Cliff, in your rush to prove your knowledge about the ottoman empire book(s) you've read recently, you're making arguments and counter arguments to things i've never said.
Below you will find my entire post history in this thread, where not once do I mention the ottoman empire.
If you want to have a discussion about the pitfalls of the modern or classical or ancient muslim world I'd be happy to as I don't think I'm close to an expert on the subject and have lots to learn, but I'm not interested in a discussion where you consistently change the subject when presented with disqualifying facts or explanations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
If the IRA had billions of dollars to promote their ludicrous agenda overseas to Boston and Sydney and Cape Town, the west would be dealing with international Irish terrorism in the same way they deal with Islamic terrorism.
The question is, would western governments be doing billions of dollars in business with the republic of Ireland if it was the largest , most prominent state sponsor of terrorism? I would hope not, but based on what we know of Saudi Arabia, the answer would probably be yes.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
I don't think it is accurate to characterize that Islam has not gone through a reformation, nor is it accurate to suggest that the lack of reformation has made the religion more violent. The religious wars following the Protestant reformation were the bloodiest conflicts europe had ever seen until the first and second world war.
The Protestant reformation was one of the more violent epochs in Christianity and Islam has arguably gone through their reformation, even if we don't like how it has reformed itself.
A serious student of history could argue what we are currently experiencing is the result of a second Islamic reformation in the 19th century.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
This statement is not any more accurate than the one I responded to. It's a poor understanding of history to believe the islamic world has not had an 'enlightenment'. It's also exceedingly poor history to believe that western 'enlightenment' lead or contributed to an aggressive adoption of "private faith and public secularism." This was a course charted over hundreds of years, beginning in the dark ages and bearing it's full fruit nearly half a millennia later.
The Spanish inquisition reached it's torturous height during the tail end of the Enlightenment period, and only preserved the free expression of religion in 1966. Forced recitation of the lords prayer in US public schools wasn't revoked until 1963.
It took hundreds of years for this evolution to take place, and those of us in the West who have witnessed the re-emergence of Protestant terror groups like the KKK for example, understand this transformation isn't close to complete.
In fact, it's a pretty prescient example of historical precedence, as both ages of islamic enlightenment were ended by foreign military aggression and the subsequent galvanisation of religious/ethnic into a mono-religious resistance.
Us in the west may want to look a bit closer at Islamic history if we want to avoid the same fate. Iran of the 1950s is essentially unrecognisable to much of the Iran of today. The same could be said for Baghdad of the 16th century compared to the 11th century.
Being attacked by external forces is a significant barrier to free and open expression. Existential threats have routinely lead to various forms of fundamentalism in every corner of human history and culture. Islam is not unique here.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
I was going to do a longer reply, but I feel I need to respond to this.
This is fantasy. The japanese were bombed into submission with millions of their citizens killed, the united states completely dismantled their existing empire structures, re-oriented their government and economic institutions and then heavily, heavily invested in rebuilding both their physical country as well as the institutions and infrastructure necessary to make it run.
Then in the 1950s, the US backed off their inital stance in regards to large scale corporate structures in japan as well as their defense industry in order to help with force projection and technological development for use in Korea. These corporate structures, called zaibatzus were culturally important components of the japanese government that US was able to change direction on outlawing due to their importance in strengthening the japanese economy against the growing communist threat in asia.
So, after being virtually destroyed, having their empire seized and a significant portion of a generation killed, this incredibly ethnically homogenous country was pumped full of money and protected with the most powerful military on earth so that their economy could slowly and steadly build itself up and provide excellent standards of living for its citizens.
Your idea of what constituted the rebuilding of japan, korea and vietnam is a fantasy of your own making. Hormonal Birth Control wasn't even available until the 1960s, long after the japanese post war 'economic miracle'.
FFS, Cliff.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
I guess muslims just don't look to the west enough for inspiration?
Where is the conversation going? You say something patently false, I respond, you change the subject, we collectively abandon talking about the latest terrorist incident apparently triggered by a British National?
|