Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxt.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!ihnp4!ihuxt!martillo From: martillo@ihuxt.UUCP (Yehoyaqim Martillo) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Muslim States and Political Regressiveness Message-ID: <479@ihuxt.UUCP> Date: Thu, 10-May-84 22:57:21 EDT Article-I.D.: ihuxt.479 Posted: Thu May 10 22:57:21 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 12-May-84 12:39:36 EDT References: <250@hou2g.UUCP> <331@teldata.UUCP>, <474@ihuxt.UUCP> <1786@randvax.ARPA> Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL Lines: 54 Despite David's statement, calling for the annihilation of certain states is not equivalent to Hitlerism and is not necessarily wrong. Calling for the annihilation of Nazi Germany during the 30's was perfectly reasonable and hardly could be termed Hitlerism. Annihilating a state is not equivalent to murdering the people who reside in that state, unless someone is claiming that the allies killed all the residents of Nazi Germany. During the 19th century, a large part of the Muslim world was occupied and colonized by Europe. For the non-Muslims who lived in these nations, this conquest was one of the most progressive events of the last 500 years. If any net-reader thinks being a dhimmi was fun, I suggest reading a little publication of the Government of Pakistan called Dhimma. I would rather have been a black under jim-crow. The European colonial rulers tended to forbid the worst types of mistreatment of non-Muslims. Not surprisingly the Muslims chafed at their subjugation and at the rising status of those who were formerly asfal assafalin (the lowest of the low). In response two very different ideologies developed (at least in the Arab nations) Arab nationalism and Islamic fundamentalism. Arab nationalists have tended to slaughter people not considered Arab e.g. Jews, Berbers, Kurds, Turks, Persians and many others. The Islamic fundamentalist tend to degrade and humiliate dhimmis under their rule. Those peoples who don't qualify as dhimmis like Baha'is or Ahmadis just get slaughtered. Majorities don't have the right to slaughter or to oppress minorities. Since Arab nationalist and Islamic fundamentalist majorities commit exactly these crimes, they should not rule. Then the only possibility is a return to colonialism. I have no great love for Westerners but they did a much better job of ruling North Africa than the locals. Western intellectuals showed no moral fibre whatsoever when the howling savages of Qum foamed about the "crimes" the USA committed against the Muslim peoples as if the shiites have not done much worse. Richard Falk's analysis was particularly mindless. I saw no outcry at the destruction of Hamah by the Syrian government. The intellectuals claim we cannot judge these nations by first world standards of right and wrong. But most of my family until 1950 were cave-dwellers living in Southern Libya and we would not act like the Syrians or Iranians. Right and wrong has no relationship to the level of technical development.