Greatest Spanish contribution(s) to the world ?

What is/are the greatest Spanish contribution(s) to the world?

  • Spanish food (tapas, paella, tortilla, Iberian pork, churros, etc.)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The classical guitar

    Votes: 1 100.0%
  • Spanish painting (Goya, Velásquez, Dali, Picasso, Miro, etc.)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The invention of cigarettes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The epidural analgesia

    Votes: 1 100.0%
  • Other (please specify)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1
All colonial powers committed serious crimes against indigenous peoples. No European colonizer was any better or worse than the other.

Do yo really believe that ? The French were generally on very good terms with the Native Americans, traded abundantly with them and intermarried with them. There aren't known for forced conversions or massacres.

The Dutch had little foothold in the Americas, but overall their colonisation style was focused on the commercial aspects, rather than acquiring land (except for their self-centred colony in South Africa) or converting people. They were so unpreoccupied by spreading their own culture, language or convictions that Dutch language is the only colonial European language that didn't spread beyond the mother land (again, except in South Africa, but only among Dutch people, not indigenous populations). The Dutch took over Portuguese colonies along the coasts of Africa and Asia, and used Portuguese as a lingua franca (because it was already established in those ports) instead of imposing their own language. In Indonesia, the Dutch spoke Bahasa Melayu (the Malay language) for commerce, also because it was already widely used as a lingua franca in the region. They were the only ones that respected so much indigenous populations as to learn the local language rather than impose their own. That says a lot.

The British are generally regarded as the "best" colonisers though. They left the most positive feelings in their colonies to this day, and are the only one who maintained close relationships with their former colonies in the form of a Commonwealth of Nations (which includes its own sporting event, the Commonwealth Games).

As for the massacres of Native Americans in what is today the USA, it took place mostly in the 19th century (after the independence) when the young USA started to expand westward. But by that time the Amerindians had acquired guns and horses and were fighting against the Americans on a much more level field than the hapless (and hopeless) 16th-century Amerindians when the Spaniards landed.


However, it may well be that, overall, disease claimed more native lives in the New World than European arms.

No argument with that. Diseases killed hundreds of millions over time (tens of millions within a few decades of the arrival of Europeans in the Americas). Nevertheless, the Spaniards and Portuguese committed a lot of atrocities willingly too.
 
this thread is useless in my opinion. spaniards are and have ever been a disgrace to human kind. the world would have been a so much better place without them.
 
The French mathematician Blaise Pascal once said "Truth on this side of the Pyrenees, error on the other side". That was in the 1600's but it didn't change much since. Spain contributed little to mathematics, sciences or philosophy. Look at the list of famous Spaniards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Spaniards). Before the 20th century the philosophers were all humanists (defenders of Indian rights) or theologians. The scientists are almost only doctors and naturalists or botanists studying the flora and fauna of South America. 90% of them lived less than 100 years ago or are still alive. Spain has no past in the intellectual realm.
 
Wow there are some harsh words there !

Personally I like Gaudi. He had a very unique and interesting style inside the Art Nouveau movement. I tried to think about what Spanish painter I liked, but I am not an aficionado of bizarre and distorted pictures like Picasso or Dali. Goya and Velazquez are too dark, sinister and cheerless. Too bad there isn't a Gaudi of painting.

How about Spanish wines ? La Rioja wines are quite something, often better than French wines. Spanish cheeses, not so good though.

As for Spanish food, I like gazpacho (weird nobody mentioned it yet) and churros con chocolate (but not together !!). There are some great tapas bars here. My favourite Spanish restaurant is a Basque tapas restaurant (if that counts as Spanish ;) ).

Greatest contributions ? Definitely not cigarettes !! It's hard to think of just one amazing thing. It's more a long list of small unrelated things.
 
Basque tapas restaurant (if that counts as Spanish ;) ).

Of course that is counted as Spanish.

Spanish cheeses, not so good though.
Perhaps you are talking more about the reputation of quality.

If you like the light might like Sorolla.

By the way how fickle you are, do you think the world spins just for you?
 
It was a joke, because many Basques don't feel Spanish.

You can not generalize, not all Basques think alike, unfortunately the regionalist nazionale are a scourge to Spain and the Basque terrorism involves thousands of murders, mutilations and shattered lives, now if you can joke, is free to do.
 
It was a joke, because many Basques don't feel Spanish.

You can not generalize, not all Basques think alike, unfortunately the regionalist nazionale are a scourge to Spain and the Basque terrorism involves thousands of murders, mutilations and shattered lives, now if you can joke, is free to do.

You forget about the terrorism brought to Spain by generalissimo Franco.
And the Catholic Church that supported that dictator.
 
reinaert is right. spaniards are just getting what they deserve for their historical ties with fascism.
 
The Spanish people deserve the best, as everyone deserves.
 
this thread is useless in my opinion. spaniards are and have ever been a disgrace to human kind. the world would have been a so much better place without them.
Is racism allowed in this forum ? And this guy calls others facist ?

The French mathematician Blaise Pascal once said "Truth on this side of the Pyrenees, error on the other side". That was in the 1600's but it didn't change much since.
French were known hispanophobes.

Spain contributed little to mathematics, sciences or philosophy. Look at the list of famous Spaniards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Spaniards).
Little ? More than most european countries. The fact that you are a ignorant and you don't know them doesn't mean they didn't exist :
How about the nobel prize winner Santiago Ramón y Cajal, considered the father of modern Neuroscience ? or the philosopher Ortega y Gasset ?

reinaert is right. spaniards are just getting what they deserve for their historical ties with fascism.
Spain has never been a fascist state, ignorant.
 
Do yo really believe that ? The French were generally on very good terms with the Native Americans, traded abundantly with them and intermarried with them. There aren't known for forced conversions or massacres.

The Dutch had little foothold in the Americas, but overall their colonisation style was focused on the commercial aspects, rather than acquiring land (except for their self-centred colony in South Africa) or converting people. They were so unpreoccupied by spreading their own culture, language or convictions that Dutch language is the only colonial European language that didn't spread beyond the mother land (again, except in South Africa, but only among Dutch people, not indigenous populations). The Dutch took over Portuguese colonies along the coasts of Africa and Asia, and used Portuguese as a lingua franca (because it was already established in those ports) instead of imposing their own language. In Indonesia, the Dutch spoke Bahasa Melayu (the Malay language) for commerce, also because it was already widely used as a lingua franca in the region. They were the only ones that respected so much indigenous populations as to learn the local language rather than impose their own. That says a lot.

The British are generally regarded as the "best" colonisers though. They left the most positive feelings in their colonies to this day, and are the only one who maintained close relationships with their former colonies in the form of a Commonwealth of Nations (which includes its own sporting event, the Commonwealth Games).

As for the massacres of Native Americans in what is today the USA, it took place mostly in the 19th century (after the independence) when the young USA started to expand westward. But by that time the Amerindians had acquired guns and horses and were fighting against the Americans on a much more level field than the hapless (and hopeless) 16th-century Amerindians when the Spaniards landed.

I would agree that overall the French and the Dutch were less hostile to the natives. We must keep in mind, though, that their actions were probably directly related to their (French and Dutch) sparse populations in the New World. For the must part, they had little choice as being more aggressive would have resulted in their getting wiped out.


Although the British do seem to be the most efficient colonizers as far as building self-sustaining and vigorously growing colonies, it would be of benefit to note that their is one big difference. Even the earlier (pre-19th century) of British and British-allowed colonizers treated the natives much more as some type of alien group to be moved as far away from the colonizers as possible. The pattern of driving the natives away was established before Andrew Jackson and his successors.
The results today are quite telling; Latin America has many, many natives who still speak the old languages in many places. North America has very few. Those who remain among their own are relegated to reservations on at-best marginal land in many cases.

This should not be viewed as a defense of the manner in which the Spanish acted towards the natives. It was in fact awful. I just think that it would be best to recognize what happened while keeping the broader picture in view.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They did much damage to Spanish colonialism these foreign royal houses Handsburgo
 
all european kings/queens intermarriage with foreign royal houses. what spaniards did they did it by themselves. and they haven't contributed to anything postive to the world, just bullfighting, fascism and inquisition. not a heritage to be proud of. i would be ashamed if i were spaniard.
 
all european kings/queens intermarriage with foreign royal houses. what spaniards did they did it by themselves. and they haven't contributed to anything postive to the world, just bullfighting, fascism and inquisition. not a heritage to be proud of. i would be ashamed if i were spaniard.

Talk about irrational hatred.
 
all european kings/queens intermarriage with foreign royal houses. what spaniards did they did it by themselves. and they haven't contributed to anything postive to the world, just bullfighting, fascism and inquisition. not a heritage to be proud of. i would be ashamed if i were spaniard.

You end with these arguments. If the Hansburgo it was the solution put hand after the Bourbons, the people only when you are revolutions can only, at that time the spaniards as you say they could not decide the course of their lives and future, much work is everyday,
Do you consider better and perfect than anyone?

The modern Spanish do not hate the Romans medernos or older, or anyone else for the story, it seems so ridiculous it is to split the breast of laughter.
 
all european kings/queens intermarriage with foreign royal houses. what spaniards did they did it by themselves. and they haven't contributed to anything postive to the world, just bullfighting, fascism and inquisition. not a heritage to be proud of. i would be ashamed if i were spaniard.

You're exceedingly harsh posts are very similar to those of another Chilean (Pinguin ?) from the Anthroscape forum. BTW, he was permanently banned for posting insults and lies about a slew of European ethnicities.
 

This thread has been viewed 290578 times.

Back
Top