Hadesspirit
Prince
He showed a good point,they are right about whatever they say about WW2.The most damaged country was Czech Rep:.The zone of Soviet and Nazi forces conflicts cross.
Why is most of the Islamic world so backwards?
- Thread starter Winner
- Start date
RedRalph
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 20,708
I'm pretty sure the USSr and Poland were a lot more damaged than Czechoslovakia
Hadesspirit
Prince
Yes,for amount of humans they lost, it can be true.
But the point i was referring to was the damage Czechoslowakia got on political arena.
dionysos2048
AntiSarko
Whatever happened, things we take for granted in Europe such as free speech, human right, etc... were not so evident only 60 odd years ago. Now that's not an awful lot of time in history. So I think we should be a little more humble before calling such or such civilization, country, or culture as backwards.
DYNAMICS
Chief Engineer
You make a huge assumption that Muslim countries practice Islam correctly.
Islamic countries have failed not because of Islam, but because they reverted back to their previous cultures before they entered Islam.
Islamic countries have failed not because of Islam, but because they reverted back to their previous cultures before they entered Islam.
Hadesspirit
Prince
For example???*
I don't suppose they revert back to their previous cultures,inversely their culture changed after entering Islam.
Think about Ottomans(Turks)They left shamanist belief.Their culture mixed in Arabic culture.
The most valuable scientists of Islamic world appeared just after they had entered Islam.
DYNAMICS
Chief Engineer
How do I know that Muslim countries do not practice Islam correctly? And how have I come to the conclusion that Muslim people are their own worst enemy? And why is it that Muslims have not contributed to anything scientific for more than 500 years?
The root to all these problems the Muslim world is facing, from an observer like me to conclude, is rooted in the inability of Muslim countries to put in place an effective educational system, to harness the pure Islamic teachings. What the Muslim need is to revert back to those core values of education at all cost, education is the passport to the future ect. They need an Islamic renaissance, which unfortunate none of the Muslim countries have the political talent to do it.
Second the Muslim people are stuck behind a wall of ignorance and superstition. They have not completely left behind the indigenous cultures of those countries, before they entered Islam. So what you have is a native people with Muslim names, but not the educational horsepower that help Islam shine in the dark ages. Muslims have been crippled by there own selfish egos and fragile nature and lack of logic. They have traded in Islam for materialism. Ironically the so called west “weakest asset” to which the Muslims subscribe to and it’s causing havoc in Muslim societies around the world.
The Muslims of today are a shadow of their former selves; they are not about expanding the boundaries of scientific understanding, logic, and human law. They have lost the rationality of their ancestors. They left the Quranic teachings to which so much of their power comes from. The western world has become what Muslims have failed to be. With all the crap the Muslim countries around the world have been through you would of thought that Islam would have been extinct by now. Just goes to show you how resilient the Islamic faith is.
Muslims have lost their swagger, the confidence that once made them a force for social process and scientific advancement. I am a westerner, looking from the outside, I can see why Muslims have failed and their failure is rooted in a failure to restart an Islamic renaissance. I believe an Islamic renaissance would be good for the world, but being a westerner I’m not expected to say that.
Offtopic: Mates, I have to threadjack once more. Czech history is history of the fight for identity againist Germans. We were fighting in all ways how the nation should to have own industry, own culture and own ideas. Czechoslovakia was only democratic nation in central Europe and we were betrayed by France and UK..after some time Germans, Hungarians and Poles (yes all neigbours!) portioned us...after WW came Yalta conference, we moved under soviet influence...after it 1968, our slavic brothers occupied us. And after 1989, ironically came what our forefathers were fighting againist...nearly all newspapers and corporations are German owned and we are clearly second rated nations. Thats one nation tragedy when is only puppet in game of powers.
I agree with opinion that Islam is not primary reason. Non-islamic neigbours in region are obviously similiarly developed as Islamic ones.
I agree with opinion that Islam is not primary reason. Non-islamic neigbours in region are obviously similiarly developed as Islamic ones.
Bronx Warlord
Squad Leader
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2004
- Messages
- 2,449
Because a good protion of it can't read.
So, my understanding is:
Europe was expanding its trade, advancing due to interstate competition, and had far superior land and demographics than the Middle East and North Africa during Ottoman rule. Europe began surpassing the Ottomans, and due to their incompetent nature and weak central government and tax collection, they were much slower to adapt. They began to reform in earnest only after the mid-19th century, but by that time they had fallen too far behind to be effective enough to counter Europe, and lacked the trade and industrial base with which to expand. Much of the millets, due to a lack of internal competition, excessively rural populations, significant nomadic populations, and a lack of "federal" leadership, were still fairly backwards in terms of technology and infrastructure.
Then, just as progressives and revolutionaries take control in the early 20th century, WWI happens, and the Ottomans side with the losers, and find their empire gone by the 1920s, divided up among the European imperialists. Decades of uneven and somewhat exploitative policies later, plus a few revolutions, fundamentalist theocracies/monarchies, and unrepresentative dictators leads to a general lack of progress, while Europe and the rest of the "developed world" begin marching forward with integration and globalization.
Because many countries in the Middle East were effectively one-trick ponies, most of their business was focused on oil extraction, and due to the unrepresentative nature of their governments, much of the income from that resource did not go to the public, and there was no real impetus for change, especially since "modernization" has a rather anti-monarchic/-dictatorial ring to it.
Add in constant struggle and conflict with a certain European colony in the middle of the Levant
and one of the few progressive nations turning into a civil war nightmare for most of the latter quarter of the 20th century, much of the Middle East being used as a proxy battleground for the Cold War and against Iran, and the fact that most national boundaries were drawn up with little to no consideration of the peoples living on the lands, and you get something akin to what you see today: a region defined by political, religious, and ethnic rivalries and great powers struggles.
Sounds about right to those that know a thing or two about the region? I won't touch on Indonesia, Pakistan, etc.
Or... Islam makes people backwards.
Europe was expanding its trade, advancing due to interstate competition, and had far superior land and demographics than the Middle East and North Africa during Ottoman rule. Europe began surpassing the Ottomans, and due to their incompetent nature and weak central government and tax collection, they were much slower to adapt. They began to reform in earnest only after the mid-19th century, but by that time they had fallen too far behind to be effective enough to counter Europe, and lacked the trade and industrial base with which to expand. Much of the millets, due to a lack of internal competition, excessively rural populations, significant nomadic populations, and a lack of "federal" leadership, were still fairly backwards in terms of technology and infrastructure.
Then, just as progressives and revolutionaries take control in the early 20th century, WWI happens, and the Ottomans side with the losers, and find their empire gone by the 1920s, divided up among the European imperialists. Decades of uneven and somewhat exploitative policies later, plus a few revolutions, fundamentalist theocracies/monarchies, and unrepresentative dictators leads to a general lack of progress, while Europe and the rest of the "developed world" begin marching forward with integration and globalization.
Because many countries in the Middle East were effectively one-trick ponies, most of their business was focused on oil extraction, and due to the unrepresentative nature of their governments, much of the income from that resource did not go to the public, and there was no real impetus for change, especially since "modernization" has a rather anti-monarchic/-dictatorial ring to it.
Add in constant struggle and conflict with a certain European colony in the middle of the Levant
and one of the few progressive nations turning into a civil war nightmare for most of the latter quarter of the 20th century, much of the Middle East being used as a proxy battleground for the Cold War and against Iran, and the fact that most national boundaries were drawn up with little to no consideration of the peoples living on the lands, and you get something akin to what you see today: a region defined by political, religious, and ethnic rivalries and great powers struggles.Sounds about right to those that know a thing or two about the region? I won't touch on Indonesia, Pakistan, etc.
Or... Islam makes people backwards.
aelf
Ashen One
Well, it's mistaking the chicken for the egg. Islam is backwards because the politics of Muslim countries is backwards.
Now the US Constitution seems rather old...
Now the US Constitution seems rather old...
Ecofarm
Deity
Exactly. They need a 2 (or more) party government. Then they can play most of the blame-game internally and actually debate multiple courses of action while recording legit cause and affects of policy.
RedRalph
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 20,708
this is a good point, but its just asks the question why cant a good portion of the muslim world read?
Hadesspirit
Prince
I think this is related with the budget that Muslim countries separate for National Education
RedRalph
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 20,708
and the fact that several of them effectively wont educate women
holy king
Deity
Hadesspirit
Prince
And the real reason shows the fact that they always blame democratic countries for their faults.
finally somebody figured out the real reason.
holy king
Deity
a regime is using an outside enemy to distract it's oppressed population and rally them behind it? surprise, surprise...
that's not the reason for being backwards though. the reason for being backwards is a lack of industrialization. but we've been there a few pages back...
