Islamophobia, xenophobia and anti-semitism In the east

Love it I just love it, I forgot we're the scum of the earth, and history is made up as we need to be lectured and castigated.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

How dare you do such things such as bring up the exact reason as to why tribes such as the Khazars moved west out of central Asia and into places such as the area between the Black and Caspian Seas?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I agree. Western people did, during the age of exploration (exploitation) conquer and genocide many people but they also traded with many many people.

If one were to look at the West today - our cities are probably the most diverse places in the World.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

:bugeye:

Not even going to mention Baghdad or the mountains of Persian skulls - lets just look at the Chinese. A population census shows that Western China lost as much as 80% of their population after they were "assimilated" by the Mongolians. DNA analysis shows that Ghangus is either one of the most romantic prolific lovers or he raped his way through a HUGE number of Chinese and Middle Eastern women. He along accounts for 0.5% of the people on the Earth today. God Damn!

 

I'm not addressing their savagery, which was commonplace among all invaders of the time. (see Taimurlang for comparison).

I'm addressing xenophobia. Did they, once established as a power, have a policy of reeducating the savages to their way of life?

 

Is the West more xenophobic? No.

Take a look at the Japanese treatment of Koreans and Taiwanese who even had to change their names to Japanese names and learn Japanese.
Take a look at the Arabs treatment of the Persians - don't see too many Zoroastrians around and I believe Farsi is mainly Arabic now.
Take a look at the treatment of the Tibetans by the Han Chinese. Mandarin is the official language and Communism was the official religion.
Take a look at the treatment of other Native American tribes by the Aztecs.

Did the English enslave Indians? Did the English force Indians to speak English? Did the English force Indians to change their religion? Did the English force Indians to change their names to English names? Did they sacrifice Indians to their God by cutting out their hearts? Because if they did ALL of those things they still didn't do anything different than any other conquers did to the people the conquered.

I'm not defending colonization or conquest - I'm suggesting that it was no different than what other people in other cultures have done.

 

The Koreans and Taiwanese are not Japanese today

The Persians or Iranians are not Arabs and do not consider themselves as Arabs

The Tibetans do not consider themselves Chinese

The English followed a strict policy of enforcing divide and rule and destroyed the secular fabric of the country, they also occupied the country on the presumption of their superior culture and did not allow the natives to conduct their own governance.

 

Thanks to the Atomic Bomb and the U.S.

Something that is very apparent, if you know your history, and also if you know history Persia was a Zoroastrian by Religion and Culture, and that culture was destroyed by the Islamic invaders in the 7th Century, and replaced by Islam and Islamic Culture

Tell us something we don't know.

Must of learned that from Mohammad, isn't that how he spread Islam?

 

Many Egyptians think they are Arab. Many Iraqi's think they are Arab. Many Syrians think they are Arab. Many Lebanon think they are Arab. Many Jordanians think they are Arab.

This person here is an Arab. He speaks Arabic. His religion is Islam. He thinks of himself as an Arab. He was born in Africa, grew up in Africa. One would think he'd think he was African - not Arab.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Indians are not English today.
Vietnamese are not French today.
Chinese are not English today.
Singaporeans are not English today.
Indonesians are not Dutch today.
Philippians are not Spanish today.
Malaysians are not English today.
Moroccans are not French today.
Lebanese are not French today.


Are Westerners more xenophobic? I don't think so. The reason I don't think so is because Westerners trade with many many different people and Western cities, although relatively new, are cosmopolitan. Does that mean that a generation ago or two or ten things were not different. No. 400 years ago Westerns thought they were the most advanced people. In many regards they were. Do they now? Maybe some do. I certainly know a lot of Indians who think Indians are the most advanced people and Hinduism is the "true" religion. Almost every Chinese I know thinks they are going to be back on top - where they think they have for the most part been. The center of the World and most advanced culture and civilization.

Actually, I think the West is doing a LOT to make up for past mistakes - mistakes that I for one feel ZERO responsibility for. That is why are societies are pluralistic. Unlike in KSA or Iran where a person is beheaded or taxed for belief - the West is OPEN to new ideas and is continuing to move forward.

 

I'm guessing you have not met any Syrian, Egyptian, Tunisian, Iraqi Arabs.

I suggest you do and ask them what they identify with. Saudi Arabia or something else. Ask them what "being an Arab" means to them. Sorta like asking a German what being European means to them.

The proof is in the pudding.

What comparison do you draw to the destruction of native American, Mayan, Aboriginal and Tasmanian civilisations?

To the creation of artificial borders in Africa and the Middle East?

To deliberate structural adjustment policies that destroy entire economies in the Third World making hunger endemic?

As for KSA or Iran, what was the society like before Western intervention?

Who destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan?

Who supported dictators that destroyed several fledgling economies and socio-political systems?

All you have to do is read Western literature of the last 1000 years and the xenophobia is there to see. The white man's burden, the colonisation, the eugenics.

As for zero responsibility, your lifestyle is the fruit of their efforts. Sorta like being born in a Mafia family.

 

Well boo hoo,.. So white people killed and invaded so what else is new..so deal with it!!! If you hate all white people just come out and say it instead of beating around the bush!!

 

Saudis are white people too.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

not caus

Oh so you hate saudi's too!!!

 

Interestingly if asking older Taiwanese folks they actually have much positive to say about the Japanese occupation, especially when compared to the Kuomingtang regime. This is probably partially because of the industrialization (and associated increase of standard of living), and improved access to education. Of course the majority were treated as second-class citizens, but at least some had e.g. the opportunity to visit Japanese universities and get similar privileges as the rulers. This remained much in the memory of those that lived in that time, especially when compared to the often arbitrary rulings of the Kuomingtang party under martial law and their actions against so-called collaborators and traitors.
Also it is not completely true that the Taiwanese had to change their name to Japanese. It is true that Japanese became official language (different to the Mongols who did not install their own language, possibly due to lack of a written form).
But the name thing is a bit different. One of the three major writing forms in Japan is Kanji, which uses Chinese characters. The interesting bit is that while written almost identical in many cases, the pronunciation is totally different. So when a Taiwanese was given a name in Chinese the same characters are used to spell out his Japanese name. Essentially all had two names at that time. written identically, but if talking to officials the Japanese pronunciation is used. It was a little bit like in modern China now (or Hong-Kong) where Chinese use western names which often sound a little bit like their Chinese name to make it easier for Westeners.
AFAIK during Japanese rule the indigenous languages (e.g. Chinese, Hakka, Taiwanese etc.) were not forbidden. They just had to learn Japanese in addition (not unlike that almost everyone nowadays should learn English).

OK you can get back to topic now. Sorry for the interruption.

 

Please, do interrupt more often.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

That was very interesting.

 

We need less hate post and more post like this one!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I think there was a difference in the attitude of the invaders too. British for example "colonized" - they saw the colony a separate entity from themselves and probably tried to milk the most out the new found resouces, to channel wealth back home.

The muslim invaders to India on the other hand, looked at new areas as their own new found property to be permanently utilized.

Further, I think the efforts for cultural conversion from muslims over the locals were actually stronger than the British themselves. I also do not think mainstream muslims have assimilated or even speak native Indian languages - even today.

 

??? What languages do mainstream Indian Muslims speak?

 

Urdu in Hyderabad for example. How many know Telugu or would speak if they knew?

 

All Hyderabadis know and speak Telugu, I should know, I've stayed there!

And Urdu is an Indian language too, as is the Deccani Urdu that Hyderabadis (and no other people in India or the world) speak!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And Hyderabad is just one city.

Many Muslims don't know Urdu (as Urdu) and may non-Muslims also speak it.

edit:

I have to make a correction.

Apparently Deccani Urdu is different from Hyderabadi Urdu

http://www2.cs.uh.edu/~ahmed/urdu.dialects.html

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