Historical Combat, War, Geopolitics History and Analysis

[YeşilVatan]

America was absolutely an ethno-state. Founding pillars of that society was:

• Religious tolerance as far as which kind of protestant you were.
• Broadly being North-Western European. British Isles and Netherlands mostly.
• NOT being a Native or Black. Both of these groups were as numerous as the whites when US was founded.

All of this BS about US being a proposition nation is just that. Bullcrap. US is barely recognizable to any hypothetically resurrected founding father, and not only due to technological advancement. These characteristics were gradually eroded by the effects of migration waves.

First wave was the German and Irish immigrants flooding the country in the mid-19th century. This eroded the protestant characteristic of the urban 'core' population. There was also some minor black migration around the civil war era. Culmination of this process was the election of Theodore Roosevelt who was a nativist. This period also saw the mass deportation of Chinese from the western states which is often ignored (also Operation Wetback happened).

Second wave is the mass immigration from Europe around WW1, from which the pencil pushers somehow invented the "give me your poor" BS. I'm talking about the The Ellis Island people. These were Italian immigrants mostly but also Poles, Scandinavians, British etc. This migration wave arguably created the 'old America' as we understand today. They were the working class that fueled the US as a nation state. Almost all of them assimilated in a generation, aside from some outlier problems like mafia. The 'American White' as an ethnic group was formed out of the original whites plus these immigrants. And make no mistake, they are absolutely an ethnic group. Being from Polish of Scandinavian stock doesn't really mean anything to them, so we can't use the traditional ethnic classifications but being white absolutely means something to them. Even if they don't know it or show ethno-masochistic behaviour.

Third wave is the mass immigration from the third world starting with the immigration act of 1965. 100 million people settled the USA since that act, not counting the illegals. These mostly Spanish-speaking people from peasant communities vote overwhelmingly left, which enables some pretty radical moves from the Democrats.

The educated class that is imported after 1965 show significant difference with regards to social function when compared to previously mentioned unqualified labour. They act as the leading elite to the emerging social coalition of the 'inclusive' US. They are essentially a 'stolen' group of people. Stolen by the USA to fuel their advancement that is. I personally think stealing a nation's brightest is morally wrong, but one can't ignore how the immigrant themselves benefitted from this. One needs to look at all the tech giants: a significant portion of the CEOs are from the Indian Subcontinent.

The effect of this last, unbridled wave of mass migration is evident for those who want to see. Texas is on the brink of going blue (voting Democrat). This was unthinkable before. If Texas switches to the Democrat Party, then it's game over. The American electoral system and demographic trends does not allow another Republican victory after 2032, and that's being generous.

America will de facto become a one-party oligarchy. This is inevitable, if one looks at demographics. I also predict Conservative and white segments of the society will radicalize massively. We will see an increasingly oppressive US federal government with facial recognition technology, digital oppression, use of AI and drones. This will lead to an extreme social stratification, sort of like how Brazil is privately guarded luxury residences and favelas but my guess is US will be worse.

If you can take a walk through the streets of Los Angeles, you'll see the colossal problem they have with drug ue and homelessness. That is the future of US.

 

[Ryder]

America was absolutely an ethno-state. Founding pillars of that society was:

• Religious tolerance as far as which kind of protestant you were.
• Broadly being North-Western European. British Isles and Netherlands mostly.
• NOT being a Native or Black. Both of these groups were as numerous as the whites when US was founded.

All of this BS about US being a proposition nation is just that. Bullcrap. US is barely recognizable to any hypothetically resurrected founding father, and not only due to technological advancement. These characteristics were gradually eroded by the effects of migration waves.

First wave was the German and Irish immigrants flooding the country in the mid-19th century. This eroded the protestant characteristic of the urban 'core' population. There was also some minor black migration around the civil war era. Culmination of this process was the election of Theodore Roosevelt who was a nativist. This period also saw the mass deportation of Chinese from the western states which is often ignored (also Operation Wetback happened).

Second wave is the mass immigration from Europe around WW1, from which the pencil pushers somehow invented the "give me your poor" BS. I'm talking about the The Ellis Island people. These were Italian immigrants mostly but also Poles, Scandinavians, British etc. This migration wave arguably created the 'old America' as we understand today. They were the working class that fueled the US as a nation state. Almost all of them assimilated in a generation, aside from some outlier problems like mafia. The 'American White' as an ethnic group was formed out of the original whites plus these immigrants. And make no mistake, they are absolutely an ethnic group. Being from Polish of Scandinavian stock doesn't really mean anything to them, so we can't use the traditional ethnic classifications but being white absolutely means something to them. Even if they don't know it or show ethno-masochistic behaviour.

Third wave is the mass immigration from the third world starting with the immigration act of 1965. 100 million people settled the USA since that act, not counting the illegals. These mostly Spanish-speaking people from peasant communities vote overwhelmingly left, which enables some pretty radical moves from the Democrats.

The educated class that is imported after 1965 show significant difference with regards to social function when compared to previously mentioned unqualified labour. They act as the leading elite to the emerging social coalition of the 'inclusive' US. They are essentially a 'stolen' group of people. Stolen by the USA to fuel their advancement that is. I personally think stealing a nation's brightest is morally wrong, but one can't ignore how the immigrant themselves benefitted from this. One needs to look at all the tech giants: a significant portion of the CEOs are from the Indian Subcontinent.

The effect of this last, unbridled wave of mass migration is evident for those who want to see. Texas is on the brink of going blue (voting Democrat). This was unthinkable before. If Texas switches to the Democrat Party, then it's game over. The American electoral system and demographic trends does not allow another Republican victory after 2032, and that's being generous.

America will de facto become a one-party oligarchy. This is inevitable, if one looks at demographics. I also predict Conservative and white segments of the society will radicalize massively. We will see an increasingly oppressive US federal government with facial recognition technology, digital oppression, use of AI and drones. This will lead to an extreme social stratification, sort of like how Brazil is privately guarded luxury residences and favelas but my guess is US will be worse.

If you can take a walk through the streets of Los Angeles, you'll see the colossal problem they have with drug ue and homelessness. That is the future of US.

Not to mention the KKK actually targeted Catholics.

There has been a few lncidents where Italians got lynched by the KKK.

 

[Nilgiri]

@Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary

Personally, i dont agree with the his assumption that, by and large USA is the only society that implemented the idea of an unified identity based on values rather than race and ethnicity. But, nevertheless interesting content.

Looking at the whole story and context of the US, I generally don't begrudge when one of them point out what he points out though (whatever the finer points of "first" and "only" relative to others and of course large lapses in application and their remedies over time)....especially in the context of countering those within it that are seemingly gaining oxygen now to undermine the whole setup on principles/values first with their extreme identity politics.

It is very unique country for a large powerful one. Have to live here at some duration and in different areas to really understand it.

 

[Gary]

@Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary

Personally, i dont agree with the his assumption that, by and large USA is the only society that implemented the idea of an unified identity based on values rather than race and ethnicity. But, nevertheless interesting content.

Is he talking about the current times or what ? The Abbasid caliphate from the 8th century was a country based more on the value of Islam rather than Arabian nation superiority. Many of its military commanders, intellectuals, government bureaucrats are Persian, Greeks etc. So does the Roman empire which while doesn't have any common value to unite them (and their subjects) with other than the idea of Roman state superiority, which btw is increasingly blurry, because successive Roman empire after the fall of the Western half are actually Greeks, does becomes more inclusive in its later years, at one point even having an Arab (Philip the Arab) as emperor of the Romans. At the time this is much like Obama of today.

America, being the 21st century version of these states are naturally inclined to follow the same cycle when it comes to inclusivity of races. America just like the Roman empires or the Arabian caliphate of the past started more as a homogenous society which absorbed conquered people, which overtime the conquered people grew in size and importance and eventually dominate the country.

The guy mentioned Obama, Kamala Harris, Collin Powell etc. In the Roman time they have

Phillip the Arab

And Arminius

 

[Afif]

Is he talking about the current times or what ? The Abbasid caliphate from the 8th century was a country based more on the value of Islam rather than Arabian nation superiority. Many of its military commanders, intellectuals, government bureaucrats are Persian, Greeks etc. So does the Roman empire which while doesn't have any common value to unite them (and their subjects) with other than the idea of Roman state superiority, which btw is increasingly blurry, because successive Roman empire after the fall of the Western half are actually Greeks, does becomes more inclusive in its later years, at one point even having an Arab (Philip the Arab) as emperor of the Romans. At the time this is much like Obama of today.

America, being the 21st century version of these states are naturally inclined to follow the same cycle when it comes to inclusivity of races. America just like the Roman empires or the Arabian caliphate of the past started more as a homogenous society which absorbed conquered people, which overtime the conquered people grew in size and importance and eventually dominate the country.

The guy mentioned Obama, Kamala Harris, Collin Powell etc. In the Roman time they have

Phillip the Arab

And Arminius

Yes, that is my thinking also.
But I felt like the guy was trying to make the value based identity system unique to USA not only in the contemporary world but also in light of history by downplaying the other examples.

IMO, one of the reason Mongol Empire despite its physical size and shape couldn't last long, because unlike other great empires (Romans, Abbasid and Ottomans) Mongol Empire did not adapt any flexible value based unified identity.
While in term of pioneers outburst characteristics, Mongols resembles the early Arab conquerors a lots, however, unlike Arab conquerors they didn’t have an intellectually sound, value based, flexible social, economic and political unified system like Islam, that can adapt and expand.

 

[Afif]

Hopefully this forum will continue to exist for the next two decades, so that we'll get to see who was right. Frankly, you being right would mean more global development so I'm not against it anyway.

Despite middle income trap being a big problem, developing/emerging countries will ultimately continue to grow.
And in the next 20-30 years they will likely to achieve GDP within $18000-25000 range per capita.

However, if you meant, any emerging middle income countries are very unlikely to develop into highly advanced capital democracies like Nordic or Western European countries, then by and large I agree with you.

The thing is, in second half of 20th century the power imbalance between developed world and third world was so great that, we witnessed unprecedented stability in human history.
Hence also, West had their best days.

However, today as more and more we are progressing in first half of the 21th century, the imbalance is shrinking.

Thus, i think both the develoepd world and the developing world will have hard time moving foroward.

As the great power and regional competition intensifies we will likely to see an increase in the defence spending of emerging large countries.
Contrary to the previous spending model.

 

[Nilgiri]

Despite middle income trap being a big problem, developing/emerging countries will ultimately continue to grow.
And in the next 20-30 years they will likely to achieve GDP within $18000-25000 range per capita.

Some will. Many will not.

If the institutions of note are skewed badly (against basic ingredients in the recipe needed for growth) and brittle against that direction changing....there will be no growth of relevance.

It is a problem that afflicts the developing world quite broadly....so as a collective group it is very unlikely that they will achieve some GDP per capita inevitably.

There is simply too much evidence of the results of deeply badly run countries that are mentally committed to staying badly run. They will all stagnate atrociously (and whatever that means for their survival in the long term as the gap grows between them and world averages)....because concerted delusions can override almost anything (past a complete revolution or establishment reset/annihilation) in the end.

If the flour given to two bakers is objectively the same or similar enough, and one can produce bread whereas the other merely imagines himself as doing so but does not or cannot because of fear of the processes involved.... one side gets to eat, the other starves.

This extends to every matter in the end.

I have brutally pointed this out to folks from certain countries (with key objective evidence of flour, baker and bread) and they dismissed or laughed at it....and I inevitably watch many of them realise it in their own way later because something happens against whichever fickle emotional investment they made.

Then they lose all hope suddenly, because they want quick easy answers in a stark binary reference they have made outside the actual core issue. This prevents meaningful understanding and reform pressure taking shape where it needs to.

This delusion and ignorance makes much crucial tiers of wood very damp in too many developing countries....it gets exacerbated with the zero-sum mentality that also permeates psychologically.

 

[Afif]

Some will. Many will not.

If the institutions of note are skewed badly (against basic ingredients in the recipe needed for growth) and brittle against that direction changing....there will be no growth of relevance.

It is a problem that afflicts the developing world quite broadly....so as a collective group it is very unlikely that they will achieve some GDP per capita inevitably.

There is simply too much evidence of the results of deeply badly run countries that are mentally committed to staying badly run. They will all stagnate atrociously (and whatever that means for their survival in the long term as the gap grows between them and world averages)....because concerted delusions can override almost anything (past a complete revolution or establishment reset/annihilation) in the end.

If the flour given to two bakers is objectively the same or similar enough, and one can produce bread whereas the other merely imagines himself as doing so but does not or cannot because of fear of the processes involved.... one side gets to eat, the other starves.

This extends to every matter in the end.

I have brutally pointed this out to folks from certain countries (with key objective evidence of flour, baker and bread) and they dismissed or laughed at it....and I inevitably watch many of them realise it in their own way later because something happens against whichever fickle emotional investment they made.

Then they lose all hope suddenly, because they want quick easy answers in a stark binary reference they have made outside the actual core issue. This prevents meaningful understanding and reform pressure taking shape where it needs to.

This delusion and ignorance makes much crucial tiers of wood very damp in too many developing countries....it gets exacerbated with the zero-sum mentality that also permeates psychologically.

That certainly a new perspective.

I always thought it is not possible for countries to continue to be dirt poor and and hell hole.
Sooner or later, simply the mere cycle of successive events would improve their situation.
I mean, at some point they will start to figure it out right?
The eternal suffering is reserved only for afterlife, not on this Earth.

I am curious where do you put the line between those who have higher chance to develop and those who probbaly never will?
Because, the hurdles that hold down the progress, like Rampant corruption, dysfunctional political system, social instabilities are more or less present (in various level) in every emerging/developing countries.

Also, does all of that mean, the future of BD is onimous in the sense that you are describing?

(And now I am asking for quick easy answers)

 

[Marlii]

That certainly a new perspective.

I always thought it is not possible for countries to continue to be dirt poor and and hell hole.
Sooner or later, simply the mere cycle of successive events would improve their situation.
I mean, at some point they will start to figure it out right?
The eternal suffering is reserved only for afterlife, not on this Earth.

I am curious where do you put the line between those who have higher chance to develop and those who probbaly never will?
Because, the hurdles that hold down the progress, like Rampant corruption, dysfunctional political system, social instabilities are more or less present (in various level) in every emerging/developing countries.

Also, does all of that mean, the future of BD is onimous in the sense that you are describing?

(And now I am asking for quick easy answers)

Well I dont think @Nilgiri was pointing especially to the case of BD and I am no way any economic expert but I always have seen many point out that if BD doesn't diversify it's economy they can fall into a middle income trap.countries will stay poor if they make all stupid economic decisions North Koreans ain't gonna get rich anytime soon with their isolation ,india didn't get anywhere from its socialistic mindset till the 90s when it was literally asking for IMF bailouts .We took some correct steps and now we have never again have to knock IMF doors.BD is recent policy of signing free trade agreements with everyone including india is baffling to me and joining RCEP is to me a no brainer we ourself jumped ship in the last moment because we know how they are gonna exploit us rotten and certainly how indian companies aren't gonna get a fair competition from Chinese companies who are mostly state sponsored .

 

[Afif]

I am no way any economic expert but I always have seen many point out that if BD doesn't diversify it's economy they can fall into a middle income trap.

That's right.

We took some correct steps and now we have never again have to knock IMF doors.

IMF lone is not as bad as some people tend to think.

BD is recent policy of signing free trade agreements with everyone including india is baffling to me

Why? What's wrong with that?
I think free trade agreements are a good idea.

 

[Marlii]

That's right.



IMF lone is not as bad as some people tend to think.



Why? What's wrong with that?
I thinks free trade agreements are a good idea.

Well the recent stint of pakistan with IMF was an ugly one.Not only it dragged on for months when pakistan themselves were at serious risk of going default they did a lot meddling in the internal politics .But pakistan is a case study as the whole point of the IMF was to make sure that countries can stay on their own feet economically after agreeing to the loans and this was pakistan's 20th something bailout .

 

[Nilgiri]

That certainly a new perspective.

I always thought it is not possible for countries to continue to be dirt poor and and hell hole.
Sooner or later, simply the mere cycle of successive events would improve their situation.
I mean, at some point they will start to figure it out right?
The eternal suffering is reserved only for afterlife, not on this Earth.

I am curious where do you put the line between those who have higher chance to develop and those who probbaly never will?
Because, the hurdles that hold down the progress, like Rampant corruption, dysfunctional political system, social instabilities are more or less present (in various level) in every emerging/developing countries.

Also, does all of that mean, the future of BD is onimous in the sense that you are describing?

(And now I am asking for quick easy answers)

I am speaking overall in broad terms for developing world.

Subcontinent specifics, Pakistan is turning out to be a really worst case iteration of it, but similar issues transcend India and BD....w.r.t Flour, baker and bread.

One thing I brutally pointed out to a typical mob of Pakistani posters in PDF is just pointing out why does Pakistan not have one single chess grandmaster? Not even one (and it will not have one for forseeable future).....making a huge void along with AFG in between the chart of the spread from India to Iran to Arabia, Anatolia and Russia and Europe. Then they got even more mad when I said its relevant to why India and Iran dont just sit on their ballistic missile technology and are able to convert it to space launchers......and where at least is Pakistan's sounding rocket effort currently?...and has there been any look into the impact in other sectors like this? These things matter a lot in the end. Then they got super mad when I said I already talked a lot to Turks (including a Chess grandmaster), why does Ataturk upset you so much etc etc....and then the inevitable ended up happening when excessive trolling from specific mob of Iranians and CCPbots happened....and I got kicked out with their best friend biraaders they asserted. This is how they run a lot of things in the end, emotions waaah lol....brother on and off stuff....theres no consistency to a deep principle.

I pointed out a number of SBP (reserve bank) economist own papers on certain issues as well long before that became trendy thing to discuss now after the SHTF.....literally just 1 or 2 pakistanis wanted to actually discuss this out of 100s back then (hey Imran Khan PTI stronk! etc!)....and its always the Pakistanis the rest of the mob over time attack for a b c, x y z reason that upsets them and they throw away all that could have been genuinely investigated in a collective nationalist good.

i.e What relation does the phenomenon have to cultivating literal anti-intellectual basis in the establishment found in specific way/intensity for Pakistan compared to rest of South Asia....be it at recognised name like Abdus Salam in his field.....or my friend "Saiyan" in his legal profession or my Pakistani-origin friend here in Canada working in a top tier engineering discipline.

Why do they go out of their way to suppressing and throwing out these kind of people when they dont stay on straight and narrow field set by the establishments narrative (way more than India could even contemplate doing)? Hence if they nip in the bud what already surfaces here like in any population of current context....how they going to actually grow and organise things larger to get to actual sustained next tiers?

Instead they all broadly indulge in their mental decline, time waste and whataboutery.....and whatever attention they perceive others give them as some primary consideration....so if that is the average quality of things in their establishment as well (since these are fairly privileged folks in the end), then its no wonder the forum went to crap (kicking out the Turks, Indonesians and quality members over time because of incessant pandering to CCP-bots and other extreme trolls).

Now whole forum is largely overnight an anti-establishment ree spectacle because their political favourite got removed by military....and they reposed all their hopes and dreams and magic wand needs into one guy rather than into something far far broader and bigger (like the institutions and institution network cultivation I try to always get people to look at more).

99% of the Indians consistently posting there (whenever I do peek rarely) are now the garbage types addicted to same equivalent mental decrepitude on their side. So that also explains why Indian establishment also has some % of same toxic crap within it as well (but I knew that already anyway)....just somewhat lower intensity compared to Pakistan from what I've seen given Pakistan simply never even had a proper breakfast for this on day one and now its several meals missed and the mind must defend the gaunt consequence even more. Same with most of the regularly posting BD members there....its all a weird sychophant crowd to zero-sum emotionalism driven nonsense....all aping and mirroring each other.....many fully cognisant to the new professional start here but hey the old repetitive garbage smells too good for them.

For (real) BD I am mostly well versed by my close friend (from university days), son of major construction company founder (his father, a muktijoddha and patriot of highest caliber, is real bonafide rags to riches story by pure hard work and commitment) there.

His dad was minister in previous BNP admin even (though ofc works in bipartisan way as possible with BAL govt too).... so he has told me over length of ~ 20 years I have known him now... the deepset institutional issues in BD and the various attitudes in high places keeping it that way (and he does not shy away from criticizing India where criticism is due as we are close buddies in the end).

To us its no surprise what happened to BD forex reserves lately when pressure comes to BD economy....because the framework is just rickety in many crucial matters....but is attention given properly or is propaganda and feel good put first by too many BD people with some influence and power etc?

Its real simple in the end, there needs to be solid institutions that are capable of improving themselves. The best people in a country need to find their way to the best positions (by merit, nothing else). The worst people need to find themselves in the most irrelevant positions possible too. That is only way public trust grows and sufficient investment in critical spots chugs along.

None of this happens by rote or inertia (especially in more demand side oriented capture of it in GDP) if there is stasis or degradation in crucial elements of it.

Investment fundamentals need to be great in 5 - 10 year stretches to the current year... to have some relatively assured idea of next 5 - 10 years. The cart is firmly hitched behind donkey (supply side)....and the donkey diet and all caring inputs needs careful look at first rather than thinking oh the cart is definitely going to get to A B and C later where we are able to buy or build better larger carts and so on.

Like I put in my latest reply in coffee thread, in a vacuum and from looking at TN and no one else, TN really should have been the worst state in India from the look at the level of ingratitude displayed to what was working great at the start and bringing in the corrupt thugs on their cheap slogans and identity politics....that brought in vast swathes of unaccounted corruption and its impact/legacy now. Instead we are well ahead of Indian average....so that is really sobering stuff regd state of affairs in rest of India.

You literally have to go out of your way to do worse than TN....and thats what has happened and will happen.....so absolutely nothing is guaranteed regarding these development and projections people often like to trumpet. Its so stupid. ie TN has somehow outperformed in way it has been able to cultivate investment w.r.t how its developed institutions and trust. i.e even if it did a 4/10 job on it, India somehow has done a 2/10 job on it and BIMARU a 1/10 job etc (and people can scale these scores within a 10 however they would like, the ratios dont change)....these are all horrible grades in the end compared to what should have been done and still is not being done sufficiently.....rather a whole new toxic angle has arisen in BIMARU especially that puts institutions and trust under unnecessary pressure and attrition long term. They figure they can majoritarian brutalise to get forced consensus in some scaled down (more coerced rather than overt) version of CCP Mao for full overnight Han monolith in the new ideology/culture etc....as though that stuff is some inevitable requirement to only then bring a possibility for a Deng era later etc (and then minorities left over are just non-issues like Tibetan, Uighur etc).

These people, wherever you find them, have real issues going on in their head because they surround themselves with people that think just like them....and every institution of note becomes a target for permeation of ideology and whack-a-mole game if there is resistance offered.

Robust meritorious institutions provide bulwark and inertia to this tendency (another part of the virtue of cultivating them whenever and wherever possible)....it is actually underlooked even inside PRC how Deng, Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao did this process in their own way (decentralising things from CCP, at least the beijing CCP) and how that is again being extreme CCP-captured/coerced (at cost to China long term) by Xi now.

I can do this with other large countries in developed world too. Its long story in the end as the phenomenon is universal overall in politics. The impact is just greatest in the poorest countries that have large populations in low economic development.

Oh yeah, I also put a reply lately in TR economy thread w.r.t Ataturk, and superego of the state etc (reply given to Goatsmilk)....given utter mess Erodgan has done in last 10 years especially....this stuff all has deep layers. You need institutions with best people aligned to best proven principles.

 

[Afif]

Its kinda strange that religion discurages it but every single empire claiming to follow the said religion does the opposite?
Im not gonna dig deeper but i know that there are certain rules that explicitely allow slavery in Islam in certain conditions, most prominent are the Jariyas.

I don't think it is strange. A moral discouragement is not the same as legal prohibition. Violation of Legal prohibition comes with potential penalties.
While not choosing the morally best option does not always violate the legal code.

Similarly, allowing slavery does equate to encouraging slavery.

Here's a verse from Quran which may better represent Islam's moral attitude (not legal stance) toward slavery.

'11. But he did not brave the ascent. 12. And how would you know what the ascent is? 13. The freeing of a slave.' -90 Sura.

It clearly states the righteous path is freeing slaves.

It is interesting that you mentioned explicit allowance of slavery in certain conditions.

However, even from the legal point of view slavery wasn’t unconditional.

1. There was a contract system called 'Mukataba' that allows the slaves to directly purchase his/her freedom from his/her from the master.

And Quran directly command masters to accept the contract when servents demands it.

'30. And those who seek the contract from what your right hands possess, grant them their contract.......' -24th Sura.

(However, unfortunately for political and other reason many scholars interpreted it as recommendatory not compulsory. But, if the verse was followed literally by muslims over the centuries, there would've been very few slaves as vast majority of them simply buy their freedom within their lifetime)

Mukataba - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There was a story of a jariyah who entered the said contract with her master and prophet helped her to paid some of her Ransome so that she can be free.

In fact, it was obligatory for the state to spend some of its taxes to help servents to buy their freedom.

2. Apart from that, in some crimes, obligatory penalty was to free your own slaves.

IMHO, these facts better represents Islam approach toward slavery as religion, rather than the actions of Muslims as people.

 

[Afif]

An Unholy Omen Is Looming Over Bangladesh

There is every reason to fear that Bangladesh may witness the age-old tactic of communal violence ahead of the upcoming election.

thewire.in

@Nilgiri An interesting article.
(Not necessarily agree with all of his point, but nevertheless interesting)

 

[Afif]

Old but interesting stuff! Almost feels like an age ago.
If you think how fast world is changing right now, you can almost feel we are at a critical turning point.
Old tricks doesnt work anymore. The memory of WikiLeaks and Snowden fading away. The traditional Western 'war on terror' make less sense now. The infamous names like AL Qaeda and ISIS sounds insignificant. New tricks and games appears more clearer. Is it because we grew older or World changed significantly since 2000s? I know it sounds little philosophical but what do you guys think?
@Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary

 

[Nilgiri]

Old but interesting stuff! Almost feels like an age ago.
If you think how fast world is changing right now, you can almost feel we are at a critical turning point.
Old tricks doesnt work anymore. The memory of WikiLeaks and Snowden fading away. The traditional Western 'war on terror' make less sense now. The infamous names like AL Qaeda and ISIS sounds insignificant. New tricks and games appears more clearer. Is it because we grew older or World changed significantly since 2000s? I know it sounds little philosophical but what do you guys think?
@Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary

Wars are just far easier to get into than get out of.

I mean I have had number of convos with close friends over many years about the hypothetical if JFK was not assassinated and if it would have made a drastic enough change to Vietnam arc of the story (and also longer term state welfare economic policy) given noticeable LBJ differences with JFK here....along with the near-monolith election result from sympathy vote (in 64) for democrat party that had real inertia in legislature till the 90s by that alone.

Vietnam had a long legacy in US deepstate psychology (given what it represented for the first time that made it almost singularly irreconcilable) that it had not really grappled with and there was seriously bad affirmation on certain things after the 1991 USSR collapse and void propensity left in geopolitics for hubris and unilateralism based on it.

So the principles and working order get eroded, especially under sudden intense pressure like found in 9/11. The over-paternalistic parochial psyche that comes with even good intent when you simply have that much insularity and raw power at disposal....compared to the bulk population's capacites and deeper metaphysics....both within a nation and outside it.

 

[Ryder]

Old but interesting stuff! Almost feels like an age ago.
If you think how fast world is changing right now, you can almost feel we are at a critical turning point.
Old tricks doesnt work anymore. The memory of WikiLeaks and Snowden fading away. The traditional Western 'war on terror' make less sense now. The infamous names like AL Qaeda and ISIS sounds insignificant. New tricks and games appears more clearer. Is it because we grew older or World changed significantly since 2000s? I know it sounds little philosophical but what do you guys think?
@Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary

Its all geopolitics.

If you want to continue protecting your geopolitical interests worldwide you got invent enemies.

After the Soviets it was the Islamist terrorists like al qaeda and isis.

Not to say terrorism does not exist neither does their crimes and atrocities get ignored but lets be honest do we really think guys without any high tech equipment or even the economy to back it up will takeover the world.

I mean look at Isis they took most of Iraq and Syria now look at them just a insurgent group thats getting into fight with Iraqi farmers.

We constantly overblown isis and al qaeda that they will takeover the world and impose their own world view.

Whats interesting is that the USA knew where Osama bin laden was but constantly delayed it. Because if they take him out whats next.

Terrorist leaders are alive becauae they are useful and when their use has passed they cop the strike.

We never hear about the armed islamic group of Algeria because their atrocities were all done in Algeria but also did a lot of hijacking planes.

Islamist terrorists will stay as fringed people in the Islamic World. Basically more akin to a cult rather than a enemy that wants to dominate the world.

When it comes to geopolitics you got to overblow your enemies. Plus terrorists are useful in proxy wars.

All those people dying is just a sacrifice unfortunately thats true. Civilians will always be the victims of geopolitics.

 

[Afif]

@Nilgiri guess what i found?

Did you hear it before? @Jackdaws et al.

 

[Jackdaws]

@Nilgiri guess what i found?

Did you hear it before? @Jackdaws et al.

I have yes. It's on my saved list. Along with another Bengali you may be familiar with.

 

[Afif]

From mid 19th century to mid 20th century, Bengal region had some of the finest political and cultural intellectuals that this subcontinent has ever seen.
But then shortly after the partition, it all just stopped. For some reasons those people couldn't left worthy successors. And to this day I am trying to figure out why.