The Islamic Discussion Thread ٤: It's Always Sunni In Arabia

[Jolthig]

Yeah, they always had a bizarre foreign policy. *ahem* the stamp act

The Stamp Act was a tax--hence, not foreign policy lol.

I stand corrected

[Dahyan]

I am joining Pilar on my opposition to Iran's government because they ban Ahmadiyya, and not to mention, Iran could've been a western style democracy that would've allowed all views to exist had the theocracy not come.

Western style government is a generally a terrible idea in any Third World country.

[Jolthig]

I am joining Pilar on my opposition to Iran's government because they ban Ahmadiyya, and not to mention, Iran could've been a western style democracy that would've allowed all views to exist had the theocracy not come.

Western style government is a generally a terrible idea in any Third World country.

How so, brother?

[Dahyan]

I suppose but still. Muslims and Hindus did get along with one another for a while. At least in the 19th to 20th centuries before 1947

Eh.

Getting along is used very loosely here, tbh. More like the British largely kept them at peace.

Kept them at peace is a big phrase to use. More like kept them all starving and enslaved regardless of religion.

[Dahyan]

Western style government is a generally a terrible idea in any Third World country.

How so, brother?

Almost every single liberal "democracy" experiment attempted by a former colony has resulted in kleptocratic regimes ruling over a people in abject poverty. Most of Africa comes to mind.

The Third World can never advance until they stop trying to copy-paste Europe and the US, and try build up a country based on their own culture and traditions.

[Dahyan]

British Foreign Policy in a nutshell:

Beat up China and piss off the French, occasionally prevent the Germans from conquering Europe, flip off the Russians at every opportunity.

You forgot about stealing all the spices, then deciding you don’t like any, and going home to burnt Shepherd’s Pie.

Or taking all the wealth from India in order to develop white colonies in places like Australia and South Africa, and then charging the Indians taxes for the economic infrastructure you've built in India for the sole purpose of dragging out more wealth.

Makes Leopold II look like a noob.

[Jolthig]

I suppose my decision to leave IDT last week has been as usual, revoked. IDT and NSG in general is a super massive black hole.

[Hirota]

Happy Silly Fatwa Day!

[Frievolk]

Happy Silly Fatwa Day!

Friendly reminder that Khomeini should have been executed by Guillotine the moment he set foot on Paris.

[The Grims]

Happy Silly Fatwa Day!

Friendly reminder that Khomeini should have been executed by Guillotine the moment he set foot on Paris.

Why so humane ?

[Frievolk]

Friendly reminder that Khomeini should have been executed by Guillotine the moment he set foot on Paris.

Why so humane ?

Because the French constitutionally didn't do any other types of executions

[Kowani]

I suppose my decision to leave IDT last week has been as usual, revoked. IDT and NSG in general is a super massive black hole.

[Jolthig]

I suppose my decision to leave IDT last week has been as usual, revoked. IDT and NSG in general is a super massive black hole.

Too many good and funny people haha

[Sahansahiye Iran]

Eh.

Getting along is used very loosely here, tbh. More like the British largely kept them at peace.

Kept them at peace is a big phrase to use. More like kept them all starving and enslaved regardless of religion.

*shrugs* and they were at peace.

[Jolthig]

Kept them at peace is a big phrase to use. More like kept them all starving and enslaved regardless of religion.

*shrugs* and they were at peace.

Plus, at least there was freedom of speech. No one had to worry about getting attacked by angry mobs for saying something that contradicted mullah's views.

[Frievolk]

*shrugs* and they were at peace.

Plus, at least there was freedom of speech. No one had to worry about getting attacked by angry mobs for saying something that contradicted mullah's views.

Well I mean that might be a bit of a stretch. The Brits weren't known for tolerating dissent in their colonies.

[Jolthig]

Plus, at least there was freedom of speech. No one had to worry about getting attacked by angry mobs for saying something that contradicted mullah's views.

Well I mean that might be a bit of a stretch. The Brits weren't known for tolerating dissent in their colonies.

True but for those who weren't violent, they had freedom of speech to my knowledge

[Negarakita]

Well I mean that might be a bit of a stretch. The Brits weren't known for tolerating dissent in their colonies.

True but for those who weren't violent, they had freedom of speech to my knowledge

Not really no. Most of that stuff came from India just being so big that it was hard to be super effective.

[Byzconia]

How so, brother?

Almost every single liberal "democracy" experiment attempted by a former colony has resulted in kleptocratic regimes ruling over a people in abject poverty. Most of Africa comes to mind.

The Third World can never advance until they stop trying to copy-paste Europe and the US, and try build up a country based on their own culture and traditions.

Possibly. The issue is that the Europeans kept interfering in their colonies even after "independence" (along with the US and USSR), so it's unlikely any form of government would've really made a difference.

Likewise the Third World was so deprived of resources and infrastructure by decolonization that, again, political system likely wouldn't have made much of a difference.

[New haven america]

How so, brother?

Almost every single liberal "democracy" experiment attempted by a former colony has resulted in kleptocratic regimes ruling over a people in abject poverty.

Let's just forget about: Australia, New Zealand, Canada, several Hispanic countries like Uruguay or Chile, America (Sometimes), etc...

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Almost every single liberal "democracy" experiment attempted by a former colony has resulted in kleptocratic regimes ruling over a people in abject poverty. Most of Africa comes to mind.

The Third World can never advance until they stop trying to copy-paste Europe and the US, and try build up a country based on their own culture and traditions.

Possibly. The issue is that the Europeans kept interfering in their colonies even after "independence" (along with the US and USSR), so it's unlikely any form of government would've really made a difference.

Likewise the Third World was so deprived of resources and infrastructure by decolonization that, again, political system likely wouldn't have made much of a difference.

Actually the 3rd world has a lot of resources. It's just not accessed properly.

[Byzconia]

Possibly. The issue is that the Europeans kept interfering in their colonies even after "independence" (along with the US and USSR), so it's unlikely any form of government would've really made a difference.

Likewise the Third World was so deprived of resources and infrastructure by decolonization that, again, political system likely wouldn't have made much of a difference.

Actually the 3rd world has a lot of resources. It's just not accessed properly.

It's didn't say they didn't have resources, I said they were deprived of them. Their resources are largely controlled by the US, EU, and China through neocolonialist trade policies, making it virtually impossible for their governments to effectively manage them, corrupt or not (though, the massive amounts of corruption that do exist aren't exactly helping).

[Jolthig]

Actually the 3rd world has a lot of resources. It's just not accessed properly.

It's didn't say they didn't have resources, I said they were deprived of them. Their resources are largely controlled by the US, EU, and China through neocolonialist trade policies, making it virtually impossible for their governments to effectively manage them, corrupt or not (though, the massive amounts of corruption that do exist aren't exactly helping).

The phones we are using right now is probably made from African materials harvested by wage slaves.

[Byzconia]

It's didn't say they didn't have resources, I said they were deprived of them. Their resources are largely controlled by the US, EU, and China through neocolonialist trade policies, making it virtually impossible for their governments to effectively manage them, corrupt or not (though, the massive amounts of corruption that do exist aren't exactly helping).

The phones we are using right now is probably made from African materials harvested by wage slaves.

Yep. Western wealth was built on the resources of the Third World. That said, we should end this detour, as this is getting way off topic.

[New haven america]

Actually the 3rd world has a lot of resources. It's just not accessed properly.

It's didn't say they didn't have resources, I said they were deprived of them. Their resources are largely controlled by the US, EU, and China through neocolonialist trade policies, making it virtually impossible for their governments to effectively manage them, corrupt or not (though, the massive amounts of corruption that do exist aren't exactly helping).

Oh look, a massive overgeneralization appeared. TBH, a lot of the most resource rich countries in the world are located in Africa: the Congos, South Sudan and Uganda, Botswana, etc...

The main problem isn't foreign intervention/control (Though that is an issue), it's the environment and infrastructure. DRC Congo is one of the top 10 of most metal rich countries in the world, but they can barely any of it due to the Congo Rainforest (Which means no one can get to these massive metal and mineral deposits), meanwhile, Uganda and South Sudan lack the funding and roads/vehicles to extract their oil (Sudan removed all of their equipment when South Sudan became independent). There are some countries that are able to get their resources though: Botswana's doing very well with its diamonds and /scientific/regular tourism to the world's largest inland river delta, while Angola has oil it's able to tap into.