Columbus is NOT the source of the problem

Can we honestly blame Christopher Columbus for everything that occurred in the America's after his landing in Hispaniola? Its ridiculous. There was Cortes in the Aztec empire and Cortes in the Incan empire. There is no denying that Cortes and Pizarro had heard stories of Columbus's voyages in the New World and it may have have motivated them to pursue their voyages, but Columbus isn't responsible for what these two men decided to do in the New World. For instance, many of us may look up to X politician, but if X politician is ever impeached, we will not blame X politician for any failure we may have in our political career. I'm not denying that Christopher Columbus influenced others, but he shouldn't hold direct responsibility for it. I honestly think that the massacres that occurred in the Americas had greatly to do with what was popular at the time: earn recognition. At this time, human rights were not a main issue and conquest of different peoples led many to achieve higher status in society.

(Note: I'm about to enter into a related, yet not so related rant)

Todorov emphasizes in work, “The Conquest of America”, that Columbus valued the spread of Christianity and it was one of his main drives. Nevertheless, one could only wonder if Columbus was an actual Christian or even interested in Christian values when we read Bartolome de Las Casas' works. His works illustrate the abuses Columbus put the indigenous peoples under, which led to dehumanization of the Indians, their enslavement, and eventually the killing of millions. De Las Casas demonstrates that Columbus may have initially began his voyage with interest in Christianizing the indigenous, but until De Las Casas sends his reports to Charles V, there is no real Christianization in the Americas. It is until Charles V states that the indigenous are entitled to rights is when Columbus and his followers actually begin to “spread” Christianity.

(Rant over)

Was Columbus really responsible for what Cortes and Pizarro decided to do? It was the European-spirit-of-conquest! At this moment in history, “diplomacy” wasn't exactly the way people expanded their empire or gained riches. We can't deny that what these three men ended up doing is right and each are to be blamed for what they did – no doubt about it, but lets not blame Columbus for what the whole world ended up doing at the end. I honestly think that if Columbus had acted in a different way, someone else who might have gone to X location in the world would have done the same.

Summary:

Columbus, Cortes, nor Pizarro should be praised for what happened in the Americas.

Columbus shouldn't be blamed for what Cortes or Pizarro or any explorers ended up doing later on.