Why Does the Islamic World Lag Behind?

Powerline ^ | May 27, 2018 | Steven Hayward

[Sam Gamgee]

Islamics are kind of the like the Daleks then?

[caww]

That and Islamic teachings from childhood destroys the otherwise personality God intended them to have. They are dependent on the religious teachers because most cannot read classical arabic it’s written in, they memorize the Koran by repetition.. a language they don’t know well if at all. That’s brain washing.

[CodeToad]

Because Islamic nations are inbred 65 IQ regions. It takes that to follow islam, the teaching of a nutjob that wanted to murder people and rape young children.

[DuncanWaring]

I’ve seen assertions that the inbreeding hasn’t done their eyes and kidneys any favors, either.

[minnesota_bound]

#22 You described the democrat party.

[huckleberry55]

Because they spend all their time on their knees
bent over smelling the back side
of the ARSE WHOLE in front of them

[Cronos]

Actually 3 (the indus valley -- eastern and southern india survived, but western india ie pakistan didn't). What many Americans don't realize is that Egypt and Syria were CENTERS of Christian belief before Izlam

And Yemen was nearly completely Christian and was also a leading light of civilization, but decayed immediately under Izlam.

ditto for its conquest of western India, now Pakistan. Taking Egypt, Sumeria and the Indus valley and turning them into cesspits is quite an achievement

[Cronos]

well, to be fair, the latter idea came about in the 11th century with a guy who persecuted Central Asian thinkers like Ibn Battuta. The philosophy which took over Izlam was that everything, every moment was willed by Allah - so no laws,no action-reaction, not logical consequence.

[cherry]

what can you expect of a culture that treats half of the population as cattle....

treating women well elevates men...but some people don't get that...

[Cronos]

Yet that's oversimplification. They did have some progress when early Islamic origin brilliant men, mostly of Persian origin in Central Asia, consider the Quran purely in an allegorical fashion, and rejected the Hadiths

However, that changed with the 11th century and the Mongol obliteration of Khwarezim destroyed it permanently

[Cronos]

The Arabian world or Arab world? Without Oil and the money used by oil states to foment trouble, Syria and Lebanon might be in a better position today

[Cronos]

Apologies, but you taught the exceptions. Turks are exceptionally agnostic in the Izlamik world, close behind are Iranians. But the Arab, Pakistani, Bangladesh, South-Asian and African worlds are far, far different

Even among the Turks you interacted with Istanbul folk who are quite different from people in the east. And among the Istanbul folks you interacted with engineering students - so the exceptional of the exceptional of the exceptional!

[Cronos]

Islam missed out on the Renaissance, The Reformation and The Enlightenment.

The "reformation" was exclusively Western Christian. It had no relevance to a non-Christian world. It was exclusively theological.

The re-formation was an attempt to "return i.e. re-form back to what was supposed to be original"

The Renaissance was exclusively Western European when the Greeks and Byzantines escaped from the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople. Arguably the Islamci world had already incorporated a lot of this byzantine knowledge pre the 10th century, but lost it due to the 11th century rulings that only the Quran+hadiths+sirah.

Yes for the enlightenment

[Cronos]

1. Why were Europeans building cities and castles in the 1200's while Africa and South America had cannibal, head-hunting tribes?
2. Why are there still human tribes in rainforests who are uncivilized?
3. Why aren't there New York cities, Romes and Paris' now , in Africa, that were not built by Europeans?

Your answer "Because, in 2018, some humans have evolved as far as they can and inserting them into civilization can't change them, it can only ruin civilization. Islam is death and death does not create-it ends things." is false

Firstly, it was not just europeans building cities in the 1200s, it was all of the extended Eurasian continent which includes North Africa that was building cities - in fact North Africa had cities before any cities in Europe.

North Africa, north of the Sahara and up to Ethiopia were ALWAYS connected to the wider "Old world" -- and Ethiopia in fact was and is sub-Saharan, but it was always connected to the wider "old World expanse"

Why did sub-saharn Africa south of Ethiopia not develop any of its own civilizations ("civi" - meaning city building)?

Because of:

1. proximity
2. domesticable plants
3. domesticable animals

Dial back to 5000 BC - you have only 3 centers of civilization: Sumeria (Iraq), Indus Valley (India), Shang/Yellow river. The Egyptians had an influx of ME farmers around 5000 BC - at around the same time these Middle Eastern farmers went to Elam (South-Eastern Iran) and we could guess that the Sumerian-Elamite and Indus valley civilizations are all related and their modern cultural descendents are the Tamils of southern India. but that's speculation.

Anyway, so the Sumerians invented cities, and with other Middle Easterners developed cities and also domesticated wheat, cattle, sheep, pigs are native to the Middle east, as is barley and wine (first wine traces are from surprisingly,Iran)

that's key -- South America had/has ONLY llamas to domesticate. In the Old World there were horses, bulls, cows to help till fields, ride etc. There were camels, elephants, sheep, pigs etc. These were not there in sub-Saharan Africa or South America.

Without beasts of burden, tilling was difficult. Without Wheat, barley, rice, agriculture didn't make sense

So for SAm and SSAfr the hunter-gatherer lifestyle made more sense -- JUST AS it was more sense for Germanics, Nordics, Japanese until around the time of Christ. As game became harder to get then agricutlure and banding together in cities made more sense. When you come together in cities you create complex social structures.

Your statement some humans have evolved as far as they can is scientifically utterly wrong -- we haven't spent so much time apart from each other that we've evolved differently -- cultures can evolve, but if you pick up a white kid from a farm in Colorado at the age of 2 and exchange his place with a 2 year from the heart of Congo, then you will find that the black kid will grow up with American values and culture while the white will grow up with Congolese culture and values -- the culture is at fault, people merge with the culture.

[Cronos]

you first talk about race or genetics that held back people in South Am and SS Afr and then you talk about cultures -- the more critical factor is the culture, not the genes

There are Muslim South Asians and Hindu / Sikh South Asians and the latter have progressed further

[Cronos]

Why aren't there New York cities, Romes and Paris' now , in Africa, that were not built by Europeans?

Let's go through the cities in Africa not built by Europeans:

1. Egypt: Luxor, Thebes etc all dating from 3000 to 2000 BC - before Rome, Athens or any other city in Europe
   
   
2. North Africa: Carthage etc. built by the Lebanese (as was Carthage and indeed some of the oldest Greek cities)
   
   Ethiopia had cities like Axum built around 2000 BC, again, well before Rome or Athens
   
   
3. Sub-Saharan Africa: Timbuktu in Mali, built by Berbers around 1200
   
   Koumbi Saleh, capital of the Ghana Empire, built around the 9th century BC,
   
   Great Zimbabwe which was started around the 11th century
   
   And of course Arab cities like Zanzibar along the East coast

So sorry, but your statement is not true.

[Cronos]

Finally, "why are there humans in rainforests who are uncivilized..." - because it didn't make sense to build cities. They got and get all the sustenance they need from hunter-gathering. Why build cities?

This is not a sign of lack of intelligence

[publius911]

Why Does the Islamic World Lag Behind?

The briefest explanation...

Koranimals are in a perpetual murderous rage because they feel they are actually inferior. As a culture, they are.
And it's been so, over 1400 years.

And they are right.

[publius911]

For detailed analysis, simply read Sir Winston Churchill's prescient assessment of "Islam". It will tell you everything you need to know.

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live."

The Damned Koranimals

[DungeonMaster]

Churchill explained it very,very well about 120 years ago.

I just realized why Obama sent back the bust of Churchill!!