4 ms·

Winston Churchill and Islam

25 points by ClintEhrlich 11y ago

novalis78 11y ago
Demography...get ready for a re-write of European history.http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-02/is-the-west-ready-for-more-muslims- http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-02/is-the-west...
- lostlogin 11y ago
  >In a perfect world, that trend would be welcomed as an addition to the rich diversity of cultures and beliefs that make up any pluralistic liberal society. In practice, it will probably increase the strain on countries whose self-image of tolerance has clashed with the reality of lingering prejudice and unease toward people who are different.< A perfect world involves religion?
  - iofj 11y ago
    Plus it ignores the fact that however racist Europeans are, the new immigrants are far, far more racist. I deal with a lot of different ethnicities and I would say that Jews and Chinese are about as racist as Europeans. Americans have this sort of implicit tolerance, as if they aren't even aware of race, and yes I know it's an act. But no American (I know) will refuse to hire someone because of their skin color or religion. Europeans, Chinese and Jews will, but that's pretty much where it stops. No Jew will refuse to sell food to a non-Jew, no matter how "holy" the food is (they may -and will- overcharge, but so will Europeans and Chinese, and why not ? I will generally go there because it's special, so paying double ... meh. I don't necessarily like "the tourist treatment" but ... Just don't get in a cab (because they'll charge you hundreds, not because it's unsafe that's not what I'm trying to say)). There are -constant- incidents of muslims attacking people over perceived insults, entering a mosque (despite the fact that most look like teahouses), and half of the teahouses/cafes in Brussels make Hell's Angel clubhouses look welcoming. Muslims will attack women who merely pass them on the street merely for dressing provocatively, for being the wrong nationality (Moroccans attack Turkish women, for example, although truth be told, I've never heard of the reverse. Turk men will attack Moroccan men plenty though, I've even once seen a Turkish women participate in said activity). They will attack native Belgians for "stealing their jobs", they will attack European politicians and people working for them. And of course this has turned Brussels into an extremely non-mixed city. The ghettos are ethnicity based now. It was mixed for a short while, but now the different neighborhoods are very clearly delineated, and the only mixing is old native people - who can't leave - and the very specific group that screws up the place and chases everybody out. And the worst of it is. It's not the generation that immigrated that's the problem, it's the second and third generations that are doing this. The first generation mostly has at least serious reservations about islam, some actively hate it. I've read an article about a muslim immigrant who "asked" an imam who lived in the same block as him to leave, with a shotgun. Europe will be a racist hellhole in a decade or so, not a "bastion of tolerance". Europe was a bastion of tolerance at the end of the 80s, beginning of the 90s. Today, it's racist. By necessity, because of the constant violence. And it's getting worse, not better.
    - gotchange 11y ago
      > And of course this has turned Brussels into an extremely non-mixed city. The ghettos are ethnicity based now. I have a feeling that it is not entirely the immigrants' fault for this state of affairs that they self-segregate or exclude natives from their social circles. I speculate that it's got to do to some degree with racist and nativist Belgian politicians or European politicians in general who benefit enormously from a failure of the multi-culturalism experience and integration/assimilation by immigrants to warrant a xenophobic and hateful reaction like deportations, internment or barring of entry.
- gotchange 11y ago
  Funny not a single one of all these scare-mongering pieces of a Muslim demographic ticking bomb popping up periodically explores the effect of population growth in China or India in the coming years given they have currently the lion's share of humans on the planet and any population tsunami hitting the Earth would probably come from these areas not from the Greater Middle East.
- dang 11y ago
  It's pathetic that the appearance of a single word 'Islam' can now trigger reflexes like this, but at least the comment was flagged.
digi_owl 11y ago
The Ottoman Islam was perhaps the most progressive sort of the time. But then the post-ww1 dividing of the empire between the British and the French turned the place into the mess the world is still dealing with today. Adam Curtis talk about this in part of this blog: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/2989a78a-ee94-385e-808f-c9c7c38d1cb7 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/2989a78a-ee94-...
- avar 11y ago
  This situation is still perpetuated to this day. All of US and Israeli foreign policy in the Middle-East basically revolves around containing the various states there to keep there from being a unified Middle-Eastern superstate. Which creates instability & low-level wars, which they'd prefer to having a stronger state that would contain that sort of thing, but which might challenge them on the international scene.
  - gotchange 11y ago
    A Middle-Eastern superstate? Where did you guys come up with this? I don't think that the Elite in many ME countries would cherish the idea of sharing their power with any of their peers in neighboring countries let alone people of different countries sharing space with other people from the region. If you're talking about Pan-Arabism or Pan-Islamism, both ideologies are moribund and can't be taken seriously in any meaninful discussion.
- elbigbad 11y ago
  Additionally the book Lawrence in Arabia is a fascinating historical account of the events that led to this empire dividing. http://www.amazon.com/Lawrence-Arabia-Deceit-Imperial-Making/dp/0307476413 http://www.amazon.com/Lawrence-Arabia-Deceit-Imperial-Making...
- a-guest 11y ago
  Progressive? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide
staunch 11y ago
> By October 1898, he had returned to Britain and begun his two-volume work, The River War, an account of the reconquest of the Sudan which was published the following year. In this work, Churchill warned against what he considered to be the dangers of the influence of Islam: "Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step, and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it (Islam) has vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill
- gotchange 11y ago
  - "No stronger retrograde force exists in the world." Funny that this is coming from a reactionary and status quo aficionado. - "Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith." Funny again that this is coming from a colonialist and imperialistic person. Apparently, it's bad for Islam to have expansionist and supremacist ambitions but it's OK for Britain. Hypocrisy much? - "Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it (Islam) has vainly struggled" Funny that it was the other way around for Christianity and Islam in Europe's Dark Age and Islam's Golden Age [0] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age
  - nashashmi 11y ago
    > "Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it (Islam) has vainly struggled" I think this means that Christianity is "tamed" by the doubts science has laid on it. And that science does not seem to reign Islam much.
    - gotchange 11y ago
      Muslims embraced science before Christians ever thought about it and Al-Andalus rule in Iberia and the scientific development overseen by Muslims there is a great testament to my viewpoint. Furthermore, Islam had a reformation movement albeit unsuccessful hundreds of years [0] before Christendom is engulfed in reformation debates (wars). [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu%CA%BFtazila https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu%CA%BFtazila
ramanamit1234 11y ago
Churchill did not like a lot of non-Western nations. He had his mind made up at a young age. He was also against Indians and Hindu thought. Europe does not fall because there has not been an Islam v. Europe war for centuries. It's been a slow integration of North African & Arab cultures with a continued focus on European social values, science and leadership.
gotchange 11y ago
Churchill is the equivalent of Saddam Hussein, Hafez Asad or any other ruthless blood thirsty Arab despot and I find it bewildering why he's still admired by certain segments of the population in the west unless they share the same value system and morals (or the lack thereof) and then I find it more bewildering why they dislike militant or radical Islam vehemently since they have a lot in common with the adherents of those ideologies.
- richmarr 11y ago
  > Churchill is the equivalent of Saddam Hussein... I find it bewildering why he's still admired... unless they share the same value system and morals (or the lack thereof) Just as a friendly pointer, I don't think you're going to change the mind of anyone who respects Churchill by saying that they're amoral & comparing him to Saddam Hussein. Regardless of where the truth may lie it doesn't seem like a winning approach.
  - gotchange 11y ago
    I am not after changing anybody's political opinion much less Churchill's followers' because they seem like a lost cause to me but if my comment could be construed as a political speech, it would be more valuable if it was targeted at enlightened people sitting on the fence and not the hardcore ardent crowd.
    - richmarr 11y ago
      Sorry, I'm being too indirect. You come across like a zealot. If you want to be heard by anyone who's not already on your side then you need to tone it down.
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
- digi_owl 11y ago
  Churchill may have been a old school imperial asshole. But when the people didn't vote for him, he stepped down.
mieses 11y ago
Hitler and Napoleon were both into Islam too.

25 points by ClintEhrlich 11y ago

Demography...get ready for a re-write of European history.http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-02/is-the-west-ready-for-more-muslims- http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-02/is-the-west...

lostlogin 11y ago
>In a perfect world, that trend would be welcomed as an addition to the rich diversity of cultures and beliefs that make up any pluralistic liberal society. In practice, it will probably increase the strain on countries whose self-image of tolerance has clashed with the reality of lingering prejudice and unease toward people who are different.< A perfect world involves religion?
- iofj 11y ago
  Plus it ignores the fact that however racist Europeans are, the new immigrants are far, far more racist. I deal with a lot of different ethnicities and I would say that Jews and Chinese are about as racist as Europeans. Americans have this sort of implicit tolerance, as if they aren't even aware of race, and yes I know it's an act. But no American (I know) will refuse to hire someone because of their skin color or religion. Europeans, Chinese and Jews will, but that's pretty much where it stops. No Jew will refuse to sell food to a non-Jew, no matter how "holy" the food is (they may -and will- overcharge, but so will Europeans and Chinese, and why not ? I will generally go there because it's special, so paying double ... meh. I don't necessarily like "the tourist treatment" but ... Just don't get in a cab (because they'll charge you hundreds, not because it's unsafe that's not what I'm trying to say)). There are -constant- incidents of muslims attacking people over perceived insults, entering a mosque (despite the fact that most look like teahouses), and half of the teahouses/cafes in Brussels make Hell's Angel clubhouses look welcoming. Muslims will attack women who merely pass them on the street merely for dressing provocatively, for being the wrong nationality (Moroccans attack Turkish women, for example, although truth be told, I've never heard of the reverse. Turk men will attack Moroccan men plenty though, I've even once seen a Turkish women participate in said activity). They will attack native Belgians for "stealing their jobs", they will attack European politicians and people working for them. And of course this has turned Brussels into an extremely non-mixed city. The ghettos are ethnicity based now. It was mixed for a short while, but now the different neighborhoods are very clearly delineated, and the only mixing is old native people - who can't leave - and the very specific group that screws up the place and chases everybody out. And the worst of it is. It's not the generation that immigrated that's the problem, it's the second and third generations that are doing this. The first generation mostly has at least serious reservations about islam, some actively hate it. I've read an article about a muslim immigrant who "asked" an imam who lived in the same block as him to leave, with a shotgun. Europe will be a racist hellhole in a decade or so, not a "bastion of tolerance". Europe was a bastion of tolerance at the end of the 80s, beginning of the 90s. Today, it's racist. By necessity, because of the constant violence. And it's getting worse, not better.
  - gotchange 11y ago
    > And of course this has turned Brussels into an extremely non-mixed city. The ghettos are ethnicity based now. I have a feeling that it is not entirely the immigrants' fault for this state of affairs that they self-segregate or exclude natives from their social circles. I speculate that it's got to do to some degree with racist and nativist Belgian politicians or European politicians in general who benefit enormously from a failure of the multi-culturalism experience and integration/assimilation by immigrants to warrant a xenophobic and hateful reaction like deportations, internment or barring of entry.
gotchange 11y ago
Funny not a single one of all these scare-mongering pieces of a Muslim demographic ticking bomb popping up periodically explores the effect of population growth in China or India in the coming years given they have currently the lion's share of humans on the planet and any population tsunami hitting the Earth would probably come from these areas not from the Greater Middle East.
dang 11y ago
It's pathetic that the appearance of a single word 'Islam' can now trigger reflexes like this, but at least the comment was flagged.

digi_owl 11y ago

The Ottoman Islam was perhaps the most progressive sort of the time. But then the post-ww1 dividing of the empire between the British and the French turned the place into the mess the world is still dealing with today. Adam Curtis talk about this in part of this blog: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/2989a78a-ee94-385e-808f-c9c7c38d1cb7 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/2989a78a-ee94-...

avar 11y ago
This situation is still perpetuated to this day. All of US and Israeli foreign policy in the Middle-East basically revolves around containing the various states there to keep there from being a unified Middle-Eastern superstate. Which creates instability & low-level wars, which they'd prefer to having a stronger state that would contain that sort of thing, but which might challenge them on the international scene.
- gotchange 11y ago
  A Middle-Eastern superstate? Where did you guys come up with this? I don't think that the Elite in many ME countries would cherish the idea of sharing their power with any of their peers in neighboring countries let alone people of different countries sharing space with other people from the region. If you're talking about Pan-Arabism or Pan-Islamism, both ideologies are moribund and can't be taken seriously in any meaninful discussion.
elbigbad 11y ago
Additionally the book Lawrence in Arabia is a fascinating historical account of the events that led to this empire dividing. http://www.amazon.com/Lawrence-Arabia-Deceit-Imperial-Making/dp/0307476413 http://www.amazon.com/Lawrence-Arabia-Deceit-Imperial-Making...
a-guest 11y ago
Progressive? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide

staunch 11y ago

> By October 1898, he had returned to Britain and begun his two-volume work, The River War, an account of the reconquest of the Sudan which was published the following year. In this work, Churchill warned against what he considered to be the dangers of the influence of Islam: "Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step, and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it (Islam) has vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill

gotchange 11y ago
- "No stronger retrograde force exists in the world." Funny that this is coming from a reactionary and status quo aficionado. - "Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith." Funny again that this is coming from a colonialist and imperialistic person. Apparently, it's bad for Islam to have expansionist and supremacist ambitions but it's OK for Britain. Hypocrisy much? - "Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it (Islam) has vainly struggled" Funny that it was the other way around for Christianity and Islam in Europe's Dark Age and Islam's Golden Age [0] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age
- nashashmi 11y ago
  > "Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it (Islam) has vainly struggled" I think this means that Christianity is "tamed" by the doubts science has laid on it. And that science does not seem to reign Islam much.
  - gotchange 11y ago
    Muslims embraced science before Christians ever thought about it and Al-Andalus rule in Iberia and the scientific development overseen by Muslims there is a great testament to my viewpoint. Furthermore, Islam had a reformation movement albeit unsuccessful hundreds of years [0] before Christendom is engulfed in reformation debates (wars). [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu%CA%BFtazila https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu%CA%BFtazila

ramanamit1234 11y ago

Churchill did not like a lot of non-Western nations. He had his mind made up at a young age. He was also against Indians and Hindu thought. Europe does not fall because there has not been an Islam v. Europe war for centuries. It's been a slow integration of North African & Arab cultures with a continued focus on European social values, science and leadership.

gotchange 11y ago

Churchill is the equivalent of Saddam Hussein, Hafez Asad or any other ruthless blood thirsty Arab despot and I find it bewildering why he's still admired by certain segments of the population in the west unless they share the same value system and morals (or the lack thereof) and then I find it more bewildering why they dislike militant or radical Islam vehemently since they have a lot in common with the adherents of those ideologies.

richmarr 11y ago
> Churchill is the equivalent of Saddam Hussein... I find it bewildering why he's still admired... unless they share the same value system and morals (or the lack thereof) Just as a friendly pointer, I don't think you're going to change the mind of anyone who respects Churchill by saying that they're amoral & comparing him to Saddam Hussein. Regardless of where the truth may lie it doesn't seem like a winning approach.
- gotchange 11y ago
  I am not after changing anybody's political opinion much less Churchill's followers' because they seem like a lost cause to me but if my comment could be construed as a political speech, it would be more valuable if it was targeted at enlightened people sitting on the fence and not the hardcore ardent crowd.
  - richmarr 11y ago
    Sorry, I'm being too indirect. You come across like a zealot. If you want to be heard by anyone who's not already on your side then you need to tone it down.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
digi_owl 11y ago
Churchill may have been a old school imperial asshole. But when the people didn't vote for him, he stepped down.

mieses 11y ago

Hitler and Napoleon were both into Islam too.