Gimli raises axe for Western civilization
- Thread starter Riesstiu IV
- Start date
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
Clearly too many hours of swordfight training have gone to his head.
The abolition of slavery comes from Western Democracy? Ha! It was certainly the greatest manumission of all time - because Western "Democracies" had the greatest number of slaves to begin with. I'd like to see Mr. Rhys-Davies try to start a tobacco plantation in Yemen and see how things work out over there.
As for the Greco-Jewish-Christian tradition of western democracy? Ha again! Who did the Greeks let vote? Not women. Not slaves. Not poor people or even the well-to-do artisans. Greece was NOT a democracy, it was a half-oligarchy, half-aristocracy. The Jewish tradition of democracy? Who is he kidding? Judaism was a tribe-based monarchy. NIGERIA has a greater tradition of "democracy" than Judaism does. Christian democracy? It was the barbarian German Christians who developed the WESTERN concept of divine right [which also developed simultaneously in the East]. After, or even before, monarchy, Christianity has been the greatest ANTIdemocratic force in the West for two thousand years! If we have democracy today, it would be in SPITE of our culture and our religion, not because of it. Perhaps the greatest contribution would be from the ROMANS who Mr. Rhys-Davies does not mention, of course, because they were evil barbaric pagans. Like his ancestors, I expect.
Well, he has Tolkein's approbation. Hooray! Who's next, Simon Darkshade?
The abolition of slavery comes from Western Democracy? Ha! It was certainly the greatest manumission of all time - because Western "Democracies" had the greatest number of slaves to begin with. I'd like to see Mr. Rhys-Davies try to start a tobacco plantation in Yemen and see how things work out over there.
As for the Greco-Jewish-Christian tradition of western democracy? Ha again! Who did the Greeks let vote? Not women. Not slaves. Not poor people or even the well-to-do artisans. Greece was NOT a democracy, it was a half-oligarchy, half-aristocracy. The Jewish tradition of democracy? Who is he kidding? Judaism was a tribe-based monarchy. NIGERIA has a greater tradition of "democracy" than Judaism does. Christian democracy? It was the barbarian German Christians who developed the WESTERN concept of divine right [which also developed simultaneously in the East]. After, or even before, monarchy, Christianity has been the greatest ANTIdemocratic force in the West for two thousand years! If we have democracy today, it would be in SPITE of our culture and our religion, not because of it. Perhaps the greatest contribution would be from the ROMANS who Mr. Rhys-Davies does not mention, of course, because they were evil barbaric pagans. Like his ancestors, I expect.
Well, he has Tolkein's approbation. Hooray! Who's next, Simon Darkshade?
SanPellegrino
Wanderer
he is mostly right and I agree that it is a still taboo to talk about these things. but I think there seems a slight change in public perception now.
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
So what does he propose to do about it? Outlaw Muslim immigration to preserve Western Europe's priceless Christian heritage? Forbid Arabs to have children?
SanPellegrino
Wanderer
this is of course not easy to answer, but yes a stop for immigration would be ok for me, if only for economic reasons.
SeleucusNicator
Diadoch
Pilate, slavery as it was practiced in the west was never economically viable in the Middle East. They had other forms of it, though, some extremely unique. Virtually every culture had slaves. To call slavery a western attribute is wrong.
Say whatever you want about the Western commitment to democracy, secularism, capitalism, applied technology, etc. The truth is that these ideas originated only once in world history: in the west.
Say whatever you want about the Western commitment to democracy, secularism, capitalism, applied technology, etc. The truth is that these ideas originated only once in world history: in the west.
Pilate, this isn't about Christianity vs Islam. It's about secularism vs fundamentalism.
Surely he right about the demographic disaster but he himself claims he does not care about the genetic stock... I think it's far fetched to say the least to think that muslim immigration would result in the replacement of Western civilization by Islam.
For me, his statements leave a bitter taste. Anti-semitism isn't very popular in Europe, it's a political sucide for anyone and hardly gathers any votes. Race-based hate speech is hardly any better. Racism against other cultures, such as Islamophobia, is not nearly as politically incorrect however. Therefore it has become the main weapon of the new wave of racist political parties in Europe.
Surely he right about the demographic disaster but he himself claims he does not care about the genetic stock... I think it's far fetched to say the least to think that muslim immigration would result in the replacement of Western civilization by Islam.
For me, his statements leave a bitter taste. Anti-semitism isn't very popular in Europe, it's a political sucide for anyone and hardly gathers any votes. Race-based hate speech is hardly any better. Racism against other cultures, such as Islamophobia, is not nearly as politically incorrect however. Therefore it has become the main weapon of the new wave of racist political parties in Europe.
SeleucusNicator
Diadoch
I think the key to the "demographic disaster" here is the degree of assimilation on the part of the newcommers.
In the 19th century, it was common for many to say that the United States was doomed because, due to immigration and higher birth rates, a majority of Americans would soon be of recent Irish or German origin. This was considered undesirable because both of those were Catholic (most German immigrants were from Bavaria) and because both of those cultures drank heavily. In short, the US would soon become a nation of drunken papists, unable to keep itself in order because of its domination by weak or inferior groups.
Well, that didn't happen. Those people largely assimilated. Most immigrants to the United States continue to assimilate. While they are usually noticible due to their accents and their foreign behavior, their children often become indistinguishable, at least culturally. My own parents, for instance, are immigrants from Poland, and while that is very evident upon looking at them, it would be almost impossible to detect if you looked at me.
The trouble is, sometimes immigrants don't assimilate or, even worse, try to assimilate but are rejected. Then, you have ethnic strife, clashes, disorder, all those bad things that can lead to problems. If immigrants to European nations don't assimilate, they will have those problems.
In the 19th century, it was common for many to say that the United States was doomed because, due to immigration and higher birth rates, a majority of Americans would soon be of recent Irish or German origin. This was considered undesirable because both of those were Catholic (most German immigrants were from Bavaria) and because both of those cultures drank heavily. In short, the US would soon become a nation of drunken papists, unable to keep itself in order because of its domination by weak or inferior groups.
Well, that didn't happen. Those people largely assimilated. Most immigrants to the United States continue to assimilate. While they are usually noticible due to their accents and their foreign behavior, their children often become indistinguishable, at least culturally. My own parents, for instance, are immigrants from Poland, and while that is very evident upon looking at them, it would be almost impossible to detect if you looked at me.
The trouble is, sometimes immigrants don't assimilate or, even worse, try to assimilate but are rejected. Then, you have ethnic strife, clashes, disorder, all those bad things that can lead to problems. If immigrants to European nations don't assimilate, they will have those problems.
SanPellegrino
Wanderer
But in fact the muslims in Europe try to segregate very much, even trieing to put pressure on those who try to assimilate.
SeleucusNicator
Diadoch
If that's an accurate description, then it's trouble.
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
Pilate, slavery as it was practiced in the west was never economically viable in the Middle East.
That was exactly my point! Why credit Western society with freeing slaves when they were no longer useful, when they had GOT slaves when they WERE useful? It doesn't have anything to do with morality or civilization or any of that bull****, it's just interplaying economic factors.
They had other forms of it, though, some extremely unique. Virtually every culture had slaves. To call slavery a western attribute is wrong.
Of course! But I think you'll find that some of "the extremely unique slaves" that the Middle East had were not so unique after all. The same relationships between slaves and masters DID exist in the USA. Of course, they were unofficial, "shameful", and covered up later, but they existed anyway.
No, slavery is not a western attribute, and neither is abolition. Why do we remember the end of slavery in Western society as coinciding with the end of the Civil War? Because the USA was virtually the last western country to free their slaves, and as far as I can remember they were the ONLY ones who had to fight a civil war to do it. Again, that's neither a credit nor a debit on the USA's record. As I said, it's all about economic factors. For example Britain did not have slavery as a vital part of the economy and so to abolish it was really a political, not a social issue. But to attribute any of this to moral codes or civilizations or cultures, as John Rhys-Davies is doing - well, he's basically talking through his hat!
Say whatever you want about the Western commitment to democracy, secularism, capitalism, applied technology, etc. The truth is that these ideas originated only once in world history: in the west.
What about meritocracy and bureaucracy, which developed earlier in China, for instance? Can you really call applied science an invention of the West when for most of Christian civilization [from 0 to about 1600 AD] China and Arabia were neck-and-neck with, if not positively ahead of, the West? Medicine and mathematics were Arabian and Indian specialties. In England they were still amputating and trepanning, and in Genoa, the mercantilist state par excellence, they used a counting system based on dozens, with Roman numerals. All this at the same time that Arabs were carrying on the Greek experimental medical tradition and Indians were approximating pi and inventing the number zero.
Capitalism and secularism I definitely give you, though. These are excellent and uniquely Western contributions to society.
Pilate, this isn't about Christianity vs Islam. It's about secularism vs fundamentalism.
That's not what Rhys-Davies is saying. He's trying, with revisionist history, to make it appear as if Western civilization is the best thing since sliced bread. Get real, Gimli. Until the Reformation, the greatest civilization on Earth was China. Up until that time, Europe was playing catch-up, and would have got their asses kicked repeatedly if not for the fact that the Orient was conveniently a whole continent away. Hell, if not for their disastrous period of isolationism, China would STILL be the dominant civilization on the planet.
Really, I just think that Europe is going through a natural stage in politics. For years Europe PROVIDED the rest of the world with immigrants. And it was places like the USA, which experienced immigration from nations as far apart as China and Ireland, which developed nativist, racist politics. Now Europe is experiencing the backlash of their colonialism. England has large Indian and Chinese population; North Africans are flocking to Italy and France. It is inevitable that people like Le Pen will be popular.
Let's just hope that this fades away.
That was exactly my point! Why credit Western society with freeing slaves when they were no longer useful, when they had GOT slaves when they WERE useful? It doesn't have anything to do with morality or civilization or any of that bull****, it's just interplaying economic factors.
They had other forms of it, though, some extremely unique. Virtually every culture had slaves. To call slavery a western attribute is wrong.
Of course! But I think you'll find that some of "the extremely unique slaves" that the Middle East had were not so unique after all. The same relationships between slaves and masters DID exist in the USA. Of course, they were unofficial, "shameful", and covered up later, but they existed anyway.
No, slavery is not a western attribute, and neither is abolition. Why do we remember the end of slavery in Western society as coinciding with the end of the Civil War? Because the USA was virtually the last western country to free their slaves, and as far as I can remember they were the ONLY ones who had to fight a civil war to do it. Again, that's neither a credit nor a debit on the USA's record. As I said, it's all about economic factors. For example Britain did not have slavery as a vital part of the economy and so to abolish it was really a political, not a social issue. But to attribute any of this to moral codes or civilizations or cultures, as John Rhys-Davies is doing - well, he's basically talking through his hat!
Say whatever you want about the Western commitment to democracy, secularism, capitalism, applied technology, etc. The truth is that these ideas originated only once in world history: in the west.
What about meritocracy and bureaucracy, which developed earlier in China, for instance? Can you really call applied science an invention of the West when for most of Christian civilization [from 0 to about 1600 AD] China and Arabia were neck-and-neck with, if not positively ahead of, the West? Medicine and mathematics were Arabian and Indian specialties. In England they were still amputating and trepanning, and in Genoa, the mercantilist state par excellence, they used a counting system based on dozens, with Roman numerals. All this at the same time that Arabs were carrying on the Greek experimental medical tradition and Indians were approximating pi and inventing the number zero.
Capitalism and secularism I definitely give you, though. These are excellent and uniquely Western contributions to society.
Pilate, this isn't about Christianity vs Islam. It's about secularism vs fundamentalism.
That's not what Rhys-Davies is saying. He's trying, with revisionist history, to make it appear as if Western civilization is the best thing since sliced bread. Get real, Gimli. Until the Reformation, the greatest civilization on Earth was China. Up until that time, Europe was playing catch-up, and would have got their asses kicked repeatedly if not for the fact that the Orient was conveniently a whole continent away. Hell, if not for their disastrous period of isolationism, China would STILL be the dominant civilization on the planet.
Really, I just think that Europe is going through a natural stage in politics. For years Europe PROVIDED the rest of the world with immigrants. And it was places like the USA, which experienced immigration from nations as far apart as China and Ireland, which developed nativist, racist politics. Now Europe is experiencing the backlash of their colonialism. England has large Indian and Chinese population; North Africans are flocking to Italy and France. It is inevitable that people like Le Pen will be popular.
Let's just hope that this fades away.
SeleucusNicator
Diadoch
Yes. Other cultures were WAY ahead of us in math and science. But they never DID anything with that. China could have had an industrial revolution in 1600. They didn't.
We did, hundreds of years later, and we conquered everyone who was once ahead of us because, unlike them, we APPLIED math and science.
So what is he trying to do? Does he want Muslims barred from Europe? Does he want missionaries to convert Muslims in Europe?
I think he is being foolish. If 50% of people under 18 in Holland are Muslim, it is either because alot of Muslims are moving there or that many Dutch are converting willingly. He says that his father said the next world war would be between the West and Islam. Why is he promoting that idea rather than trying to prevent it? Do we really all want another World War?
I think he is being foolish. If 50% of people under 18 in Holland are Muslim, it is either because alot of Muslims are moving there or that many Dutch are converting willingly. He says that his father said the next world war would be between the West and Islam. Why is he promoting that idea rather than trying to prevent it? Do we really all want another World War?
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
Or because Islam has something against birth control? 
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
Yes. Other cultures were WAY ahead of us in math and science. But they never DID anything with that. China could have had an industrial revolution in 1600. They didn't.
We did, hundreds of years later, and we conquered everyone who was once ahead of us because, unlike them, we APPLIED math and science.
I think that has a lot to do with the Western mindset. Especially the part of it that thinks conquest equals victory and that progress always means benefits. Traits that are not exactly shared very strongly with Oriental civilizations.
The Nepalese appear to have been perfectly happy until the Red Army descended on them.
We did, hundreds of years later, and we conquered everyone who was once ahead of us because, unlike them, we APPLIED math and science.
I think that has a lot to do with the Western mindset. Especially the part of it that thinks conquest equals victory
and that progress always means benefits. Traits that are not exactly shared very strongly with Oriental civilizations.The Nepalese appear to have been perfectly happy until the Red Army descended on them.
Comraddict
C.IV
Kuran propagate spreading as #1 thing to do.
China is not threatened yet by them... but India is.
Interesting times are comming!
China is not threatened yet by them... but India is.
Interesting times are comming!
EdwardTking
Deity
It is a generalisation, and there are a good number of individual exceptions, but it is an accurate generalisation for Britain.
There are very many second and third generation immigrants
who seem to regard themselves as:
Muslim first
Bengali or Pakistani second
British last
They don't want to integrate. Many of them send their daughters back to Pakistan and Bangla Desh to be forcibly married (raped)
by pure blood and creed Pakistanis and Bengalis specifically to prevent integration.
Many native Britons regard such types as little more than uninvited and unwanted colonialists.
SeleucusNicator
Diadoch
Exactly.
If Europe becomes dominated by "Orientals" who do not share that mindset , then Western civilization will be wiped from it. Only the United States will remain, and we have immigration issues of our own.
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
So France is OK [or rather, Le Pen is OK] with restricting Muslim immigration because of their barbaric practices [such as the ones Ed TK mentioned]. But nobody goes, "Oh, let's keep the Irish out, they're all chronic drinkers". We recognize that there are exceptions to that rule [few as they are 
].
National character be damned, you can't blame people for their neighbors. And can you really justify excluding people from your country because they don't share your views or ideals?
].National character be damned, you can't blame people for their neighbors. And can you really justify excluding people from your country because they don't share your views or ideals?
