OPINION

Islam: The Greatest Colonizer Of All Time

January 17, 2007
Dileep Yogi

Whenever there are terrorist attacks against west, there is a tendency in the Muslim world to interpret that these attacks against western societies as a natural backlash of the colonization of the Islamic world by Europeans for almost two centuries. I was reminded of this argument again, when I recently watched the video of the discussion of the noted secular Muslim activist Wafa Sultan on Al-Jazeera TV where an Egyptian Muslim cleric presenting this claim asking her, who colonized whom, whether UK colonized Egypt or Egypt colonized UK.

European colonization began with the discovery of America by Christopher Columbus in CE 1492 and this was a unique historical event with political, cultural, military and religious aspects that lasted for half a millennium and the consequences of this well discussed and much written chapter of history continues to produce more and more related discussions and of course, will cause more and more related events in the future as well.

European colonization had been in two different ways, one that happened in Americas and in Australia, where the indigenous population was systematically oppressed and were forced to flee from their own land and the Europeans migrating to theses lands. This was the transculturalization of a region wherein the indigenous people of these lands finally lost their existence and the United States and Canada and even the geographically east Australia and New Zealand collectively being known as being part of the western civilization, there was a cultural destruction.

In the first case there were large scale immigration from Europe to Americas and Australia and the ethnicity of the majority changed and that was the reason why these continents are now regarded as being part of the west. But indigenous masses of Latin-American don't claim that they are part of the west, but express their identity whenever possible, even as the evil of colonialism still hunts them. Any way western colonialism could not make the natives a part of its own civilizations or west had no such intention.

Another way was what happened in Africa and Asia where the indigenous people were relatively not forced to flee their lands and there was no large scale immigration from Europe to these two continents but the Europeans just ruled over them so that the cultural and social identify of the people of Africa and Asia were not much affected. These regions continue to be part of the pre colonial civilizations to which they actually belonged. This was the way that the Islamic world too had been colonized by Europeans, there were only political and military effects and the culture and religion of the so called Islamic world were unchanged, there was relatively no cultural destruction.

The spread of Christianity in Europe too had its own cultural impacts, but the people of Europe are not unaware or ashamed of their pre Christian pagan past but they are proud of it. Admittedly, paganism in Europe was heavily struck down by Christianity from the very day that Emperor Constantine the great decriminalized that religion in his portion of the empire in CE 313 and later in the entire Rome that he reunified in CE 324, the empire that had been partitioned by Diocletian, his predecessor.

Pagans were subject to strong persecution, pagan temples were either destroyed or were converted to Christian churches, Pagan books and literature were burned. The destruction of this European or classic Paganism was imminent as the imposition of Christianity over Europe was very rapid given its support from the successive rulers and was finished by the time of Emperor Justinian-I. Historians may go ahead with their debate on the intensity of the influence of paganism on Christianity, as argued by Edward Gibbon, but the destruction of European paganism as a religion and a culture was almost total.

Europe, where Christianity flourished, was the seat of two other prominent civilizations, Greek and Roman. The Greeks embraced Christianity, but only as another religion, they haven't lost their logistic, cultural and civilization identity and they find esteem dignity in the civilization that existed before the introduction of Christianity.

The Roman civilization may no longer be there as it had been known as it has now been divided into different cultures like Spanish, Italian and Portuguese. This was a natural process as Latin as a language began dying and new languages derived from Latin. Modern people of these cultures find no reason to be ashamed of the that much celebrated pre Christian pagan Roman civilization to which they once belonged.

The justification that many Muslim intellectuals find for Islamic terror is that it is a result of the long political oppression of the Islamic world by the west in the colonial period and they allege the west of being egotist ethically, culturally and intellectually. But not only Muslim society was the victim of western colonialism, so were the Hindu (Indian), African and scenic (indo-china) societies. None of these societies have produced terrorism and the contemporary rise of Hindu nationalism in India can not be viewed as a product of western hegemony.

When the term Islamic world is used, one has to be aware of the fact that the so called Islamic world is because of an Islamic colonialism, stronger and powerful than that of the west. A careful analysis will conclude that Islam was the greatest colonizerr of all time and the most egotist ideology ever known to humanity.

This is where we need to look back on the spread of Islam. Islam spread to all the territories that it conquered. Not only did the indigenous population of these conquered countries embrace Islam for one reason or another, but the cultural, social and intellectual aspects of of these lands were subject to a concrete transformation without immigration. Finally these civilizations became extinct and became known as part of the Islamic civilization even while the ethnicity of the people of these lands did not change.

The shores of all the rivers referred to as the cradles of civilization ,except the Huang-He-Yangtze in China which was not subject to Muslim conquest, the Tigris-Euphrates in modern day Iraq, the Nile in Africa, the Indus in the Indian subcontinent have all lost their connection to their profound inheritance. The Muslim masses on the banks of these rivers are either unaware or ashamed of their great pre Islamic heritage.

What happened with Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) and Egypt was even worse - that Arabic, the language of Islam, was forced upon them and that these regions lost even their languages, Egyptian in the case of Egypt and Sumerian in the case of Mesopotamia. Even in this case, the Indus valley or the modern Pakistan is only a partial exception, as Urdu which was not the tongue of the land but one that was born out of Islamic conquest is the official language. This was a cultural holocaust.

The most notable point here is that, the invaded masses who embraced Islam are totally in the dark about their pre-Islamic heritage and are ashamed of the same, which did not happen with the people colonized by the west. At least as far as the non Arabs conquered by Islam are concerned, for them Islam was not just a submission to Allah, it was a submission to Arab language, Arab culture and Arab tradition and a submission to fight for the Arab cause, Arab superiority and Arab Imperialism. Whereas communities colonized by westerners defended this conquest later, because of the unique colonial nature of Islam, people conquered by Islam found a cause in being conquered and the conquered joined the conqueror in fighting for this cause, triggering a chain reaction of Muslim conquests.

No colonized people glorify and iconize invaders or alien rulers as their heroes but Muslims do. We can not imagine Native Americans glorifying Columbus or Indians of the subcontinent glorifying the British or Russians or Ukrainians glorifying Genghis Khan. The best example of this peculiar psyche would be that of Invaders like Mahmud of Ghazni and Muhammed Ghuri who attacked the people of the Indus valley.

Even though they looted their properties, massacred their forefathers, gang raped their foremothers and enslaved them, they are the heroes of Pakistan and its people. Finally, this glorification and iconization turned so ridiculous where Pakistan naming one of its missiles after Muhammed Ghuri and Afghanistan opposing this saying that Pakistan has no claim over Afghan heroes and that only peaceful concerns may be named after them!

That the invaders glorify the invasion is understandable, but here, in the case of Islam, both the invader and the invaded glorify these bloody invasions. Western colonialists did try to brainwash the natives through the education system that they introduced, but even this kind of attempt was not very effective

Islam as an Identity of the invader was so potent that it has been able to brainwash and indoctrinate the indigenous people to that extent that they find pride in being invaded. This indoctrination was clever enough to cleanse out all these people had in their memories about their past, so that for them their history and civilization began only with this invasion.

Along with the western factor, Islam too has been a threat to the social, cultural, linguistic and religious identities of the colonized societies. But the hands and arms of Islam have even been mightier than that of the west, as far as the indigenous people of the lands invaded by Islam, from Morocco to Pakistan to Indonesia are concerned, and they consider themselves to be a part of the Islamic world. The people of the territories ruled by west are not treated, or they don't treat themselves as being a part of the western world.

Islamic colonialism was so horrendous and destructive when compared to the characteristics of western colonialism, as it was not only something political or militarily but something more influential, cultural, religious and psychological too. To be more exact, even the one fifth of the humanity which identifies itself as Muslims is a product of this ultra-colonial nature of Islam.

The ethical, cultural and intellectual egotism of the west may be a fact, but such egotism and hegemony are even deeper for Islam. This has always been apparent in its intolerant nature towards other cultures and religions; the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas is a recent example. This will be apparent again, if Islam becomes more powerful than the west, politically or militarily.

A software engineer from Bangalore
eXTReMe Tracker
Keep reading for comments on this article and add some feedback of your own!

Islam: The Greatest Colonizer Of All Time

Article

Author: Dileep Yogi

 

Comments! Feedback! Speak and be heard!

Comment on this article or leave feedback for the author

#1
Sujai
URL
January 17, 2007
08:15 AM

Dileep Yogi:

I agree with few of your 'facts' but disagree with most of your 'interpretations'.

First, you easily dismiss the influence of Christianity on Latin America. The indigenous population are not left with local culture or language. They are predominantly Roman Catholic and either speak Portuguese or Spanish. In trying to demonize Islam, you have resorted to exonerating Christianity.

Hindu India, even after centuries of Muslim rule, has remained predominantly Hindu. Russia, even after centuries of Muslim rule, has remained Orthodox Christian. The same way Christianity spread, Islam did, by invasion, by occupation and by conversion.

You write:
"The justification that many Muslim intellectuals find for Islamic terror is that it is a result of the long political oppression of the Islamic world by the west in the colonial period"

I don't think (most) 'intellectuals' justify the Islamic terror. At the most, they try to find the reasons for the frustrations of the people which is vented out in the forms of terror. You have analyzed this problem wrongly. The present day problems of Islamic world is NOT the result of the 'long and political oppression' during 'colonial period'. While Asia and Africa were going through colonial periods by the West, most of the middle eastern countries were under the Ottoman Empire.

What turns out to be an important factor but something you completely missed out in your analysis above is what happened right after the fall of Ottoman Empire which set the trend for the next eighty years or so. The answers for finding the reasons for Islamic Terror are in the last hundred years. You don't have to look far into the past for that.

You write:
"But not only Muslim society was the victim of western colonialism, so were the Hindu (Indian), African and scenic (indo-china) societies"

[I repeat myself here] while Indian, African and Sinic societies were under western colonial powers, most of the Middle East was under Ottoman Empire.

You write:
"None of these societies have produced terrorism..."

Origins of Islamic terrorism are NOT rooted in western colonialism. By making a wrong comparison, you are bound to make wrong conclusion.

You write:
Islam spread to all the territories that it conquered.

Not that this has any bearing on the discussion. But there are two societies that are predominantly non-Islamic though ruled by Islamic ruler for many centuries. Russia (is still Orthodox Christian) and India (is predominantly Hindu). During Tatar rule of Russia, Orthodox Christianity thrived and was able to come out as dominant religion.

You write:
Finally these civilizations became extinct..

If you were to compare two dominant religions that spread by invasion, occupation and conversion, Christianity would outrank Islam on making civilizations extinct.

You make some fundamental mistakes in your assumption when you say the following:

"What happened with Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) and Egypt was even worse, that Arabic, the language of Islam was forced upon them and that these regions lost even their languages, Egyptian in the case of Egypt and Sumerian in the case of Mesopotamia. Even in this case, the Indus valley or the modern Pakistan is only a partial exception, as Urdu which was not the tongue of the land but one that was born out of Islamic conquest is the official language. This was a cultural holocaust. "

You are way off on this count. Most of the regions that you talk about lost their civilizations before the advent of Islam. Mesopotamia was no longer a cradle of civilization by the time Muhammed arrived, and so was Egypt. The languages were lost much before the advent of Islam. Indus Valley disappeared even before the advent of Vedas, which happened nearly 2000 years before birth of Islam.

Very few civilizations have a continuity. Many others have vanished- and this happened before Islam came into picture. Even today we cannot decipher the script from Indus Valley. Egyptian Hieroglyphics could be deciphered because of a chance event (discovery of Rosetta Stone by French invading army).

The above sentence is patently false. You need to check your history on this.

You write:
At least as far as the non Arabs conquered by Islam are concerned, for them Islam was not just a submission to Allah, it was a submission to Arab language, Arab culture and Arab tradition and a submission to fight for the Arab cause, Arab superiority and Arab Imperialism.

I am not sure if this is entirely true. Someone from a Muslim world can refute this better than me. But, a mere glance at contemporary world tells me a different story. Punjabi Muslims (in Pakistan) speak Punjabi. Bengali Muslims (in Bangladesh) speak Bengali. Indonesian, Filipino Muslims speak their own language. And these populations comprise a huge chunk. Next, just tell an Iranian that they speak Arab, and see his reaction  :)

You make yourself look like an ignorant when you write the following. After this sentence, I started to wonder why I started to refute your analysis.

"The best example of this peculiar psyche would be that, Invaders like Mahmud of Ghazni and Muhammed Ghuri who attacked the people of the Indus valley. "

There was no Indus Valley civilization even when Muhammad was born.

Also, many non-Islamic invaders are glorified. Glorification of invaders is not just confined to Islam.

#2
Durgesh
January 17, 2007
09:50 AM

Yogi Sahab,

Yeh kya kar diya aapne. Woh bhi desicritics par. Bahut joote padne waali hai aapko abhi. Mr. Karampuri is first of the block. There is more hell to come. Wishing you the best.

#3
passerby
January 17, 2007
10:08 AM

Get over with this global favorite obsession with Islam. Look at India now. Languages, culture, food, the way people think & work & behave, family structures, clothing, entertainment .. you name it .. everything is being moulded by the dazzle of the west. We are in the middle of a silent, major transformation. Very soon not just India, the whole of Asia Pacific will look more American. Then Africa will follow. In this transformation, Muslims are included too. So stop worrying about the past. Think current. Enjoy the ride and do something about it.

#4
arun
URL
January 17, 2007
10:42 AM

Islam - Aurangzeb etc. tried very hard to finish off Hinduism , but once Hindus -Sikhs, Rajput , Dogragot artillery as well they reconqured nearly all of India , Pakistan , Afghanistan , Kashmir etc.
What should worry the Hindus is that having won all the wars in the last 300 years , they are about to lose the big - the demographic war, already they are a miniority in the northern half of the subcontinent , and will be a minority within India by 2075 and they will never get India back. Impose a three child limit before its too late and we are forced to live under sharia law - burqas , amoutations , killing for blasphemy etc.

#5
someguy
January 17, 2007
10:58 AM

^
Wishful thinking by Arun. The fact is, if the Muslims had so desired, not a single hindu would have survived. it simply wasn't on their agenda.

But to the Hindutvists, this just isn't a palatable reality...so they decide to invent their own...

#6
Atlantean
URL
January 17, 2007
11:40 AM

Wishful thinking to assume that if Muslims had so desired, they could've really finished off the Hindus. They were here for 800 years, tried really very hard to convert all Hindus but failed ultra-miserably. It must be one of the biggest failed conversion programs ever, something that Islamists simply cannot digest because everytime they think about it, it hits them hard in the groin, with the force of a 500 pound sand bag dropping from the 10th floor of a building.

They keep sending that Saudi petrodollar funded Islamist shit to bomb Indian cities in their quest to bring India under the Dar-ul-Islam because they are oblivious to the fact that they failed miserably for 800 years.

The time is coming when the world will break the back of the evil of Islamism forever. No more compulsory burkas, no more death fatwas, no more head severing, no more hand chopping, no more suicide bombing. The filth that Islamism brought into the world will be washed away until it meets and mixes with the sludge in the local sewer, which is its rightful place.

#7
Apollo
URL
January 17, 2007
12:55 PM

first one should congragulate Dileep yogi on an excellent article.

It is a fact that Islam is a colonist religion.But u have made a mistake of trying to exonerate christianity, this is a similar mistake to what the enlightenment scholars of the west made during the reformation age. They completely ignored the colonial nature of Islam in their attempt to project christianity in the darkest light possible. It is in this attempt that the myth of the so called 'Golden age of Islam' during 9th-12th century was manufactured and perpetuated to this day until 9/11 and 7/7 shook the west out of its own make believe world.

This is what Fjordman also deals in his essay about 'Multiculturalism and Enlightenment'.


"Gibbon, like Voltaire, painted Islam in as favorable a light as possible to better contrast it with Christianity. The English historian emphasized Muhammad's humanity as a means of indirectly criticizing the Christian doctrine of the divinity of Christ. Gibbon's anticlericalism led him to underline Islam's supposed freedom from that accursed class, the priesthood. Indeed, the familiar pattern is reemerging - Islam is being used as a weapon against Christianity. Gibbon's deistic view of Islam as a rational, priest-free religion, with Muhammad as a wise and tolerant lawgiver, enormously influenced the way all Europeans perceived their sister religion for years to come. Indeed, it established myths that are still accepted totally uncritically by scholars and laymen alike. Both Voltaire and Gibbon subscribed to the myth of Muslim tolerance, which to them meant Turkish tolerance."

#8
DictatorOfDemocracy
URL
January 17, 2007
01:25 PM

Right on Atlantean, how true your words are. The entire non-islamic world is at war with the 'believers'. Even today muslims pick fights with every other nation/religion on this beautiful planet.

I find it hard to understand how anyone can respect a religion that behead budhist monks, or shoot children in the back. No one else seems to be doing this. Hell, some might say even the nazis weren't as bad as the state of the Umma. THe only diffrence is that Nazis terrorised this earth for few decades, while the Umma has been doing it for a few centuries. And it reach has been much greater!

Good luck to us all.

#9
Apollo
URL
January 17, 2007
02:35 PM

Must watch videos of fundamentalist preaching in the
UK mosques.

Dispatches:undercover report telecast on Channel 4.

#10
tarikur
January 17, 2007
04:01 PM

This is pure Islamophobic hatred article.

First of all, most Muslims don't interpret that these terrorists attacks on West due to colonization. It is creation of Israel. There was no terrorist group or terrorist act before the creation of Israel. There is direct connection between the creation of Israel and Wahhabi movement or extremist movement in Islamic world.

Second of all, you said Islamic colonization forced the native to changed the their culture and their thinking into supporting the invaders. What Islamic army ever went to Malaysia, Indoneasia, Mali, and many other places. Still those Muslims think same way as other Muslims. Without colonization, how could they enforce Islamic thinking on them? So your reasoning fails.

Third, you are wrong that victims of West's colonization take pride in their old culture. People like Indians take pride in their old culture becasue there were able resist West Christian conversion. Look at Africa, look at South America, look at Philippines. They all have White European names, they hate their old cultural names, they speak European language and they view White Europeans as superior without thinking it. From my own experience, even Hindu Indian view White as superior and view themselves as inferior without thinking. Look it up, Philippines girls will die to marry a White boy instead of Philippines boy because in their they view White superior.

Fourth thing is, We support one another (we are united), we don't glorify the invaders or think invader is somewhat superior. I am Bengali Muslims. I think the Arabs are more dumber than the Indians. I don't view Arabs as superior. I support all my brothers like Indoneasia or Malaysia. We never had contact with Indoneasia or Malaysia, I still support them and they will support us. It is not called glorify or thinking superior, it called United.

#11
Abir
January 17, 2007
05:13 PM

To Tarikur: Right! Its all about Israel.. you moron.. So basically Israel is responsible for all Muslim Attacks in India and the Sudan and Algeria and Afghanistan and New York and Pakistan and Israel and Russia and Chechnya and the Philippines and Indonesia and Nigeria and England and Thailand and Spain and Egypt and Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia and Ingushetia and Dagestan and Turkey and Kabardino-Balkaria and Morocco and Yemen and Lebanon and France and Uzbekistan and Gaza and Tunisia and Kosovo and Bosnia and Mauritania and Kenya and Eritrea and Syria and Somalia and California and Argentina and Kuwait and Virginia and Ethiopia and Iran and Jordan and United Arab Emirates and Louisiana and Texas and Tanzania and Germany and Australia and Pennsylvania and Belgium and Denmark and East Timor and Qatar and Maryland and Tajikistan and the Netherlands and Scotland and Chad and Canada and China and...
Learn your facts you stupid dhimmi

#12
P.Anupallavi
URL
January 17, 2007
05:36 PM

Well-written article. But the subject being delicate and emotional does not help it. I do find myself agreeing in parts to very many of these viewpoints.

- Christianity is no saint. If Yogi exonerating it is all it takes for its pride to be restored, the Pope will be flown in tomorrow to kiss Yogi's feet!

- Muslim rulers did not intend to convert India? Really? I would have to agree with Atlatean. India of today is more of a their failure than a result of their benevolence or secularism.

Even considering only the recent present :

- Refer to Abir's comments above on the nations that are under Islamic extremist strife..

The fact of the matter is : 19 Muslims attacked on 9/11 and it was not 19 Hindus or Christians.
In private most moderate Muslims desist what gets done in the name of Islam. But unless there is an outcry in the Muslim world against the extremists, their resolve will be questioned. And rightly so.

While the moderates are scared to voice much of an opinion, an increasingly large number of youngsters are ensnared into terrorism. Not to forget the lure for the after-life: Heaven ; Hordes of women ; Unbound happiness ..

Separation of state and religion, or the lack of it, is at the heart of the banes of Muslim world today. Just look at the two most trusted allies on the 'War on terror and the spread of democracy' -- Saudi Arabia & Pakistan. Both are guilty of harboring terror and neither is a democracy !

Saudi Arabia relegates women to second-class citizenship. Women are not treated as equals. They may not legally drive cars. A recent article about 5 men marrying a single cab driver to help their daily commutes to work is pathetic. A woman's testimony is treated as inferior to a man's in court.

In 'Princess Sultana's Circle' the plight of women in the Islamic state is on display. The worst of it : A pervert peeping tom watches a young teenager in her backyard-highwalled-private pool. When the matter becomes public, it is tried in Islamic courts. The girl is found guilty and asked to marry a cleric 50 years older to her. As if that's not enough, the cleric is Mr. Peeping-tom's father.

Greatest Colonizers or not, the Islamic brethren could be doing a lot more for itself and the world. It is currently in denial. Any mistakes are attributed to past atrocities or current dominant west. To hell with the west. How about some introspection and tidying up?

#13
P.Anupallavi
URL
January 17, 2007
05:39 PM

Errrrr..., meant "5 women marrying a single cab driver ".

#14
beepbeepitsme
URL
January 17, 2007
06:58 PM

Both islam and christianity are colonizers. They both fight over which one has the true word of "the invisible egg."

The Holy Invisible Egg
http://beepbeepitsme.blogspot.com/2007/01/holy-invisible-egg.html

#15
Dileep Yogi
URL
January 18, 2007
01:18 AM

Let me quote form my own article:


"Admittedly, paganism in Europe was heavily struck down by Christianity from the very day that Emperor Constantine the great decriminalized that religion in his portion of the empire in CE 313 and later in the entire Rome that he reunified in CE 324, the empire that had been partitioned by Diocletian, his predecessor.

Pagans were subject to strong persecution, pagan temples were either destroyed or were converted to Christian churches, Pagan books and literature were burned. The destruction of this European or classic Paganism was imminent as the imposition of Christianity over Europe was very rapid given its support from the successive rulers and was finished by the time of Emperor Justinian-I. Historians may go ahead with their debate on the intensity of the influence of paganism on Christianity, as argued by Edward Gibbon, but the destruction of European paganism as a religion and a culture was almost total."


I dont understand where I have exonerated Christianity.

By the by I dony know how put comments in italics, anyone please let me know.

#16
Sujai
URL
January 18, 2007
03:32 AM

Dileep Yogi:
When I said that you exonerated Christianity, I was referring to subsequent events after the initial conversion of Europe to Christianity, like in South America, Africa, and Asia. These conversions were contemporaneous to Islamic conversions.

By talking only about overthrow of paganism in Europe, you show Islam as the only culprit in the subsequent periods- which is not the case.

#17
Sujai
URL
January 18, 2007
03:41 AM

Dileep:
To put comments in italics, add < i > at the beginning of the sentence and add < / i > at the end of the sentence (WITHOUT spaces).

#18
Dileep Yogi
URL
January 18, 2007
04:35 AM

Sujai,

I would like to make it very clear that I was making a comparison study between the nature of western colonialism and that of Islam. The conclusion of my study is that if west was bad then Islam was/is worst and I hope readers got it right.


Thaks,
Dileep.

#19
sarfraz
URL
January 28, 2007
07:47 PM

lets see if you have the courage to post this. Islam is a terrorist religion? Tell that to the muslims of gujrat, tell that to the muslims of bosnia, tell that to the muslims of modern day Iraq that in fact it is they who are the aggressors even when defending themselves.

#20
Jim
URL
February 3, 2007
02:57 PM

Although I am no expert and it really isn't to difficult to check, most of the conversion of Europe was peacefull and was mainly due to the folowing reasons.

Missionaries.
For example St Patrick was credited with converting the whole of Ireland who retain him as there patron Saint.

Through the conversion of Kings, where they led others/their people followed. The Emperor of Rome for Example and the Irish King(Sorry forgot the name).

Christianity preached the eternal soul which had great appeal as it was absent in a lot of Pagan religions.

This is not to exonerate churches as there have been nasty incidents in the past. But overall these have been exceptions rather than the rule.

Oh and im a white English Atheist.

Regards.

#21
tomasz
February 20, 2007
09:46 PM

I am from Poland and live in America now. I've discarded Catholicism and am rediscovering pre-christian slavic traditions, which have survived, despite a millenium of catholic brainwashing. Islam is the same as christianity, and both are derived from Judaism, which is the real cause of the fanaticism that posseses monotheisits.

#22
tomasz
February 20, 2007
10:15 PM

Tarikur,
You are deceiving yourself. Whether it's christianity or islam, it is the religion of one's overlord and, by embracing it so blindly and accusing others of islamophobia, you are infact saying that the traditions of your own people are inferior and you are doing the work of those who belive that your ways are to be extinguised while the glories of islam are to be extolled.

#23
Juan
March 14, 2007
05:12 AM

Hello,

I am from Latin America and I stumbled upon this brilliant article. The first gentleman to comment is an absolute idiot. Latin American culture, despite the language and religion, is not the same as Spanish or Portuguese. Not even remotely. We have maintained a distinc indegenous culture where as almost all Islamic states have adopted an Arab culture (in Islam, culture is religion, so they are interchangable). In fact, a significant number of Latin Americans spoke an indigenous language up until modern times. It is clear that you are an Arab apologist who has been so blinded by Islam you don't even know who you really are anymore (at least not culturaly).

#24
Sri
March 14, 2007
09:36 AM

Juan
The first gentleman to comment is an absolute idiot
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.............!!!!

Let's see why...
Sujai says
>>I don't think (most) 'intellectuals' justify the Islamic terror. At the most, they try to find the reasons for the frustrations of the people which is vented out in the forms of terror..

I think I must look up the definition of the word "justification"...
er..um..the dictionary says "explanation for something"......never mind...

Now he says
>>
The present day problems of Islamic world is NOT the result of the 'long and political oppression' during 'colonial period'.

Present day problems of the ISLAMIC world???
Terror is their problem??
Brother,are you OK??

Now Dilip Yogi says something which is blindly objected to by our Islam-lover friend
>>At least as far as the non Arabs conquered by Islam are concerned, for them Islam was not just a submission to Allah, it was a submission to Arab language, Arab culture and Arab tradition and a submission to fight for the Arab cause, Arab superiority and Arab Imperialism.

Since a mere glance is enough for Sujai,let me do some "mere glancing" at today's Mohammedans
1.Why do they kneel toward Arabia when they pray?
2.Why are they prohibited from answering nature's call while facing Arabia?
3.Why is a dead Mohammedan buried in the direction of Arabia?
4.Why Haj only to Arabia?
Sujai,you're defending the indefensible.....

someguy
>>
Wishful thinking by Arun. The fact is, if the Muslims had so desired, not a single hindu would have survived. it simply wasn't on their agenda.

Not on their agenda....hmmm..
I guess they came for sightseeing...







#25
allat
March 30, 2007
04:14 PM

Well, sir, *Paganism is back! In the last few months, I've been thinking, what the heck (!) is so superior about monotheism?

Simply because they force it on others. Simply because they say so!

Read Read Mayan Elders - read Hopi Elders. Read shaman mena and wolen conducting Inipi Ceremonies. And Africans searching for Shaman Elders to heal them from AIDS - and them being healed. Read about the many branches of Paganistic revivals - Wican and Goddess - Odinic ceremonies.

In fact, Goddess Religion never died in East Europeans countries - and there is a great revival there and also in Germany. Because the younger generations are seeing that christianity (with a small "c") - was imposed on them - it is NOT their own religion.

Neither is it dead in Egypt - because the people called "fallahin" (a term of contempt by the arab conquerors)

http://www.egypt-tehuti.org/articles/peoples-of-egypt.html

are the true ancient Egyptians - NOT the christian copts

We're all searching for our roots.

Paganism is another word for polytheism - which recognizes a Great Mind aka - and recognizes the light of this Creator in all things. NOT worshipping, but recognizing it in stones, clay, trees, and the Mother Earth.

In fact, science/physics is now able to see through special telescopes that all matter gives off light.

So, we are back to the beginning, eh?

Could it be that the idea of the one god was turned around? Could it be that it is reall that,

EVERYTHING IS T H E ONE GOD !?!

#26
aarian
July 23, 2007
01:51 AM

o comeon why dont you think you can change someone's religion by critisizing and without knowing it. What was the biggest threat for the world before islam? Was IRA stands for the whole terror from christianity? Are all the hindus are terorist because of brutal philosophy of shiv sena or BJP..? this is really bad when people like you get conquered by popular emotions? Come out of Fox television fobia and try to help the straggling people all around the world, regardless of their religion. We all have to think and act accordingly and it should not, definately not o the view of someone else.

#27
Ahmed
July 26, 2007
04:40 PM

Sujai,

You gave a very good response to Dileep, despite being a Hindu.

Yes, there was colonisation done by muslims, of which there is no doubt. But if the author of this article thinks that it was a worse colonisation than what the West did, I do not know what planet he is living on.

Also, will he also accept that there was colonisation done by Hindus too? Not to the extent that the muslims did, but it happened nontheless. Will he also accept that his forefathers might have been colonised into following Hinduism? And that he has no knowledge of his past culture?

#28
MAPAD
July 26, 2007
11:48 PM

Islam is the most successful empire of all time. 1400 years and over 50 countries and still growing strong.

European colonialism has NOTHING on Islam.

Current American imperialism is NOTHING compared to Islam.

Remember kids, Islam is the fastest growing 'religion' in the world!


Compare the average Islamic country with America.

Who do YOU want to win the war between Islam and America?

#29
Ahmed
July 27, 2007
07:29 AM

MAPAD, ou said "Islam is the most successful empire of all time"...

yet Christinaity is still the world's greatest religion...and the American Empire has resulted in more deaths per year than the "Islamic Empire"

Nice scaremongering and manipulation of facts, MAPAD!

#30
Ahmed
July 27, 2007
07:33 AM

I find it funny how allat is acting as if Christinaity/Islam etc were "imposed on people", and pagan religions weren't! I mean, there is no denying that monotheistic religions imposed their beliefs on others, but so did the pagan religions.
Let there be no mistake; there is no difference in the spread of pagan religions and momotheistic religions. Most pagan religions spread with a conquest of another tribe, taking over their region, and imposing their belief on the other.

#31
MAPAD
July 27, 2007
07:49 AM

Ahmed - Which would you rather live in? A Christian country or an Islamic country?

Also, who is doing more killing in Iraq right now? Americans or Muslims?


P.S. We all saw 9/11, Bali nightclub, London 7/7, Beslan, Madrid, London/Glasgow and muslim truck bombings in Iraq.

EVERYBODY ALREADY KNOWS THAT MUSLIMS CHOOSE TO BE VIOLENT.

No scaremongering required.

#32
sami
July 27, 2007
03:02 PM

Great article by Dileep Yogi and excellent (first) comment by Sujai. Both the pieces got me thinking, so thanks for the insights.

#33
Berry
July 27, 2007
04:50 PM

Excellent article by Deelip Yogi. A new direction of thinking! Of course some people have tried to twist facts for the sake of argument. I sometimes am more scared of pseudo-seculars like Sujai than people in denial mode(Ahmed). Why these people are scared of calling a spade a spade? Are they scared of some fatwa against them? All we expect of you is keep your eyes open and observe than being the head in the sand ostrich.

#34
MAPAD
July 28, 2007
01:14 AM

People are scared to call a spade a spade because it you speak out against islam you will receive a death threat.

If you want to discuss islam at an american university then you will receive a death threat.

Muslims use violence and intimidation to silence their critics.

Moderate muslims are clearly happy with this status quo because they allow it to exist.

Moderate muslims let the terrorists do the dirty work while they fight the jihad thru political and ideological channels.

Moderates are terrorists are an excellent team both fighting for the same cause.

#35
Sanjay
July 28, 2007
02:13 AM


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWw0ov-cAUg

Michael Caine said:

"... and in their desperation, they turned to a man they didn't fully understand.
Some men aren't looking for anything logical.
They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with.
Some men just want to watch the world burn..."


Likewise, some will turn to a faith they don't fully understand, and will spend the rest of their days trying to come up with explanations for what they did, while defensively hurling accusations of "Islamophobia". SouthAsian converts don't have the intimate understanding of Middle Eastern history to know the real origins of the religion they've latched onto. Theirs is just a reflexive exercise in defensive self-justification.

#36
Jan
URL
February 18, 2009
08:37 AM

Thanks (also from me) to Dileep and Sujaj.
Some contributions, (e.g. Atlantean, allat) presuppose that there is one original and correct belief, inherited from some ancient forefathers, that everyone is obliged to believe in. (So they criticise people for dropping one belief in favor of another). Another idea of theirs is that everyone is obliged to resist against violent invaders that import their belief to another territory. I don't agree to either of that.
Sometimes invaders really have better ideas than your parents or you, like the invaders that came to my country, Germany. In 1945 they had better ideas compared to those of most Germans. I am lucky that most Germans quickly subordinated themselves to the Russians or the Americans and did not start a century-long struggle of nazi resistance.
It is mostly better to improve things from inside the prevailing belief, instead of choosing martyrdom. Probably it is no good idea to be a jew or an atheist if you want to improve education or medical support in the Gaza strip.
Of course, the priests of every religion ever demanded their faithful ones to be martyrs for the belief. But if your primary concerns are feeding your children, clean water and a roof over your head, you will be ready to compromise on things like how many gods are in heaven, if your soul goes there after death and if virgins await it there or not.
MAPAD, you ask: "Who do YOU want to win the war between Islam and America?" I want my wife to keep her good job, to read books of Voltaire and Marx and to sometimes write stuff like this. The Americans allow me all that. If the muslims allow it too, and if all they want is that I get circumcised and utter in a ceremony "There is no god besides Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet" - well I wouldn't mind if muslims govern me or christians. Just be more tolerant, and the world will be yours. But before you force my wife to walk around like a moving barrel, I would rather want "the Americans" to drop A-boms onto the area where you live.

#37
Morris
February 18, 2009
05:27 PM

Thanks Jan for commenting on this old artcle. Otherwise, I would not have read it. Dileep Yogi has done an excellent job and shown us a new way(at least for me) to look at the history of colonizations.

Add your comment

(Or ping: http://desicritics.org/tb/4092)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.






Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!