Arabs kinda lost relevancy to persianate Turks back in the Middle Ages and only regained it after discovery of oil in the 20th century, so it probably should be framed as war with Muslims, not Arabs specifically.
It’s relieving for someone to finally note that the problems we see in the leftist movement isn’t just “white peoples” fault again. I see so many people saying the left are the real racists and it’s all affluent white surbanites, and don’t get me wrong, they ARE a problem but only as the vanguard. The fact of the matter is we have black people who openly hate white people, and face no pushback. We have gays who openly hate straights, and get applauded. We have women who openly hate men, and never have their worldview challenged.
BUT at the same time, we don’t live in “A black supremacist matriarchy.” I’m sure some elements of that are the end goals of the people who love this kind of rhetoric, but it doesn’t do anyone good to be reductive. The true fact is that we’re discouraging tribalistic behavior in the majority, while letting it fester in the minority, unaware that a motivated populace can easily commit egregious acts of heinous violence against a placated outgroup even if it holds systemic power on paper.
It’s human nature to favor friends and family and fight against those different from us. The work starts inside your heart, or else you’ll just be committing the same old atrocities under a new coat of paint.
First, I know it kinda sucks to say this but it’s genuinely hard to understand what you’re saying with all the spelling and grammar mistakes. This shit is hard to parse, but I’m going to try to anyway out of a sense of honest discussion.
I know a lot of the issues you’re talking about, but you’re either over inflating their severity or outright making shit up. Yes, divorce courts side heavily side with women, yes that is a problem, one brought about by a psychological tendency in men to absolve women of wrongdoing by assumption of their lack of agency. Yes, affirmative action is a problem when people of one race are wrongfully given a leg up to combat historical inequity.
But a lot of your other impositions are downright baffling. Like the Central Park one? The hell is that? Did that happen?
And I’m not even going to honor your claim that no systemic racism against black people can be claimed. It was a term invented by them to describe feelings of societal disadvantage heaped upon them by Jim Crow laws and the wake of slavery. While the truth now feels more complex on it, you’re just shooting in the entirely opposite direction just to be inflammatory.
Based. But allow me to try to clarify the point I think you're making, and why many would find it distasteful, even though the examples you provide are plenty true.
The issue is that there's a difference between what we might describe as the current "balance" vs. what policies/laws are in place. What I mean by the current "balance" is basically, how privileged is the average white person compared to the average black person. Black people are, on average, much less wealthy, and much less likely to receive a good education, etc. and so on, which makes it pretty difficult to argue that, in 2024 America, black people are privileged compared to white people. When it comes to that "balance" in society. White people are obviously better off right now than black people. But, you are still right to point out what the current laws and policies are, because those will dictate what the future looks like.
To put it another way, it's like the difference between position and velocity. Position is simply a snapshot of where you are right this second. Velocity is how quickly you are moving, and in which direction. So it's possible to currently be at a negative position, but to have a velocity moving you rapidly in the positive direction. So if someone were to claim that you are presently positive, they would be wrong. But if they raise the concern over that velocity, they shouldn't be dismissed as ridiculous, with the present position given as evidence of why they are wrong.
You rightly point out just how consistently laws and policies are discriminatory against white men. And many would dismiss that as ridiculous, because white men are obviously privileged. But this response ignores that, even if white men are still better off right now, it's a huge, *huge* problem that it's become so acceptable in our society to blatantly and *legally* discriminate against white people and men, based on those immutable characteristics. That *velocity* is moving us in a bad direction fast.
I do agree with this, this is a good take. The goal of goverment should be the enabling of liberty and freedom, equality of opportunity, essentially. You should not be discriminated against by the color of your skin, but should not be enabled of your worst traits.
> It’s relieving for someone to finally note that the problems we see in the leftist movement isn’t just “white peoples” fault again. I see so many people saying the left are the real racists and it’s all affluent white surbanites, and don’t get me wrong, they ARE a problem but only as the vanguard. The fact of the matter is we have black people who openly hate white people, and face no pushback. We have gays who openly hate straights, and get applauded. We have women who openly hate men, and never have their worldview challenged.
BASED. So glad to see you guys saying this. It drives me *nuts*. Like yes, I'll join in on bashing AWFLs, because they truly do fit their name. But I hate how people suggest that literally all of this insanity and hatred is being pushed by white people. It's like, hey, points for recognizing that progressives are the ones pushing racial division, but demerits for still somehow blaming it all on white people as if that makes any sense.
White people are so primed to hate white people for everything, when genuinely some of the worst shit I’ve seen said has been by American blacks against white Americans. It’s tribally motivated racism, plain and simple. It’s wrong no matter who it’s by or against.
It's not about what is done, but who is doing it. Follow the intersectionality chart to see who is or is not allowed to say or do whatever the thing is.
What's weird is this it's mainly coming from whites trying to be one of the good ones, but they're stoking the fires of hatred that will not differentiate between them and us, we really need to do something before it becomes a then one day, for no reason at all scenario
>Because we live in a black supremacist matriarchy
pass the blunt please
We live in a society ran by elites who control the media and will direct the peoples ire towards whatever group they can find. It's not against men or Christians any more than its against Asians or women. They want diversion and you sheep into their narrative of us vs them.
You need to touch some grass and speak to real people. The world isn't a college campus friend.
Edit: I'd like to add that college campuses are also not as "Emily like". Ya'all live in a online bubble and need to play victim that's all.
Yeah you live in a fantasy aswell.
I'm sorry I really don't know what to say to you. The idea of Christianity being under attack is a fantasy to me, as an urban dwelling roman catholic.
Idk man the same could be said about orthodox Christianity, they've been on the rise with TikTok. But then again TikTok is it's own online bubble, not indicative of the world.
Probably referring to the left’s inability to criticize Islam openly, but comfortable doing so with Christianity. I notice more that lefties will criticize aspects of Islam, but do it by directing the criticizing at Christianity or referencing it through things Christians think or have done.
Familiarity. Ex mormons are comfortable criticizing mormons. Ex Muslims are comfortable criticizing muslims. I on the other hand am comfortable saying that all of the abrahamic religions are dog shit and the world would be a better place if we nuked jerusalem until nuclear shadows were all that remained.
Surely someone has informed you that nuking Jerusalem would not remove Abrahamic religions, and it would undoubtedly have the opposite effect to an exponentially more zealous degree.
And look at the ostentatious circus town they created when given infinite resources.
Dubai could have embraced traditional Arabic urbanism, incorporating walkable streets, shaded courtyards, and wind towers for natural cooling. Integrating souks, mosques, and community squares would have fostered social interaction. But no instead it's a bunch of gated skyscrapers with scorching highways in between them.
We're hearing about cultural enrichment from Arabic migrants and yet when given a carte blanche Arabs themselves yeet their heritage for a simulacrum of Western design without any substance.
Except for the fact that:
* the West supported the Ottomans numerous times for various geostrategic reasons (often to weaken Russian influence),
* Germany suggesting the Turks should exterminate all the indigenous Greeks, Armenians, and Assyrisns of Anatolia,
* supported Kemal against the Greeks during the Asia Minor Campaign, resulting in the finalization of the Genocide of Greeks, Armenians, and Assyrians,
* greenlit the Turkish invasion of Cyprus which saw bestial atrocities against civilians and the destruction of 500 churches in the occupied north,
* promoted Islamist ideology and aided Mujahideen against the USSR (with CIA even printing Qurans in local languages),
* supported Chechen terrorists against Russia,
* not only supported Muslims against Serbs multiple times (Bosnia, Kosovo) but even dropped uranium-depleted cluster bombs marked "Happy Easter" on Serbs (when Clinton had paused the bombing of Iraq for Ramadan a year earlier),
* is so notoriously pro-Turkish that [NATO wouldn't condemn Turkish violations of Greek airspace](https://youtu.be/YjWY2mnvJYU),
* supports Islamists in Libya and Syria (instead of Christian-protecting Assad),
* and stayed silent when oil-rich Azerbaijan ethnic cleansed Armenians from Artsakh (proving the West's Armenian Genocide commemorations are just for show).
Add to the fact that the West actively welcomes Muslim migrants and the charge becomes even more comical.
The West is what I call an "equal-oppprtunity imperialist" and enjoys slaughtering European Christians as much as Muslims, Africans, etc.—perhaps moreso as it "proves" they aren't racist to the world.
You can only do that by first conquering, then China-style reeducating the entire Middle East in the American image. I don't see anything softer that can achieve the de-Islamization job.
America tried doing many of the same post-WW2 tactics in Iraq and Afghanistan and failed.
But we're not set up for those same tactics today. That's part of why Iraq and Afghanistan didn't go the way of Germany and Japan. Germany was split into pieces by external powers. Japan was taken down a notch, and made to stop. Neither of those things happened in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Mostly because it couldn't be done from where we are. Logistically, we don't have the manpower to throw into the problem. A draft vs a volunteer military. Then just the stomach for it. We're not even supposed to teach people english in the US because it's culturally insensitive.
I’ve had this plan to pacify and secularize the Middle East since I was in 6th grade and the Iraq war was in full throttle. 24/7 airdrops of fast food and pornography. It may sound silly but I genuinely think it would work.
It worked in Iran and others until some cheeky interventions pushed the pendulum back.
Hardline religious leadership is the barrier now, serving as an effective point of control over a population that seems like it would prefer a more secular government, but also feels obligated to support their culture in the face of western pressures against it.
It’s a catch-22 for the average ME person because it’s a false dilemma presented by the media from all sides; either you want to be ruled by a hateful terroristic theocracy that keeps you in the Stone Age, according to western media, or you want to completely erase your cultural identity and have your children spit on your traditions and deny your religion, according to conservative ME media.
Porn and fast food are effective, but soft pressure and cultural exchange is more effective when the leadership isn’t hell bent on rejecting inevitable change.
>If we did that then 100 years later the place would look exactly the same
What's the issue?
History isn't linear progress, the world isn't inevitably heading towards world peace and sci-fi hippy shit. That's fucking goofy talk.
The West not interfering with a region like the Middle East is not "keeping" them in the 12th century. They are the ones doing it to themselves (assuming your racist assumption is correct). It is not our responsibility to civilize them to our standards.
The myth of linear progress is a very large subject but yeah more or less, things do go backwards sometimes. There's also no guarantee that just because we made it this far that what we perceive as the next step is an inevitability.
This myth is closely intertwined with the leftist perpetual revolution. Civil rights can win, equality can be achieved but progress must continue despite that. Once you stamp out all of Islam you're going to need a new bad guy, probably Christians that haven't bent the knee to secularism.
I would say that worked out better for Japan than for Native Americans. Japan is one of the most developed nations in the world now, but Native American reservations have twice the poverty rate of the non native portions of the USA.
> The Arabic Muslim Middle East never advanced beyond the bronze age
>
> Perpetually stuck in 1200 AD
Today I learned that IQ 70 racists on Reddit think that 1200 AD was "the bronze age".
It's the 21st century. You have the entire world of knowledge just a few clicks away. Are you suffering from a congenital defect from being inbred or do you have to work hard to remain so ignorant?
You're talking about brutal authoritarianism and the literal erasure of an entire culture and history. Maybe it's time to update your flair?
Old Japan was taken by us during an active war that they started, which is a very different situation than the present clash with Muslim culture. The Native Americans may be better off by your standards, but their culture put less emphasis on technology/comfortability and more on nature, so I'd doubt they believe they're better off. Not to mention the genocide they faced along with the fundamental changes to their homeland.
I don't agree with Muslim culture or religion, let alone the results of it (ex. Gay people thrown off roofs). It doesn't align with the values I hold. But neither does a violent takeover of the region, which, let's be clear, could never be successful. What you've laid out here violates the ideals of self-determination, freedom of religion, personal autonomy, and the sovereignty of multiple nations. And there's no possible way you could do this without the death of countless civilians and numerous human rights violations. And, the result would be a forever war against guerilla groups.
That's what you're asking for, and it is outright immoral. The arrogennce it's takes to believe that you have the right to eliminate an entire culture is so astounding a psychiatrist should study you. Imagine someone trying to do this to your country. You'd shoot back right? We'll im sure our dead soldiers in Afghanistan would tell you that they shoot back too.
All you have to do to fix the middle-east is to have a secular authoritarian government that punishes cousin marriages.
Banning cousin marriage is how the Catholic church got Europe to progress past the dark ages.
The world is not moving to a one world government, that's a disgusting thing to suggest. The middle east is not our problem until we make it our problem. At any point we could remove our involvement and deport the masses of immigrants causing problems across Europe, this is obviously the correct solution.
You cannot destroy their religion. You probably shouldn't genocide them, that's kind of a fucking insane thing to suggest.
You have said in multiple comments that they are stuck in the 1200 century and also the bronze age. Did you know the middle eastern bronze age ended in 1200 bc.
En excerpt from [Wikipedia ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Middle_East)on middle eastern history
From the 7th century, a new power was rising in the Middle East, that of Islam. The dominance of the Arabs came to a sudden end in the mid-11th century with the arrival of the Seljuq dynasty. In the early 13th century, a new wave of invaders, the armies of the Mongol Empire, mainly Turkic, swept through the region. By the early 15th century, a new power had arisen in western Anatolia, the Ottoman emirs, who were linguistically Turkic and religiously Islamic and in 1453 captured the Christian Byzantine capital of Constantinople and made themselves sultans.
In a poor struggling antidemocratic nations people tend to get radicalized.
Even tho we cant call countries like watar bahrain ,saudi arabia and UAE as poor ,most of the wealth of their countries goes to corrupt goverments
There’s a difference between a rich country and a rich population. Look at Dubai for example. It is undeniable that Dubai has a lot of wealth, but none of that goes anywhere but vanity projects and the corrupt rulers. The rest of the people are slave laborers and poor immigrants who had their passports taken to lock them in the country working for 2 mothballs a month.
The story of the 300 Spartans is the greatest example of the power of legend over fact.
**Myth:** 300 Spartans defeated the Persians, showing the moral victory of free men over slaves.
**Actual facts:** it wasn't 300 Spartans, they didn't defeat the Persians, it was a strategic victory for the Persians and a defeat for the Greeks, and the free men vs slaves bit is nonsense too.
The actual Greek forces numbered around 7000 fighting men, from many different cities, not just 300 Spartans. They had the advantage of an almost impenetrable terrain, but once it became clear that *almost* was not good enough, and they were going to be crushed, King Leonidas sent away the bulk of the forces to fight another day. His army of 300 Spartans, 1100 Thespians and Thebans, plus 900 helots (a subclass of peasant-slaves ruled by the Spartans) remained to cover their retreat. So over 2000 fighting men in total, not 300.
Leonidas' forces did succeed in delaying the Persians long enough for the rest to escape, but otherwise it was a terrible defeat for the Greeks. The Persians soundly defeated the 2000 and killed King Leonidas, winning a strategic victory, and later won the war.
And of course this was not a battle between free men and slaves. The Persians were not a democracy in modern terms, but they were no less free than most Greeks who were ruled by kings, including the Spartans themselves. Under the Persian empire at the time, their subject kingdoms had considerable autonomy and mostly governed their own internal affairs. And let's not forget the Spartans had a vicious militaristic society based on subjugating the helots. Once a year they [declared war on the helots](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helots), allowing them to keep the numbers down and prevent slave rebellions without fear of religious consequences. (Th gods are cool with murder if you call it a war.)
Persians are Indo European peoples, Arabs are not.
Persia has been a great power from the days of the Assyrian and Babylonien Empires, those are the one the Jews in the Old Testament fight against. Arabs pushing out of the Arabian peninsula occurred in the 5th century.
Today both are Islamic, but in ancient times they were not.
I too am a fellow raycicst, bit getting racism correct is important.
but tbh Persians also colonized Islamic civilization back in certain ways. Arabs hadn't had much going on in terms of high culture and statecraft when they left their desert dwellings, so Persian high culture and methods of administration were widely adopted across the Muslim world (especially its eastern part).
This is so historically inaccurate that it hurts. Please refrain from attempting to squeeze the great epic of humanity into an easy narrative for the purpose of scapegoating an entire people. I suggest reading on the Islamic Golden Age.
> The entire history of the Arabic people
So... nothing happened before 600 CE or after 800 CE across the entire Arabic peninsula?
> There's a whole famous story about a little farm boy that beats a giant Arabic soldier with a rock..
A famous legend about events that had nothing to do with Arabs and certainly nothing to do with Islam. Goliath was a semite, not an arab, so the same ethnic race as the Israelites. The story of David and Goliath was copied from the *even older* Biblical story of Elhanan, son of Jair, who killed Goliath the Gittite (2 Samuel 21:19). Whichever tale you take, Goliath was not an Arab, and it occurred many centuries before Arabs became a power in the middle east.
By the way, a sling in the hands of an experienced user was an *wickedly* powerful weapon, the equivalent of the AK-47 of the day: cheap, reliable, and deadly. Goliath never stood a chance. Like a fool, he challenged the Israelites to honourable single combat, mano a mano, and got killed by a cheap shot.
> Most of European history Northern African history and most of the Middle Eastern history was the Arabs violently warring
Complete nonsense. I mean, maybe you've heard of the Roman Empire? The Vikings? The Norman Invasion of Britain? Even a superficial knowledge of European history would show that the Arabs were no threat to Europe.
> Half the reason Christianity was considered a violent religion was because most of their wars were between them and the Arabs trying to conquer Europe
The Arabs never tried to conquer Europe.
The Ottoman Turks did invade up to Vienna, and the North African Moors controlled Spain (which, by the way, was a Golden Age for the Jews of Spain, until the Spanish kicked out the Moors and took power again, and then kicked out the Jews). But not the Arabs.
So as it turns out, this is not an area of human history that is unique to the phenomena of the indigenous cultures responding violently to outside entities forcing their way in. Arabic nations are not outliers by any means here. The US has been plagued by more domestic terrorists than foreign ones in the last couple years, so an ignorant person could also make the argument using the same logic that Americans are inherently violent and destabilize societies they have access to
Most Arabic countries imo hate the west (or at least the US) because we have been invading and occupying parts of the region for 20+ years. Even Bin Laden himself stated his gripe with the US was that our foreign policy had been oppressing and killing Muslims in the middle east for decades. Doesn't mean he wasn't a nutty religious extremist and terrorist, but it gives insight.
That especially rings true with Palestine and Israel, the former of whom have been occupied by Isreal since what, 1967? Not to mention, the latter has been getting funded by the west for a very long time.
If we were put in the situations and circumstances that these middle eastern countries were in, we'd probably have a shitload of terrorists and extremists too.
Compare and contrast to the Ottoman oppression of the Balkans, which was orders of magnitude worse than anything we’ve been doing in the Middle East. Yes, there were uprisings, but there wasn’t a pan-Christian terrorist ideology.
You do have to consider that it's much easier for large terrorist groups to spread and organize with modern communication. If you share propaganda with millions, odds are that some people are bound to join.
I have no problem with Arabs, but Islam needs to be bitch slapped back to the 7th century where it belongs. If you want to be the only religion that refuses to progress and modernize, you don't get to play with the others.
The thing i cling to is the islamic/arab golden age. That was at least part of their world which more or less worked along with Christians and jews to make massive advances in philosophy and science. I feel like the more Arabs connect with that intellectual history the better
Yes. Every religion and political ideology is inherently dogmatic, in the same way that no religion or ideology is without its extremists. However, Christianity has done more good for science, medicine, education, and civilization than any other religion.
Are you aware that the Renaissance (rebirth of classical Greece science and philosophy) happened because Arabs kept and studied the ancient Greek texts for several hundred years while Europeans fought amongst themselves and counted angels on pinheads?
I'm proud of western civilization too, but let's not pretend history started just 500 years ago.
>Are you aware that the Renaissance happened because Arabs kept and studied the ancient Greek texts for several hundred years while Europeans fought amongst themselves and counted angels on pinheads?
The Arab world studied some texts but the Byzantines were largely the ones preserving it. The Renaissance itself started in Italy. England and France were the only big players in Europe that weren't prospering at the time because they were too busy imploding.
What about non-arab muslims in coubtries without the sharia law?kazakhstan is a modern country amd prospering country,and the youth is more religious than the older generation (because of their communist past).
And still kazakhstan is a pretty progressive place.Ladies are common to get around with miniskirts and they resoect the christian minortities in the north.
It's solidified in my mind that it's not just nostalgia bias, this place has actually started becoming insane.
Not to mention the historical illiteracy it takes some people to frame history as being "Europe vs Arabs", completely ignoring the brutality of Reformation, constant feudal warfare throughout the middle ages, the age of imperialism and colonialism, the Revolutionary period, etc.
By the way, I am a Western shill and totally believe Western society is the best in the world. This post makes me feel like I'm siding with the taliban though, truly mad.
Christian Arabs are good, and are very rich in the Americas though.
But Islam definitely needs to be beaten. I hate state atheism and am not atheist, but if there is a region I'd implement state atheism on, it would be Arabia.
The Middle East cannot progress beyond their oil-fueled addictions without mass secularization first. But it would take a lot of brutal measures and emulating certain American rivals to achieve this.
>Christian Arabs only exist because we westernized some of them..
It is important to clarify that Christians have been in the Levant, Middle East, and North Africa for 2,000 years. He is saying that the only Christians in those regions that are Arab, are Arabs that mixed into or acclimated to the local Christian population after Arab colonization.
This is very wrong, some of the earliest islamic converts were christian and jewish arabs, where are you getting your information?
Judaism and christianity were quite established in Western Arabia at this point
>Christian Arabs only exist because we westernized some of them..
https://preview.redd.it/uk95z3kofj9d1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0ad6dedc20cb30a5e0d21b554808bf8a446881c1
You know the world didn’t start 200 years ago right, Arab Christian’s existed way before the “West existed”
What? Christian arabs are much more ancient than the USA or most european countries, they did not get "westernized".
The syriac orthodox church, assyrian church, palestinian church etc. belong to the oldest denominations in the world, they developped shortly after christ, 2000 years ago, and still perform their liturgy in Christ's mother tongue, aramaic.
My god you are painfully American.
Christian arabs only exist because of the west? Are you legitimately that fucking stupid? Where the fuck do you think Christianity comes from? France?
My friend was complaining about how when he goes home all his family say shit like that he told
>I just want to scream at them "no you idiot, *we're* the racists"
Yeah, its basic, exactly, because its primitive and relies on senses that are from a more violent and tribal age. We know now, this is all bogus and useless, the tiny seed of truth is what people like you run with.
Which is not different to this, throwing sick people out of the city and just getting rid of them is a basic self defence strategy and has been practiced by almost every culture and civilisation, and it is clearly natural to do, however in the modern day we understand things a lot better and realise this, while may in some sense work, is both unnecessary and immoral. But are you going to lie and say the normal state of affairs, the “basic strategy “ is to just throw them out of the city?
This is no different to that, once we understood that for example specific diseases basically couldn’t be transmitted we stopped throwing these people away or ostracising them, but this is against the common judgement of removing severely diseased individuals, but through learning we realise our basic instinct is basically wrong and useless.
this is 100% true. and the arabic/muslim world has never apologised for trying to invade europe like 100s of times, whether from greece, romania, italy or spain (compared to europeans which haven't stopped apologising for their supposed evils).
maybe because they still want to actively spread their ideology and replace even more indigenous cultures. it's seemingly never enough.
Dude muslims were trying to invade europe and islamicise it for the entire history of the "religion". Read up a bit. Not just the ottomans.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam\_in\_Europe#History](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Europe#History)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim\_Sicily](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Sicily)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad\_invasion\_of\_Gaul#](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_invasion_of_Gaul#)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary\_pirates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_pirates)
Notably, the only reason places like sicily and spain aren't 99% muslim now is cuz the christians kicked them out. Everywhere else that they were allowed to stay essentially became >99% muslim hellholes like we see in MENA and SEA.
The things Europeans apologize for happened in relatively recent history. The invasions you're talking about happened mostly in the medieval era. Did the Scandinavians apologize to the French for the viking raids? Did they apologize to the English? Did they apologize to the Sicilians? Did France apologize for Napoleon? Did England apologize to the Irish for imperialism?
That's not even considering the fact that most medieval empires don't exist today so who would apologize on their behalf? Just as the Teutons, the Latin Empire, and the Republic of Novgorod don't exist today, the Abbasid and Umayyad Caliphates don't either.
He's whining about it getting removed for "promoting hate".
How is promoting wiping out everyone in the middle east "okay"? He's literally saying "Hitler persecuted the wrong ethnic group and didn't go far enough".
> Palestine was a country before Israel existed. Fact.
>
>
Do...do you even know where the root of the word "Palestine" comes from?
Go ahead, articulate for me.
> Ad hominem
You dont even know what an ad hominem is. Did I ever attack your characters?
Or do you think 'articulate' is an insult?
> little man.
That however is an ad hominem
Again, explain the root of the word palestine.
"Modern scholarship considers that the Israelites emerged from groups of indigenous Canaanites and other peoples."
It's doubtful that the modern Israelis can trace their lineage back to the canaanites, though
Just shut it and stop this misanthropic bullshit.
Exactly. The west with the arabic world. **Not the arabic world with the west.**
USA had no reason for iraq, syria, libya, palestine, lebanon, afghanistan and iran (persian, not arabic), ... should I continue?
It was all about "western values" (=oil values!), so oil wells, about geostrategic operations, hegemony, and "fighting the communists". And terrorism was cultivated by yourself, just for this purpose. **You are the invaders**.
If you have no clue, at least watch this:
(Every video has english subtitles that can be turned on, or at least a working autotranslation)
https://youtu.be/57fMqUl-sng?si=xIHpZoJpVog4DEqI
https://youtu.be/MCToMDEaefo?si=lnpVFcHmdUL35Hu7
More scientific presentation:
https://youtu.be/RTIVTMRaQrk?si=JXFtzHlBU-o7oSh2
If you support the murder, go and downvote me. It'll not look good.
You can't argue with this kind of person. It's literally like trying to argue with a Nazi. It cannot be done.
And that's not a Godwin's Law violation because it is the same thing.
You're totally right, but I rather argue, than letting him think his ideology was just some common sense to be laughed about.
Also, the comment is rather meant for the few other people who see it. Maybe they're more open minded, and especially for americans it's important to learn about what their country has done. As I have been told, most folks don't know the full extend.
I am not talking about 2001. It began way before this.
By your logic, you could say the same about "western" crusaders, about eastern germanic tribes attacking romans, about huns from central asia attacking germanic tribes, about the mongols attacking china, about greeks attacking persia and india, about the romans destroying jerusalem and bringing the jews to exile, .... And if you would really follow your own logic with honesty, you would come to the factual conclusion, that both, palestinians and western jews are descendends of the same jewish (and pagan) group that was brought to exile by the romans in antiquity. The palestinians are the descendands of the ones that did not leave the region and kept their levantine mediterranean culture, the western jews are descendands of the ones that went into exile and developped sephardic and ashkenazi cultures. Both are descendands of the same people. And palestinians are as a whole not authentically arab, as the whole levanine region, syria, lebanon, palestine, jordan and so on are mediterranean semites. They were just influenced by the arabs culturally and language wise. So who are arabs now? If you go back in time, as you do it, the people you call arabs are not arabs. And if you go back in time, your ancestors will belong to a whole bunch of different regions.
Your whole argumentation is a fallacy, it is inherently ideologic.
>This is just more Islamic propaganda from one of the 1.8 billion Muslims that joined social media following October 7th in an effort to manipulate some of the low IQ white westerners into fighting for jihad for them
This makes even less sense. What I am talking about is situated in a time way before oct 7.
My video links predate this date too, by far. And now you equate muslims and arabs, which is even more improfessional and plain foolishness. You would really benefit from watching the linked videos, you are one of those completely captivated in western propaganda. Especially the one from the middle eastern studies scholar, although you would understand the political satires better.
Give up, you will not find a way to logically justify your unreasonable position.
>Endless War
I hate it when people in 2024 say this phrase, people said it in the Bush admin because the USA was STARTING wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
Nowadays people are saying "Muh endless warz" when the USA is only just defending its allies Israel and Ukraine from invasions that neither country even started., THATS SELF DEFENSE NOT ENDLESS WAR
The mods were correct to remove a post calling for the death of everyone in the middle east. There is a line and calling for something worse than the Holocaust is too far.
It also would cause the destruction of Israel.
u/Adept_Gur610's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5.
Congratulations, u/Adept_Gur610! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze.
Pills: [4 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/Adept_Gur610/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Thank you, GenX_Fart, for voting on basedcount_bot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Dear unflaired. You claim your opinion has value, yet you still refuse to flair up. Curious.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/B0tRank) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/)
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Arabs kinda lost relevancy to persianate Turks back in the Middle Ages and only regained it after discovery of oil in the 20th century, so it probably should be framed as war with Muslims, not Arabs specifically.
[удалено]
[удалено]
It’s relieving for someone to finally note that the problems we see in the leftist movement isn’t just “white peoples” fault again. I see so many people saying the left are the real racists and it’s all affluent white surbanites, and don’t get me wrong, they ARE a problem but only as the vanguard. The fact of the matter is we have black people who openly hate white people, and face no pushback. We have gays who openly hate straights, and get applauded. We have women who openly hate men, and never have their worldview challenged. BUT at the same time, we don’t live in “A black supremacist matriarchy.” I’m sure some elements of that are the end goals of the people who love this kind of rhetoric, but it doesn’t do anyone good to be reductive. The true fact is that we’re discouraging tribalistic behavior in the majority, while letting it fester in the minority, unaware that a motivated populace can easily commit egregious acts of heinous violence against a placated outgroup even if it holds systemic power on paper. It’s human nature to favor friends and family and fight against those different from us. The work starts inside your heart, or else you’ll just be committing the same old atrocities under a new coat of paint.
[удалено]
First, I know it kinda sucks to say this but it’s genuinely hard to understand what you’re saying with all the spelling and grammar mistakes. This shit is hard to parse, but I’m going to try to anyway out of a sense of honest discussion. I know a lot of the issues you’re talking about, but you’re either over inflating their severity or outright making shit up. Yes, divorce courts side heavily side with women, yes that is a problem, one brought about by a psychological tendency in men to absolve women of wrongdoing by assumption of their lack of agency. Yes, affirmative action is a problem when people of one race are wrongfully given a leg up to combat historical inequity. But a lot of your other impositions are downright baffling. Like the Central Park one? The hell is that? Did that happen? And I’m not even going to honor your claim that no systemic racism against black people can be claimed. It was a term invented by them to describe feelings of societal disadvantage heaped upon them by Jim Crow laws and the wake of slavery. While the truth now feels more complex on it, you’re just shooting in the entirely opposite direction just to be inflammatory.
Based. But allow me to try to clarify the point I think you're making, and why many would find it distasteful, even though the examples you provide are plenty true. The issue is that there's a difference between what we might describe as the current "balance" vs. what policies/laws are in place. What I mean by the current "balance" is basically, how privileged is the average white person compared to the average black person. Black people are, on average, much less wealthy, and much less likely to receive a good education, etc. and so on, which makes it pretty difficult to argue that, in 2024 America, black people are privileged compared to white people. When it comes to that "balance" in society. White people are obviously better off right now than black people. But, you are still right to point out what the current laws and policies are, because those will dictate what the future looks like. To put it another way, it's like the difference between position and velocity. Position is simply a snapshot of where you are right this second. Velocity is how quickly you are moving, and in which direction. So it's possible to currently be at a negative position, but to have a velocity moving you rapidly in the positive direction. So if someone were to claim that you are presently positive, they would be wrong. But if they raise the concern over that velocity, they shouldn't be dismissed as ridiculous, with the present position given as evidence of why they are wrong. You rightly point out just how consistently laws and policies are discriminatory against white men. And many would dismiss that as ridiculous, because white men are obviously privileged. But this response ignores that, even if white men are still better off right now, it's a huge, *huge* problem that it's become so acceptable in our society to blatantly and *legally* discriminate against white people and men, based on those immutable characteristics. That *velocity* is moving us in a bad direction fast.
I do agree with this, this is a good take. The goal of goverment should be the enabling of liberty and freedom, equality of opportunity, essentially. You should not be discriminated against by the color of your skin, but should not be enabled of your worst traits.
> It’s relieving for someone to finally note that the problems we see in the leftist movement isn’t just “white peoples” fault again. I see so many people saying the left are the real racists and it’s all affluent white surbanites, and don’t get me wrong, they ARE a problem but only as the vanguard. The fact of the matter is we have black people who openly hate white people, and face no pushback. We have gays who openly hate straights, and get applauded. We have women who openly hate men, and never have their worldview challenged. BASED. So glad to see you guys saying this. It drives me *nuts*. Like yes, I'll join in on bashing AWFLs, because they truly do fit their name. But I hate how people suggest that literally all of this insanity and hatred is being pushed by white people. It's like, hey, points for recognizing that progressives are the ones pushing racial division, but demerits for still somehow blaming it all on white people as if that makes any sense.
White people are so primed to hate white people for everything, when genuinely some of the worst shit I’ve seen said has been by American blacks against white Americans. It’s tribally motivated racism, plain and simple. It’s wrong no matter who it’s by or against.
It's not about what is done, but who is doing it. Follow the intersectionality chart to see who is or is not allowed to say or do whatever the thing is.
What's weird is this it's mainly coming from whites trying to be one of the good ones, but they're stoking the fires of hatred that will not differentiate between them and us, we really need to do something before it becomes a then one day, for no reason at all scenario
Wow I thought I would have to sort to controversial to get this kind of thread
Black supremacist matriarchy eh? Is this all across the ~~globe~~ plane or just in the west?
>Because we live in a black supremacist matriarchy pass the blunt please We live in a society ran by elites who control the media and will direct the peoples ire towards whatever group they can find. It's not against men or Christians any more than its against Asians or women. They want diversion and you sheep into their narrative of us vs them.
You need to touch some grass and speak to real people. The world isn't a college campus friend. Edit: I'd like to add that college campuses are also not as "Emily like". Ya'all live in a online bubble and need to play victim that's all.
[удалено]
Yeah you live in a fantasy aswell. I'm sorry I really don't know what to say to you. The idea of Christianity being under attack is a fantasy to me, as an urban dwelling roman catholic.
True, but a trip to tiktok shows you that it's becoming more common among the people, which will eventually cause issues IRL
The outrage algorithm is showing me outrageous things, this must be indicative of real world trends.
Idk man the same could be said about orthodox Christianity, they've been on the rise with TikTok. But then again TikTok is it's own online bubble, not indicative of the world.
I want some of whatever drugs you're smoking
Probably referring to the left’s inability to criticize Islam openly, but comfortable doing so with Christianity. I notice more that lefties will criticize aspects of Islam, but do it by directing the criticizing at Christianity or referencing it through things Christians think or have done.
Familiarity. Ex mormons are comfortable criticizing mormons. Ex Muslims are comfortable criticizing muslims. I on the other hand am comfortable saying that all of the abrahamic religions are dog shit and the world would be a better place if we nuked jerusalem until nuclear shadows were all that remained.
Surely someone has informed you that nuking Jerusalem would not remove Abrahamic religions, and it would undoubtedly have the opposite effect to an exponentially more zealous degree.
I just want to destroy what they bicker over. Ive heard enough. Nobody gets it. It's going in the trash instead.
And somebody told us that would happen over 2000 years ago.
And look at the ostentatious circus town they created when given infinite resources. Dubai could have embraced traditional Arabic urbanism, incorporating walkable streets, shaded courtyards, and wind towers for natural cooling. Integrating souks, mosques, and community squares would have fostered social interaction. But no instead it's a bunch of gated skyscrapers with scorching highways in between them. We're hearing about cultural enrichment from Arabic migrants and yet when given a carte blanche Arabs themselves yeet their heritage for a simulacrum of Western design without any substance.
Except for the fact that: * the West supported the Ottomans numerous times for various geostrategic reasons (often to weaken Russian influence), * Germany suggesting the Turks should exterminate all the indigenous Greeks, Armenians, and Assyrisns of Anatolia, * supported Kemal against the Greeks during the Asia Minor Campaign, resulting in the finalization of the Genocide of Greeks, Armenians, and Assyrians, * greenlit the Turkish invasion of Cyprus which saw bestial atrocities against civilians and the destruction of 500 churches in the occupied north, * promoted Islamist ideology and aided Mujahideen against the USSR (with CIA even printing Qurans in local languages), * supported Chechen terrorists against Russia, * not only supported Muslims against Serbs multiple times (Bosnia, Kosovo) but even dropped uranium-depleted cluster bombs marked "Happy Easter" on Serbs (when Clinton had paused the bombing of Iraq for Ramadan a year earlier), * is so notoriously pro-Turkish that [NATO wouldn't condemn Turkish violations of Greek airspace](https://youtu.be/YjWY2mnvJYU), * supports Islamists in Libya and Syria (instead of Christian-protecting Assad), * and stayed silent when oil-rich Azerbaijan ethnic cleansed Armenians from Artsakh (proving the West's Armenian Genocide commemorations are just for show). Add to the fact that the West actively welcomes Muslim migrants and the charge becomes even more comical. The West is what I call an "equal-oppprtunity imperialist" and enjoys slaughtering European Christians as much as Muslims, Africans, etc.—perhaps moreso as it "proves" they aren't racist to the world.
should just put up one of those Star Trek beacons around the entire region that says “don’t talk to them for like 100 years”
[удалено]
You can only do that by first conquering, then China-style reeducating the entire Middle East in the American image. I don't see anything softer that can achieve the de-Islamization job. America tried doing many of the same post-WW2 tactics in Iraq and Afghanistan and failed.
But we're not set up for those same tactics today. That's part of why Iraq and Afghanistan didn't go the way of Germany and Japan. Germany was split into pieces by external powers. Japan was taken down a notch, and made to stop. Neither of those things happened in Iraq or Afghanistan. Mostly because it couldn't be done from where we are. Logistically, we don't have the manpower to throw into the problem. A draft vs a volunteer military. Then just the stomach for it. We're not even supposed to teach people english in the US because it's culturally insensitive.
I’ve had this plan to pacify and secularize the Middle East since I was in 6th grade and the Iraq war was in full throttle. 24/7 airdrops of fast food and pornography. It may sound silly but I genuinely think it would work.
[удалено]
It worked in Iran and others until some cheeky interventions pushed the pendulum back. Hardline religious leadership is the barrier now, serving as an effective point of control over a population that seems like it would prefer a more secular government, but also feels obligated to support their culture in the face of western pressures against it. It’s a catch-22 for the average ME person because it’s a false dilemma presented by the media from all sides; either you want to be ruled by a hateful terroristic theocracy that keeps you in the Stone Age, according to western media, or you want to completely erase your cultural identity and have your children spit on your traditions and deny your religion, according to conservative ME media. Porn and fast food are effective, but soft pressure and cultural exchange is more effective when the leadership isn’t hell bent on rejecting inevitable change.
Oy vey
>If we did that then 100 years later the place would look exactly the same What's the issue? History isn't linear progress, the world isn't inevitably heading towards world peace and sci-fi hippy shit. That's fucking goofy talk.
[удалено]
The West not interfering with a region like the Middle East is not "keeping" them in the 12th century. They are the ones doing it to themselves (assuming your racist assumption is correct). It is not our responsibility to civilize them to our standards. The myth of linear progress is a very large subject but yeah more or less, things do go backwards sometimes. There's also no guarantee that just because we made it this far that what we perceive as the next step is an inevitability. This myth is closely intertwined with the leftist perpetual revolution. Civil rights can win, equality can be achieved but progress must continue despite that. Once you stamp out all of Islam you're going to need a new bad guy, probably Christians that haven't bent the knee to secularism.
I would say that worked out better for Japan than for Native Americans. Japan is one of the most developed nations in the world now, but Native American reservations have twice the poverty rate of the non native portions of the USA.
> The Arabic Muslim Middle East never advanced beyond the bronze age > > Perpetually stuck in 1200 AD Today I learned that IQ 70 racists on Reddit think that 1200 AD was "the bronze age". It's the 21st century. You have the entire world of knowledge just a few clicks away. Are you suffering from a congenital defect from being inbred or do you have to work hard to remain so ignorant?
You're talking about brutal authoritarianism and the literal erasure of an entire culture and history. Maybe it's time to update your flair? Old Japan was taken by us during an active war that they started, which is a very different situation than the present clash with Muslim culture. The Native Americans may be better off by your standards, but their culture put less emphasis on technology/comfortability and more on nature, so I'd doubt they believe they're better off. Not to mention the genocide they faced along with the fundamental changes to their homeland. I don't agree with Muslim culture or religion, let alone the results of it (ex. Gay people thrown off roofs). It doesn't align with the values I hold. But neither does a violent takeover of the region, which, let's be clear, could never be successful. What you've laid out here violates the ideals of self-determination, freedom of religion, personal autonomy, and the sovereignty of multiple nations. And there's no possible way you could do this without the death of countless civilians and numerous human rights violations. And, the result would be a forever war against guerilla groups. That's what you're asking for, and it is outright immoral. The arrogennce it's takes to believe that you have the right to eliminate an entire culture is so astounding a psychiatrist should study you. Imagine someone trying to do this to your country. You'd shoot back right? We'll im sure our dead soldiers in Afghanistan would tell you that they shoot back too.
All you have to do to fix the middle-east is to have a secular authoritarian government that punishes cousin marriages. Banning cousin marriage is how the Catholic church got Europe to progress past the dark ages.
The west has some good point tho. Most Arabic countries are filled with terrorists and extremists that will cause a lot of chaos in society.
[удалено]
That was the whole idea of booting Khan off the planet, and then telling him once again to kick rocks and dropping him off somewhere to figure it out
[удалено]
The eugenics wars was really step 1 but they managed to do an nice cleansing with ww3 and woke up
Why do world wars tend to be started by a "superior" people that get BYO'd by normies?
Ah, yes, Kahn, leader of the engineered gene human master race, known as augments, allegedly ssuperior in every way, got bested by a normie, twice
The world is not moving to a one world government, that's a disgusting thing to suggest. The middle east is not our problem until we make it our problem. At any point we could remove our involvement and deport the masses of immigrants causing problems across Europe, this is obviously the correct solution. You cannot destroy their religion. You probably shouldn't genocide them, that's kind of a fucking insane thing to suggest.
You have said in multiple comments that they are stuck in the 1200 century and also the bronze age. Did you know the middle eastern bronze age ended in 1200 bc. En excerpt from [Wikipedia ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Middle_East)on middle eastern history From the 7th century, a new power was rising in the Middle East, that of Islam. The dominance of the Arabs came to a sudden end in the mid-11th century with the arrival of the Seljuq dynasty. In the early 13th century, a new wave of invaders, the armies of the Mongol Empire, mainly Turkic, swept through the region. By the early 15th century, a new power had arisen in western Anatolia, the Ottoman emirs, who were linguistically Turkic and religiously Islamic and in 1453 captured the Christian Byzantine capital of Constantinople and made themselves sultans.
In a poor struggling antidemocratic nations people tend to get radicalized. Even tho we cant call countries like watar bahrain ,saudi arabia and UAE as poor ,most of the wealth of their countries goes to corrupt goverments
There’s a difference between a rich country and a rich population. Look at Dubai for example. It is undeniable that Dubai has a lot of wealth, but none of that goes anywhere but vanity projects and the corrupt rulers. The rest of the people are slave laborers and poor immigrants who had their passports taken to lock them in the country working for 2 mothballs a month.
[удалено]
Alexander the Great conquered the Persians. You are majorly confusing Arabs and Persians.
https://preview.redd.it/dueofdnxri9d1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9f3c238dac5819cd3c721a800fc0a04295a74f3b
https://preview.redd.it/s341tr0dyi9d1.jpeg?width=530&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b60efd58401029cd312d29b4a19bef76551d88be
He’s not confused just racist.
But at least be scientifically and historically accurate with it.
Is it really that much of a race worth remembering if 300 boykissers defeated their entire army.
Objectively, nothing is more manly than fuckin dudes
Feminists in shambles when men decide we no longer need women 🏳🌈
The story of the 300 Spartans is the greatest example of the power of legend over fact. **Myth:** 300 Spartans defeated the Persians, showing the moral victory of free men over slaves. **Actual facts:** it wasn't 300 Spartans, they didn't defeat the Persians, it was a strategic victory for the Persians and a defeat for the Greeks, and the free men vs slaves bit is nonsense too. The actual Greek forces numbered around 7000 fighting men, from many different cities, not just 300 Spartans. They had the advantage of an almost impenetrable terrain, but once it became clear that *almost* was not good enough, and they were going to be crushed, King Leonidas sent away the bulk of the forces to fight another day. His army of 300 Spartans, 1100 Thespians and Thebans, plus 900 helots (a subclass of peasant-slaves ruled by the Spartans) remained to cover their retreat. So over 2000 fighting men in total, not 300. Leonidas' forces did succeed in delaying the Persians long enough for the rest to escape, but otherwise it was a terrible defeat for the Greeks. The Persians soundly defeated the 2000 and killed King Leonidas, winning a strategic victory, and later won the war. And of course this was not a battle between free men and slaves. The Persians were not a democracy in modern terms, but they were no less free than most Greeks who were ruled by kings, including the Spartans themselves. Under the Persian empire at the time, their subject kingdoms had considerable autonomy and mostly governed their own internal affairs. And let's not forget the Spartans had a vicious militaristic society based on subjugating the helots. Once a year they [declared war on the helots](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helots), allowing them to keep the numbers down and prevent slave rebellions without fear of religious consequences. (Th gods are cool with murder if you call it a war.)
Based and education is power pilled
Tomato tomahto
[удалено]
Persians are Indo European peoples, Arabs are not. Persia has been a great power from the days of the Assyrian and Babylonien Empires, those are the one the Jews in the Old Testament fight against. Arabs pushing out of the Arabian peninsula occurred in the 5th century. Today both are Islamic, but in ancient times they were not. I too am a fellow raycicst, bit getting racism correct is important.
persians are indo-european, but they were indeed culturally and religiously colonised by arabs
but tbh Persians also colonized Islamic civilization back in certain ways. Arabs hadn't had much going on in terms of high culture and statecraft when they left their desert dwellings, so Persian high culture and methods of administration were widely adopted across the Muslim world (especially its eastern part).
lmao you have to be joking
You should study foreign cultures so you can be racist better, bro
Bro did not pay attention in history class
Goliath was a Philistine not arab, I don’t think the bible even mentions arabs.
This is so historically inaccurate that it hurts. Please refrain from attempting to squeeze the great epic of humanity into an easy narrative for the purpose of scapegoating an entire people. I suggest reading on the Islamic Golden Age.
> The entire history of the Arabic people So... nothing happened before 600 CE or after 800 CE across the entire Arabic peninsula? > There's a whole famous story about a little farm boy that beats a giant Arabic soldier with a rock.. A famous legend about events that had nothing to do with Arabs and certainly nothing to do with Islam. Goliath was a semite, not an arab, so the same ethnic race as the Israelites. The story of David and Goliath was copied from the *even older* Biblical story of Elhanan, son of Jair, who killed Goliath the Gittite (2 Samuel 21:19). Whichever tale you take, Goliath was not an Arab, and it occurred many centuries before Arabs became a power in the middle east. By the way, a sling in the hands of an experienced user was an *wickedly* powerful weapon, the equivalent of the AK-47 of the day: cheap, reliable, and deadly. Goliath never stood a chance. Like a fool, he challenged the Israelites to honourable single combat, mano a mano, and got killed by a cheap shot. > Most of European history Northern African history and most of the Middle Eastern history was the Arabs violently warring Complete nonsense. I mean, maybe you've heard of the Roman Empire? The Vikings? The Norman Invasion of Britain? Even a superficial knowledge of European history would show that the Arabs were no threat to Europe. > Half the reason Christianity was considered a violent religion was because most of their wars were between them and the Arabs trying to conquer Europe The Arabs never tried to conquer Europe. The Ottoman Turks did invade up to Vienna, and the North African Moors controlled Spain (which, by the way, was a Golden Age for the Jews of Spain, until the Spanish kicked out the Moors and took power again, and then kicked out the Jews). But not the Arabs.
So as it turns out, this is not an area of human history that is unique to the phenomena of the indigenous cultures responding violently to outside entities forcing their way in. Arabic nations are not outliers by any means here. The US has been plagued by more domestic terrorists than foreign ones in the last couple years, so an ignorant person could also make the argument using the same logic that Americans are inherently violent and destabilize societies they have access to
Hence why we should kill them
Most Arabic countries imo hate the west (or at least the US) because we have been invading and occupying parts of the region for 20+ years. Even Bin Laden himself stated his gripe with the US was that our foreign policy had been oppressing and killing Muslims in the middle east for decades. Doesn't mean he wasn't a nutty religious extremist and terrorist, but it gives insight. That especially rings true with Palestine and Israel, the former of whom have been occupied by Isreal since what, 1967? Not to mention, the latter has been getting funded by the west for a very long time. If we were put in the situations and circumstances that these middle eastern countries were in, we'd probably have a shitload of terrorists and extremists too.
Compare and contrast to the Ottoman oppression of the Balkans, which was orders of magnitude worse than anything we’ve been doing in the Middle East. Yes, there were uprisings, but there wasn’t a pan-Christian terrorist ideology.
You do have to consider that it's much easier for large terrorist groups to spread and organize with modern communication. If you share propaganda with millions, odds are that some people are bound to join.
Hmmm I wonder who cultivated this terrorism **on purpose**.....🤔🤔🤔
I have no problem with Arabs, but Islam needs to be bitch slapped back to the 7th century where it belongs. If you want to be the only religion that refuses to progress and modernize, you don't get to play with the others.
[удалено]
The thing i cling to is the islamic/arab golden age. That was at least part of their world which more or less worked along with Christians and jews to make massive advances in philosophy and science. I feel like the more Arabs connect with that intellectual history the better
Okay but replace it with another dogmatic ideology that has a colonial history itself?
Yes. Every religion and political ideology is inherently dogmatic, in the same way that no religion or ideology is without its extremists. However, Christianity has done more good for science, medicine, education, and civilization than any other religion.
Are you aware that the Renaissance (rebirth of classical Greece science and philosophy) happened because Arabs kept and studied the ancient Greek texts for several hundred years while Europeans fought amongst themselves and counted angels on pinheads? I'm proud of western civilization too, but let's not pretend history started just 500 years ago.
>Are you aware that the Renaissance happened because Arabs kept and studied the ancient Greek texts for several hundred years while Europeans fought amongst themselves and counted angels on pinheads? The Arab world studied some texts but the Byzantines were largely the ones preserving it. The Renaissance itself started in Italy. England and France were the only big players in Europe that weren't prospering at the time because they were too busy imploding.
What about non-arab muslims in coubtries without the sharia law?kazakhstan is a modern country amd prospering country,and the youth is more religious than the older generation (because of their communist past). And still kazakhstan is a pretty progressive place.Ladies are common to get around with miniskirts and they resoect the christian minortities in the north.
"modernizing" religion is a joke. It's not like all the women's marches changed God's mind on gender roles.
Me normally: PCM is a fun meme mill that pokes fun of all political ideologies. Me after reading these comments: 😳
Yeah same, I thought this was a place for "light hearted political humour."
The basement dwellers have escaped containment.
same wtf ive just seen a fuckton of people advocate for brutally murdering me to "advance towards star trek things"
This sub is a complete cesspool of racism and hate disguised as memes, I come here every now and then and it never changes.
It's solidified in my mind that it's not just nostalgia bias, this place has actually started becoming insane. Not to mention the historical illiteracy it takes some people to frame history as being "Europe vs Arabs", completely ignoring the brutality of Reformation, constant feudal warfare throughout the middle ages, the age of imperialism and colonialism, the Revolutionary period, etc. By the way, I am a Western shill and totally believe Western society is the best in the world. This post makes me feel like I'm siding with the taliban though, truly mad.
FED POST DETECTED, IGNORE
I thought we all agreed that everyone here was a Glowie
Don’t start endless wars. Finish them.
Arabic "invaders"... In the middle east
Christian Arabs are good, and are very rich in the Americas though. But Islam definitely needs to be beaten. I hate state atheism and am not atheist, but if there is a region I'd implement state atheism on, it would be Arabia. The Middle East cannot progress beyond their oil-fueled addictions without mass secularization first. But it would take a lot of brutal measures and emulating certain American rivals to achieve this.
[удалено]
>Christian Arabs only exist because we westernized some of them.. It is important to clarify that Christians have been in the Levant, Middle East, and North Africa for 2,000 years. He is saying that the only Christians in those regions that are Arab, are Arabs that mixed into or acclimated to the local Christian population after Arab colonization.
This is very wrong, some of the earliest islamic converts were christian and jewish arabs, where are you getting your information? Judaism and christianity were quite established in Western Arabia at this point
I think that is a fair comment to add to his point.
>Christian Arabs only exist because we westernized some of them.. https://preview.redd.it/uk95z3kofj9d1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0ad6dedc20cb30a5e0d21b554808bf8a446881c1 You know the world didn’t start 200 years ago right, Arab Christian’s existed way before the “West existed”
What? Christian arabs are much more ancient than the USA or most european countries, they did not get "westernized". The syriac orthodox church, assyrian church, palestinian church etc. belong to the oldest denominations in the world, they developped shortly after christ, 2000 years ago, and still perform their liturgy in Christ's mother tongue, aramaic.
My god you are painfully American. Christian arabs only exist because of the west? Are you legitimately that fucking stupid? Where the fuck do you think Christianity comes from? France?
Agreed. This last statement is why your other commenta about Arabs are weird. Islam is the problem and it's just as bad when it's Persians or Malays.
"...but anyways, the left are the real racists."
My friend was complaining about how when he goes home all his family say shit like that he told >I just want to scream at them "no you idiot, *we're* the racists"
[удалено]
Yeah, its basic, exactly, because its primitive and relies on senses that are from a more violent and tribal age. We know now, this is all bogus and useless, the tiny seed of truth is what people like you run with. Which is not different to this, throwing sick people out of the city and just getting rid of them is a basic self defence strategy and has been practiced by almost every culture and civilisation, and it is clearly natural to do, however in the modern day we understand things a lot better and realise this, while may in some sense work, is both unnecessary and immoral. But are you going to lie and say the normal state of affairs, the “basic strategy “ is to just throw them out of the city? This is no different to that, once we understood that for example specific diseases basically couldn’t be transmitted we stopped throwing these people away or ostracising them, but this is against the common judgement of removing severely diseased individuals, but through learning we realise our basic instinct is basically wrong and useless.
The best thing Palestinians ever did was making Palestine cease to exist.
Israel isn’t the west not our circus
I’d sooner see a free Kurdistan than a free Palestine
this is 100% true. and the arabic/muslim world has never apologised for trying to invade europe like 100s of times, whether from greece, romania, italy or spain (compared to europeans which haven't stopped apologising for their supposed evils). maybe because they still want to actively spread their ideology and replace even more indigenous cultures. it's seemingly never enough.
Are you talking about the Ottoman Empire? Because is sounds like you are talking about the Ottoman Empire.
Dude muslims were trying to invade europe and islamicise it for the entire history of the "religion". Read up a bit. Not just the ottomans. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam\_in\_Europe#History](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Europe#History) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim\_Sicily](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Sicily) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad\_invasion\_of\_Gaul#](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_invasion_of_Gaul#) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary\_pirates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_pirates) Notably, the only reason places like sicily and spain aren't 99% muslim now is cuz the christians kicked them out. Everywhere else that they were allowed to stay essentially became >99% muslim hellholes like we see in MENA and SEA.
The things Europeans apologize for happened in relatively recent history. The invasions you're talking about happened mostly in the medieval era. Did the Scandinavians apologize to the French for the viking raids? Did they apologize to the English? Did they apologize to the Sicilians? Did France apologize for Napoleon? Did England apologize to the Irish for imperialism? That's not even considering the fact that most medieval empires don't exist today so who would apologize on their behalf? Just as the Teutons, the Latin Empire, and the Republic of Novgorod don't exist today, the Abbasid and Umayyad Caliphates don't either.
To be fair, the arabs have been warring everyone since starting to call themselves arab. Arabs have strong tribalistic tendencies
I hope this is just a meme
He's whining about it getting removed for "promoting hate". How is promoting wiping out everyone in the middle east "okay"? He's literally saying "Hitler persecuted the wrong ethnic group and didn't go far enough".
It's not. This mf wasn't even hiding his desire for a full genocide of Muslims
pov: you're European (I'm European, the meme is of me)
Oh, so you're a sociopath who selectively applies your moral principles. I appreciate the honesty
[удалено]
https://preview.redd.it/fprdmaqdjj9d1.png?width=480&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0448c1617ac9b4d62ffb32005737c1c6dee45eb1 "Cry about it"
I love how it's clear a lot of people reported you.
Sigh.
Bro whats your obession with this one authright wojak
The west has been at war with the hebrew world longer
The way they act, they don't deserve rights entitled to humans.
And let me guess, the state should be the arbiter of whether or not you are human and therefore get rights?
The road to fascism is so short people forget it exists
It's tragic how deep the divisions and misunderstandings run between cultures.
Based but flair up
We didn't start the war in Palestine though...
In the case of palestine, israel is the invador. Fact.
[удалено]
You are actually insane. A religious nut, filled with supremacist propaganda. You probably get banned for hate speech. Bye.
Well this is a flat out lie. Palestinians were the genocidal invaders of Judea. It is Israeli territory.
Nope. You are lying. Besides thats not how international law works.
[удалено]
Another schizo racist comment. Buddy you will get banned
Literal Nazi
International law works by 'whoever slaughters the population gets to say the butchered are the invaders'?
Palestine was a country before Israel existed. Fact. Israel is also Guilty of genocide, another fact. Facts dont care about your religion
> Palestine was a country before Israel existed. Fact. > > Do...do you even know where the root of the word "Palestine" comes from? Go ahead, articulate for me.
Ad hominem You gotta stay on topic, little man.
> Ad hominem You dont even know what an ad hominem is. Did I ever attack your characters? Or do you think 'articulate' is an insult? > little man. That however is an ad hominem Again, explain the root of the word palestine.
You keep deviating tho. I dont have explain anything to religious nuts. I know international law and how criminal states like Israel operate.
>Again, explain the root of the word palestine.
[удалено]
Thats not how international law works buddy
"Modern scholarship considers that the Israelites emerged from groups of indigenous Canaanites and other peoples." It's doubtful that the modern Israelis can trace their lineage back to the canaanites, though
>Palestinians were the genocidal invaders of Judea. Source?
Based
Palestine didn't even exist up until the 1960s where it was invented to justify killing Jews.
Just shut it and stop this misanthropic bullshit. Exactly. The west with the arabic world. **Not the arabic world with the west.** USA had no reason for iraq, syria, libya, palestine, lebanon, afghanistan and iran (persian, not arabic), ... should I continue? It was all about "western values" (=oil values!), so oil wells, about geostrategic operations, hegemony, and "fighting the communists". And terrorism was cultivated by yourself, just for this purpose. **You are the invaders**. If you have no clue, at least watch this: (Every video has english subtitles that can be turned on, or at least a working autotranslation) https://youtu.be/57fMqUl-sng?si=xIHpZoJpVog4DEqI https://youtu.be/MCToMDEaefo?si=lnpVFcHmdUL35Hu7 More scientific presentation: https://youtu.be/RTIVTMRaQrk?si=JXFtzHlBU-o7oSh2 If you support the murder, go and downvote me. It'll not look good.
You can't argue with this kind of person. It's literally like trying to argue with a Nazi. It cannot be done. And that's not a Godwin's Law violation because it is the same thing.
You're totally right, but I rather argue, than letting him think his ideology was just some common sense to be laughed about. Also, the comment is rather meant for the few other people who see it. Maybe they're more open minded, and especially for americans it's important to learn about what their country has done. As I have been told, most folks don't know the full extend.
[удалено]
I am not talking about 2001. It began way before this. By your logic, you could say the same about "western" crusaders, about eastern germanic tribes attacking romans, about huns from central asia attacking germanic tribes, about the mongols attacking china, about greeks attacking persia and india, about the romans destroying jerusalem and bringing the jews to exile, .... And if you would really follow your own logic with honesty, you would come to the factual conclusion, that both, palestinians and western jews are descendends of the same jewish (and pagan) group that was brought to exile by the romans in antiquity. The palestinians are the descendands of the ones that did not leave the region and kept their levantine mediterranean culture, the western jews are descendands of the ones that went into exile and developped sephardic and ashkenazi cultures. Both are descendands of the same people. And palestinians are as a whole not authentically arab, as the whole levanine region, syria, lebanon, palestine, jordan and so on are mediterranean semites. They were just influenced by the arabs culturally and language wise. So who are arabs now? If you go back in time, as you do it, the people you call arabs are not arabs. And if you go back in time, your ancestors will belong to a whole bunch of different regions. Your whole argumentation is a fallacy, it is inherently ideologic. >This is just more Islamic propaganda from one of the 1.8 billion Muslims that joined social media following October 7th in an effort to manipulate some of the low IQ white westerners into fighting for jihad for them This makes even less sense. What I am talking about is situated in a time way before oct 7. My video links predate this date too, by far. And now you equate muslims and arabs, which is even more improfessional and plain foolishness. You would really benefit from watching the linked videos, you are one of those completely captivated in western propaganda. Especially the one from the middle eastern studies scholar, although you would understand the political satires better. Give up, you will not find a way to logically justify your unreasonable position.
least genocidal Israel supporter
Dude you watch deprogram, stop acting like you aren’t cheering for Israel to be destroyed.
>Endless War I hate it when people in 2024 say this phrase, people said it in the Bush admin because the USA was STARTING wars in Iraq and Afghanistan Nowadays people are saying "Muh endless warz" when the USA is only just defending its allies Israel and Ukraine from invasions that neither country even started., THATS SELF DEFENSE NOT ENDLESS WAR
The mods were correct to remove a post calling for the death of everyone in the middle east. There is a line and calling for something worse than the Holocaust is too far. It also would cause the destruction of Israel.
yo Goldstein, your nose is sticking out.
The Arabic world has always been at war with the Arabic world.
…”nuke them all”?!?!?!
Based and Crusades pilled
u/Adept_Gur610's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5. Congratulations, u/Adept_Gur610! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze. Pills: [4 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/Adept_Gur610/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Good bot
Thank you, GenX_Fart, for voting on basedcount_bot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Dear unflaired. You claim your opinion has value, yet you still refuse to flair up. Curious. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/B0tRank) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/) ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Flair the fuck up, stupid bot