Keep the presses rolling...

[jp]

The problem is that all of you have been brainwashed by the K propaganda to believe that Roca was a bastard who killed poor little indian women and children for fun.

Yawn.

That's not the case. That is leftist revisionist history. Roca protected the criollo settlements from indian agression and in the process expanded Argentina's borders and defended against Chilean expansion in Patagonia.

The same arguments have been used the world over to justify genocide. The ugly truth of the matter is that human life wasn't valued particularly highly at the time. And exterminating unfriendly "savages" was deemed to be the sensible thing to do. Roca wasn't remotely different from any of his contemporaries in that respect.

You can't change history, or deny that Roca played an important role. But you can choose who to celebrate two centuries later. I'm not sure Evita is the best choice, but I'm pretty sure Roca isn't.

 

[sesamosinsal]

Roca was not some genocidal maniac who set out to liquidate the indians for no good reason. The Mapuches attacked a number of settlements in 1872 (such as General Alvear) with an army of 6000 warriors and killed over 300 settlers and stole 200,000 cattle. This is what prompted the conquest of the desert.

The land wasn't theirs to settle. Surely you wouldn't like it too much if the state came to your house, told you it was theirs, and gave you no compensation whatsoever--and murdered you while they were at it! Talk about tyranny!

During Roca's presidency, a man by the name of Francisco Moreno was able to set up his museum which displayed the skeletons of deceased indigenous people, and even a live exhibition. Some of them even were the prisoners held from the Desert Campaign/Conquest. Perhaps calling Roca a genocidal maniac is extreme, but one thing that is certain is that he didn't recognize the humanity of the indigenous people. (Dehumanization is often a crucial step in carrying out genocide.) If Roca's war against the native peoples was just to secure territory, why did he allow such barbaric establishments such as this museum to operate? Why were they continually treated as subhuman even after the "conquest?"

Los cautivos fueron obligados a pasearse por las mismas habitaciones donde los restos de sus compañeros eran expuestos en vitrinas, y a medida que morían sus esqueletos pasaban a formar parte de la exposición. [/B]Como todo coleccionista, Moreno se enorgullecía de sus adquisiciones. En otra de sus cartas señaló: “tenemos ya en el Museo representantes vivos de las razas más inferiores”

-Source

 

[BASailor]

Bradly: the same did Darwing and Fitz Roy when they took a couple of Tierra del Fuego natives to Europe, in order to "civilizate" them...
I ask you what's the difference between them and the present invasions to many countries in the world. The idea behind is the same: they must be taught to live as we live in the West. Of course I don't agree with that idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jemmy_Button

 

[el_expatriado]

During Roca's presidency, a man by the name of Francisco Moreno was able to set up his museum which displayed the skeletons of deceased indigenous people, and even a live exhibition. Some of them even were the prisoners held from the Desert Campaign/Conquest. Perhaps calling Roca a genocidal maniac is extreme, but one thing that is certain is that he didn't recognize the humanity of the indigenous people. (Dehumanization is often a crucial step in carrying out genocide.) If Roca's war against the native peoples was just to secure territory, why did he allow such barbaric establishments such as this museum to operate? Why were they continually treated as subhuman even after the "conquest?"

I don't deny that people behaved like barbarians and they were terribly racist. But that doesn't change a fact that this was a WAR. And yes, surely there were what we would call today WAR CRIMES, but that's far from a genocide and many orders of magnitude from being a Hitler.

You can't compare Roca to Hitler. There was no Argentine Hitler. That is insulting to Argentines and Jews everywhere.

 

[nicoenarg]

It is a sad day when a country is left with figures like Evita and Roca to choose from when deciding who to next idolize on their currency.

Neither should be on the bill but the fact of the matter is us EXPATS don't have a say in that. I don't really see the citizens complaining or banging pots en masse (correct me if I am wrong about that).

Argentines are brainwashed about Evita and the whole Peron BS. Peronism has become a religion here and that's what people seem to adhere to. The facts don't really matter at the end of the day. Just like Jesus became a blue-eyed Swedish looking caucasian man for most of the Christian world, so has Evita become a saint and Peronism the perfect model.

Cristina is smart in that she's using this image. The people are idiots for going along with her BS without doubting at all.

 

[sesamosinsal]

You can't compare Roca to Hitler. There was no Argentine Hitler. That is insulting to Argentines and Jews everywhere.

Hitler murdered Jewish people to build a nation, just as Roca. Their reasoning was the same. Hitler viewed Jewish people as enemies of the state (not belonging to the Volksgemeinschaft), just as Roca viewed the indigenous people in Patagonia. The only difference perhaps, as you stated yourself, is that Roca killed fewer people and he didn't have gas chambers. In terms of comparison, it's not relevant to the discussion how Roca murdered the indigenous people or how many he murdered (although these are important questions in general terms), but rather why he murdered them.

 

[jp]

And yes, surely there were what we would call today WAR CRIMES, but that's far from a genocide

You need to check up on what genocide means. It is defined as the deliberate and systematic destruction in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group.

You're right that Roca's campaign was a different order of magnitude to jewish holocaust. But that doesn't change the fact that it was genocide.

 

[Iznogud]

Ermahgerd!
RERC ERND HERTLER WER MAHS MAHRDERERS

 

[Raymond]

I don't deny that people behaved like barbarians and they were terribly racist. But that doesn't change a fact that this was a WAR. And yes, surely there were what we would call today WAR CRIMES, but that's far from a genocide and many orders of magnitude from being a Hitler.

You can't compare Roca to Hitler. There was no Argentine Hitler. That is insulting to Argentines and Jews everywhere.

You seem to have a warped view of history ! Why is the Jewish holocaust more valid than the extermination of 90% of the Indigeneous peoples of Argentina? Percentage wise it was more brutal and the descendants are still suffering today .

 

[Napoleon]

Any plan yet on giving Patagonia back to the Indigenous populations?

It's funny that they could be ANTI-Roca and yet PRO-Malvinas.

Just funny.