13 replies to this topic

[ccabal86]

Heh, the Middle East was certainly better off in that era. Interesting collection of photos

 

http://m.atchuup.com/iran-in-the-1960s-and-1970s/

[Imran Ehsan]

This is nothing. You should look at pics of Kabul (Afghanistan) at around the same time.

[Commander Shepard]

Even when countries remain allies with the US they still end up shit, look at Saudi Arabia. That area of topic was somewhat being discussed on that website. 

It's Muslims in general that stop their own progression.

 

However it's easy to say that, when was the last time masses in the west got off their ass and brought about meaningful change to bring down the corruption that infests our nations. We're content to have corrupt governments who could be argued to be destabilizing the middle east for the last decades or longer. 

[Imran Ehsan]

It's Muslims in general that stop their own progression.

 

You have no idea about muslim history do you? Might be worth it to pick up a book or two or even you know use google.Islam was the most advanced civilization for over 700 years. The brit and european colonialists just managed to industrialize first and destroyed and subjugated all other civilizations.

[Shahenshah]

Heh, the Middle East was certainly better off in that era. Interesting collection of photos
 
http://m.atchuup.com/iran-in-the-1960s-and-1970s/

While you're at it, do research on operation ajax, how and who overthrew a democratic Iranian govt, the gifts the Shah of Iran showered upon its population through security forces and how all that ended.

Heh, the Middle East was certainly better off in that era. Interesting collection of photos
 
http://m.atchuup.com/iran-in-the-1960s-and-1970s/

While you're at it, do research on operation ajax, how and who overthrew a democratic Iranian govt, the gifts the Shah of Iran showered upon its population through security forces and how all that ended.

You know you could take select pictures of Pyongyang and we'd all think its a first world country.

[Commander Shepard]

 

It's Muslims in general that stop their own progression.

 

You have no idea about muslim history do you? Might be worth it to pick up a book or two or even you know use google.Islam was the most advanced civilization for over 700 years. The brit and european colonialists just managed to industrialize first and destroyed and subjugated all other civilizations.

 

 

As far as I know I said nothing that implied that I have no idea about Muslim history.

My thoughts and the general view seems to be that their barbaric traditions and lack of freedoms stop their progression which aren't directly tied to technological advances but can be related which is the case at moment I think. 

But if you measure a nation only by its advancement then the middle east is in better shape. I don't think that is what these images portray, I see freedom more than technological advancement being the message. 

 

Priding yourself on something you lost centuries ago is misguided as well, you should only brag about things your nation maintained. Otherwise it is just an interesting thought about what could have being with no substance. 

[ccabal86]

This is nothing. You should look at pics of Kabul (Afghanistan) at around the same time.

 
Saw those too. Not quite as prosperous as Iran, but still miles ahead of today's Afghanistan
 
 

It's Muslims in general that stop their own progression.

 
You have no idea about muslim history do you? Might be worth it to pick up a book or two or even you know use google.Islam was the most advanced civilization for over 700 years. The brit and european colonialists just managed to industrialize first and destroyed and subjugated all other civilizations.

 
Not-so-coincidently, that era of prosperity happened to be in a time when Islam was a lot more liberal than contemporary Christianity. There were thinkers like Omar Khayyam who openly criticized key aspects of religion, a something that he might not be able to do in today's Iran without severe repercussions.
 

While you're at it, do research on operation ajax, how and who overthrew a democratic Iranian govt, the gifts the Shah of Iran showered upon its population through security forces and how all that ended.

Maybe the Shah was an autocrat, but I don't see how his regime was any worse than Khomeini's theocracy in terms of civil liberties. In some areas, like the equality of sexes, Iran was a lot better off under the Shah than it is today.

Edited by ccabal86, 08 December 2015 - 08:18 PM.

[Rafay]

It's Muslims in general that stop their own progression.

 

Agreed......    

 

Islam was the most advanced civilization for over 700 years.

 

Lets be honest bro. That era is gone. Let it go let it go We did some stuff here and there w/ Algebra, Geometry, Physics and Chem but we certainly didn't invent penicillin, vaccines (we are against those), TVs, iPhones, etc. The last 50-60 years of human development have been more progressive than all human history.  

[onbekende]

Its fanatics that stop progress, but its the people that swallows the ideology.

[Imran Ehsan]

My response was directed towards CS's ignorant claim that Islam (mulsims) stops progress. If that was so, Islamic civilization would never have prospered for hundreds of years. Or somehow he was claiming that muslims in those periods were less muslim(?) which makes no sense whatsoever. The crash of the progress of the muslim nations cannot be attributed to the religion itself but to other direct socio-economic factors including invasion, looting and subjugation by the western civilization, corrupt dictators in the mid east countries who basically sold their country off to the west for their own gain etc. The fall from prosperity to poverty and suppression by their own leaders (who are beholden to the west) have gave rise to Islamic fanatics who are using a corrupted version of Islam to drive their agenda.

[Commander Shepard]

I think we can all agree Religion held back the advancement of European countries, are you saying Islam is better Christianity in that regard?

But you're right I have no idea if Muslims were more free in the past or less free, do you have evidence to support that they were less free?

 

If Muslims countries got invaded then they weren't all that advanced. 

[ccabal86]

I dare say Islam under the Abbasid Caliphate was more open and flexible than it is in many palces TODAY. Indeed, the core problem is that religion as a whole - if taken seriously - has a palpably detrimental effect on technological and socal progression. Europe only really flourished as religion started losing its significance. Of course, that's not the only factor, but a pretty big factor in my opinion.

[Shahenshah]

 

This is nothing. You should look at pics of Kabul (Afghanistan) at around the same time.

 
Saw those too. Not quite as prosperous as Iran, but still miles ahead of today's Afghanistan
 
 

 

It's Muslims in general that stop their own progression.

 
You have no idea about muslim history do you? Might be worth it to pick up a book or two or even you know use google.Islam was the most advanced civilization for over 700 years. The brit and european colonialists just managed to industrialize first and destroyed and subjugated all other civilizations.

 

 
Not-so-coincidently, that era of prosperity happened to be in a time when Islam was a lot more liberal than contemporary Christianity. There were thinkers like Omar Khayyam who openly criticized key aspects of religion, a something that he might not be able to do in today's Iran without severe repercussions.
 

While you're at it, do research on operation ajax, how and who overthrew a democratic Iranian govt, the gifts the Shah of Iran showered upon its population through security forces and how all that ended.

Maybe the Shah was an autocrat, but I don't see how his regime was any worse than Khomeini's theocracy in terms of civil liberties. In some areas, like the equality of sexes, Iran was a lot better off under the Shah than it is today.

 

That was for people of Iran to judge who they were better off under, and they made a clear choice on that one (including women, who participated heavily in the Iranian revolution). I suppose they picked one tough regime over another,  one independent democratic theocratic regime over a puppet dictatorship. Perhaps for them, running the affairs of their own country took priority over some civil liberties. Regardless, Western powers judgement of east was never based on civil liberties or human rights, but just self-interest :-). I dont need to cite examples on that one, you should be more than well aware of it. 

 

Also, just to drive home the point on how out-of-context those selected images are (mind you, I'm not against that all, people should be free to wear whatever they want, but you're taking one thing out of one context and trying to fit it in another), let me run some satire here:

 

USA in 2000s:

1.

2.

3.

 

 

herpderp

Edited by Shahenshah, 12 December 2015 - 01:31 PM.

[Shahenshah]

I dare say Islam under the Abbasid Caliphate was more open and flexible than it is in many palces TODAY. Indeed, the core problem is that religion as a whole - if taken seriously - has a palpably detrimental effect on technological and socal progression. Europe only really flourished as religion started losing its significance. Of course, that's not the only factor, but a pretty big factor in my opinion.

The structure of religion was bit different IMO between Europe and the Caliphate then. Europe was in dark ages after the fall of Roman Empire. Islam was thriving, uniting otherwise scattered nomadic tribes whose world view was limited to the next well of water. Things went well, all the knowledge from east and west was absorbed and worked upon for hundreds of years. Then mongols came along and screwed things up, until Turks took over and they were literally the superpower in Europe and Middle East until Suleiman. Then they just had the usual dynastic politics and poor governance, that got to them etc etc. On the east, you had Mughal Empire, literally the richest or second richest empire. They ended up spending all the economy in war and were in pretty poor shape by the time colonialism started.

 

I do not agree with Imran that invasions primarily were the cause of downfalls, there are several reasons spread over hundreds of years over thousands of kilometres.

 

I subscribe to the philosophy of history by Ibn-Khaldun. the Tldr of which is basically, once the new stuff starts going, there's a strong zeal anda the leaders are strong, the people are more focused, all of that gets them the empires, so the first few generations are raised up under struggle and hardship and strive to progress. Once that is achieved, then the next few generations of aristocracy is more laid back, they have the riches, they spend more time chilling, relaxing and doing petty politics and stupid shit, until another group of aristocracy, outsiders or insiders, who again are driven by ambition and know the hardships kick the old order out. 

 

And this is basically true, all great empires have fallen primarily due to growing internal weaknesses and negligence amongst the ruling class of those empires. I suggest you guys check it out:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muqaddimah

http://www.amazon.com/The-Muqaddimah-Introduction-Princeton-Classics/dp/0691166285