Is this assessment of Islam justified or prohpetic ?

[Sikander]

The 5th rule of Fight Club:

Only one fight at a time gentlemen.

[aneeshm]

Why veer off-topic ? I would rather not debate the Aryan invasion theory here . That debate can go on forever . What I am concerned with is whether or not this extract is an accurate assessment of Islam .

Some other passages from the same book read as if that author had some time machine which could tell him what would happen . I'll post them when I have the time .

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Odin


I'm not sure if this applies to all the hindu nationalist types, but in another forum in a thread on the Indo-Europeans several Indian posters started posting garbage of how Hindu scriptures can be interpreted as saying there was an industrial civilization in India 10,000 years ago that was ancestral to all Indo-Europeans, basically Atlantis with an Indian twist. Me and a few other posters contradicted thier BS with linguistic and archeological info from Wiki (and also the fact that those mummified Indo-European people found in NW China were Eurpoean in apearence in every way), and then the Indian posters started going batsh*t crazy about it being Western lies with no proper respect for Hindu scripture.

That's just silly . You cannot try to prove the impossible . Yes , a large urban civilisation based on the Saraswati river did exist , far before the supposed date of the Aryan invasion , and they did built huge cities , but they were nothing close to industrial . They were like the Indus valley people , only on a bigger scale . The Indus valley civilisation may be the remains of that older civilisation .

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Odin
and then the Indian posters started going batsh*t crazy about it being Western lies with no proper respect for Hindu scripture.

There are wacky nationalists all over the world. No one country has a lock on that trait.

[Barnabas]

From an anthropology blog

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2006/02/textbook-debate-over-hinduism.html

This LA Times story is about changes in California schoolbooks requested by Hindu organizations. The interesting paragraph:

The most contentious issue involves the origins of Hinduism. The common historical view, included in all textbooks, is that Indo-Europeans from Central Asia, called Aryans, migrated to India and laid the faith's foundation. But Bajpai and the Hindu groups hotly dispute the idea of any Aryan migration, citing new DNA evidence for their view that Hinduism developed indigenously. They have asked that textbooks include both views.

There is of course no new DNA evidence that Hinduism developed indigenously. The latest studies suggest that Indians are of largely indigenous origin, but that does not mean that their religion is. Hinduism is a blend of many elements, and the contribution of local elements in it should be acknowledged and celebrated, but the binding thread is the religion of the Vedic Indo-Aryans, Sanskrit, and the Brahmin caste.

The latest research actually reinforces the Aryan Invasion Theory. According to that theory, the caste system is not a simple "division of labor" as the revisionists would suggest, but rather a social structure imposed by an intrusive group. A prediction of that theory is that the upper caste in the Hindu system would carry a greater genetic legacy of non-South Asian ancestry. This prediction is supported by current evidence.

The indigenist school must explain why Brahmins are more "West Eurasian" genetically, if they were just assigned this role in a grand within-India "division of labor". A more parsimonious explanation is that they are more "West Eurasian" genetically because, well, their ancestors came from West Eurasia.

Moreover, the "division of labor" theory could accommodate exogenous origins for some Indian castes, but it does not explain why the elite group also happens to coincide with the exogenous group, namely the Brahmin caste. A more parsimonious explanationis that the elite group is also the exogenous group, because a group of outsiders took control of Indian society and placed themselves on top.

[Barnabas]

Originally posted by Oerdin


There are wacky nationalists all over the world. No one country has a lock on that trait.

Both China and India have serious problems with nationalist revisionism, in the case of China sometimes even done by the State.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Brachy-Pride
From an anthropology blog

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2006/02/textbook-debate-over-hinduism.html

This LA Times story is about changes in California schoolbooks requested by Hindu organizations. The interesting paragraph:

The most contentious issue involves the origins of Hinduism. The common historical view, included in all textbooks, is that Indo-Europeans from Central Asia, called Aryans, migrated to India and laid the faith's foundation. But Bajpai and the Hindu groups hotly dispute the idea of any Aryan migration, citing new DNA evidence for their view that Hinduism developed indigenously. They have asked that textbooks include both views.

There is of course no new DNA evidence that Hinduism developed indigenously. The latest studies suggest that Indians are of largely indigenous origin, but that does not mean that their religion is. Hinduism is a blend of many elements, and the contribution of local elements in it should be acknowledged and celebrated, but the binding thread is the religion of the Vedic Indo-Aryans, Sanskrit, and the Brahmin caste.

The latest research actually reinforces the Aryan Invasion Theory. According to that theory, the caste system is not a simple "division of labor" as the revisionists would suggest, but rather a social structure imposed by an intrusive group. A prediction of that theory is that the upper caste in the Hindu system would carry a greater genetic legacy of non-South Asian ancestry. This prediction is supported by current evidence.

The indigenist school must explain why Brahmins are more "West Eurasian" genetically, if they were just assigned this role in a grand within-India "division of labor". A more parsimonious explanation is that they are more "West Eurasian" genetically because, well, their ancestors came from West Eurasia.

Moreover, the "division of labor" theory could accommodate exogenous origins for some Indian castes, but it does not explain why the elite group also happens to coincide with the exogenous group, namely the Brahmin caste. A more parsimonious explanationis that the elite group is also the exogenous group, because a group of outsiders took control of Indian society and placed themselves on top.

I have serious reservations about the Aryan invasion theory , but this is not the place to discuss them . I would appreciate on-topic discussion .

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by aneeshm
Why veer off-topic ? I would rather not debate the Aryan invasion theory here . That debate can go on forever . What I am concerned with is whether or not this extract is an accurate assessment of Islam .
.

it was a real long quote, and when I saw that, I didnt bother reading the rest.

[Urban Ranger]

It's not like the Hindus had been particularly nice to the Muslims.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
It's not like the Hindus had been particularly nice to the Muslims.

[notyoueither]

aneeshm, prophetic in what way? The writer seems to be describing a hidebound culture that refused efforts to change (except the Turks).

I don't see any indications of the turning back of the Soviets in Afghanistan leading to something larger.

[Dr Strangelove]

I believe the author is saying that the basic structure of Islam predisposes it to fundamentalist conservatism to a greater extent than other major religions. He outlines the rise and fall of Muslim world power, and explains the effects that colonialism had on the Islamic community. He makes the claim that colonialism undermined the "low form" of Islam thus strengthening the trend towards conservatism and setting the stage for the current rise in Islamic fundamentalism. He seems to believe that this trend was inevitable, and that examples that go against the trend, i.e., Turkish secularism are mere anomalies.

How's that for a summary?

[Dr Strangelove]

Six hundred years ago Europe languished in the grips of conservative Christianity. If an alien had been observing the Earth at that time would he have been able to predict that the Europeans would soon begin an as of yet undiminished journey of intellectual growth, scientific advancement, and geopolitical expansion? I don't think so. I believe that under the right circumstances the jihadists movements may yet subside into the pages of history. The author is focusing too rigidly on the internal dynamics of the religion. Islam doesn't exist in a vaccum. Today we find instances in which the jihadist movements have already begun to wear on the very fabric of Muslim society, effectively damaging the very ummah itself. I am of course talking about the fratricidal events in Iraq and Sudan. There are other examples in North Africa. It is the very nature of these irrational misanthropes to batter the very community thatr fosters them. In time Muslims will see the jihadists as an enemy. It is only a matter of how many will die before that happens.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
It's not like the Hindus had been particularly nice to the Muslims.

Well, the Muslims were not nice first.

[DaShi]

Unlike in China, where the Muslims were nice first but got the royal screw from the Chinese.