Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVI: Making Things Right Again

[Turbofolkia]

I mean, treating minorities like second class citizens was par for the course at the time. While Jews definitely had it much better than Christians, they were also given a fair degree of tolerance that wasn't really found anywhere else in Europe at the time. Christians still had their own courts and schools, were allowed to remain in Constantinople, churches were built on some occasions, and I think a portion of the bounty taken in war was given to the Orthodox treasury. It could also expect support from the Ottoman army if it was threatened by Rome.

Point is, the Ottoman Sultans weren't really interested in spreading Islam by the sword as it has been suggested. They could have cracked down on Christianity and Judaism much harder if they wanted to enforce Isla, but they Christians and Jews for money and loyalty. They imposed a quasi-Apartheid system more than anything.

The part about the religious courts is true, and they put money into the treasury of the Constantinople Patriarchate specifically - who they set above all the other Orthodox Patriarchates in the Empire. And of course the Ottomans opposed Rome, it was the religious centre of their two main rivals; Spain and Austria, it had nothing to do with any love they had for the Orthodox Christians. Furthermore, the Ottomans intentionally impoverished and crushed their Christian population via harsh religious taxation (the jizyia); and any abuses committed by Ottoman military officials or bureaucrats in the primarily Christian provinces - which was more common than you think - were never properly followed up on, and justice was never served, as a Christian could not testify or press charges against a Muslim. So the Pashas, Sanjaks, and their underlings took many liberties with the Christians under their jurisdicition, and don't even get me started on the Janissary program.

The Ottoman system was inherently corrupt and cruel - especially against the Orthodox Christians of the Balkans, Anatolia, and Armenia - in the final decade of their dominion, as they realized their power was waning, they straight up genocided millions of Greeks and Armenians living in their lands. If they could and would pull this off at the end of their Empire, with the rest of the World watching, how much worse do you think they were in earlier centuries when they were so much stronger and nobody could criticize them.

Despite being Balkan myself, I don’t resent the fact of Ottoman rule and its legacy, but I’m not suggesting that the OE wasn’t repressive at all. My point was just that there was no real interest in forcibly converting large swathes of the population to Islam and minorities had a fair degree of tolerance relative to other states at the time. I don’t think there is anything to suggest wholesale slaughter on the scale of the Armenian genocide perpetrated by the Ottomans in the 14th to 19th Centuries.

[Nea Byzantia]

The part about the religious courts is true, and they put money into the treasury of the Constantinople Patriarchate specifically - who they set above all the other Orthodox Patriarchates in the Empire. And of course the Ottomans opposed Rome, it was the religious centre of their two main rivals; Spain and Austria, it had nothing to do with any love they had for the Orthodox Christians. Furthermore, the Ottomans intentionally impoverished and crushed their Christian population via harsh religious taxation (the jizyia); and any abuses committed by Ottoman military officials or bureaucrats in the primarily Christian provinces - which was more common than you think - were never properly followed up on, and justice was never served, as a Christian could not testify or press charges against a Muslim. So the Pashas, Sanjaks, and their underlings took many liberties with the Christians under their jurisdicition, and don't even get me started on the Janissary program.

The Ottoman system was inherently corrupt and cruel - especially against the Orthodox Christians of the Balkans, Anatolia, and Armenia - in the final decade of their dominion, as they realized their power was waning, they straight up genocided millions of Greeks and Armenians living in their lands. If they could and would pull this off at the end of their Empire, with the rest of the World watching, how much worse do you think they were in earlier centuries when they were so much stronger and nobody could criticize them.

Despite being Balkan myself, I don’t resent the fact of Ottoman rule and its legacy, but I’m not suggesting that the OE wasn’t repressive at all. My point was just that there was no real interest in forcibly converting large swathes of the population to Islam and minorities had a fair degree of tolerance relative to other states at the time. I don’t think there is anything to suggest wholesale slaughter on the scale of the Armenian genocide perpetrated by the Ottomans in the 14th to 19th Centuries.

You're "Balkan" too? Which country? I'm Greek - so you can probably guess how I feel about the Ottomans, if my answer didn't give it away.

[Salus Maior]

At the request of a Byzantine prince, and only succeeded because the the city was basically defenseless and the Emperor decide to flee rather than fight.

Of course the actions of the Venetians and their mercenaries were truly disgusting and vile, it mainly a political thing. Not particularly religiously motivated.

It was also - on some perhaps very minor level - motivated by the serious beef between the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. Of course it was political, but you can say that about every war, including all the other Crusades, and the Venetians were very involved in those too.

It should also be noted that the Crusaders were excommunicated at the time.

[Nea Byzantia]

It was also - on some perhaps very minor level - motivated by the serious beef between the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. Of course it was political, but you can say that about every war, including all the other Crusades, and the Venetians were very involved in those too.

It should also be noted that the Crusaders were excommunicated at the time.

Valid point.

[Turbofolkia]

Despite being Balkan myself, I don’t resent the fact of Ottoman rule and its legacy, but I’m not suggesting that the OE wasn’t repressive at all. My point was just that there was no real interest in forcibly converting large swathes of the population to Islam and minorities had a fair degree of tolerance relative to other states at the time. I don’t think there is anything to suggest wholesale slaughter on the scale of the Armenian genocide perpetrated by the Ottomans in the 14th to 19th Centuries.

You're "Balkan"? Which country? I'm Greek - so you can probably guess how I feel about the Ottomans, if my answer didn't give it away.

Born in Bosnia to a Bosniak mother and Croatian father - came to Australia when I was two. I’m not bothered by nationalism at all but when people ask, I say my background is Croatian since I went to Croatian school on Saturdays, went to Croatian events growing up etc. Partly because there’s a large Croatian community here going back to before WW1 while the Bosniak community is small.

I just think that Ottoman rule is a fact for better or worse and there’s no use in blaming a country’s problems on an Empire that’s been dead for over a century. You even have some weirdos who want to purge Serbo-Croatian from Turkish loanwords. Not sure if they exist in the Greek community also.

[Nea Byzantia]

You're "Balkan"? Which country? I'm Greek - so you can probably guess how I feel about the Ottomans, if my answer didn't give it away.

Born in Bosnia to a Bosniak mother and Croatian father - came to Australia when I was two. I’m not bothered by nationalism at all but when people ask, I say my background is Croatian since I went to Croatian school on Saturdays, went to Croatian events growing up etc. Partly because there’s a large Croatian community here going back to before WW1 while the Bosniak community is small.

I just think that Ottoman rule is a fact for better or worse and there’s no use in blaming a country’s problems on an Empire that’s been dead for over a century. You even have some weirdos who want to purge Serbo-Croatian from Turkish loanwords. Not sure if they exist in the Greek community also.

They probably do...wouldn't surprise me.

I don't know as much as I should about the Bosniaks, if I'm being honest - alls I know is you guys have serious beef with the Serbs, and that you guys are Muslim and the Serbs are Orthodox (like us Greeks; we get along very well with the Serbs). Didn't you guys convert during the Ottoman era?

[Turbofolkia]

Born in Bosnia to a Bosniak mother and Croatian father - came to Australia when I was two. I’m not bothered by nationalism at all but when people ask, I say my background is Croatian since I went to Croatian school on Saturdays, went to Croatian events growing up etc. Partly because there’s a large Croatian community here going back to before WW1 while the Bosniak community is small.

I just think that Ottoman rule is a fact for better or worse and there’s no use in blaming a country’s problems on an Empire that’s been dead for over a century. You even have some weirdos who want to purge Serbo-Croatian from Turkish loanwords. Not sure if they exist in the Greek community also.

They probably do...wouldn't surprise me.

I don't know as much as I should about the Bosniaks, if I'm being honest - alls I know is you guys have serious beef with the Serbs, and that you guys are Muslim and the Serbs are Orthodox (like us Greeks; we get along very well with the Serbs). Didn't you guys convert during the Ottoman era?

Yeah, Bosniaks accepted Islam easily because prior to Ottoman rule they belonged to a sect that was neither Orthodox nor Catholic, known as the Bogomils. They were oppressed by both Rome and Constantinople, so Islam seemed like a logical choice when the Ottomans arrived. Becoming Catholic or Orthodox meant losing that identity and becoming assimilated as either Croats or Serbs.

The Bosniak identity was strengthened under Austrian rule, but many Muslims still chose to identify as either Serb or Croat. Funnily enough, there were both Muslim Chetniks and Muslim Ustaše in the 20th Century. Tito did his best to hold everyone together and forge a non-religious Yugoslav identity (which I very much believe in). Then the 90s came and the rest is history. These days Bosnia is a totally dysfunctional state split into two entities that still resent each other and want absolutely nothing to do with each other. It’s depressing, really.

[Nea Byzantia]

They probably do...wouldn't surprise me.

I don't know as much as I should about the Bosniaks, if I'm being honest - alls I know is you guys have serious beef with the Serbs, and that you guys are Muslim and the Serbs are Orthodox (like us Greeks; we get along very well with the Serbs). Didn't you guys convert during the Ottoman era?

Yeah, Bosniaks accepted Islam easily because prior to Ottoman rule they belonged to a sect that was neither Orthodox nor Catholic, known as the Bogomils. They were oppressed by both Rome and Constantinople, so Islam seemed like a logical choice when the Ottomans arrived. Becoming Catholic or Orthodox meant losing that identity and becoming assimilated as either Croats or Serbs.

The Bosniak identity was strengthened under Austrian rule, but many Muslims still chose to identify as either Serb or Croat. Funnily enough, there were both Muslim Chetniks and Muslim Ustaše in the 20th Century. Tito did his best to hold everyone together and forge a non-religious Yugoslav identity (which I very much believe in). Then the 90s came and the rest is history. These days Bosnia is a totally dysfunctional state split into two entities that still resent each other and want absolutely nothing to do with each other. It’s depressing, really.

Really? The Bosniaks were Bogomils? Interesting.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Sure, but I'm not arguing against the quran or the sunnah, they can say whatever on the topic. That doesn't change the fact that Muslim rulers throughout history have been happy to force people into the faith and one could make an, imo, very good argument the only reason it ever spread beyond Arabia in any significant form is because of that.

Well, not entirely. The Ottomans had good reason to discourage conversion. Conversion would have resulted in a catastrophic loss of money via taxation, so the Ottomans really had no economic or financial gain in converting most people to Islam. Retaining them as Christian and Jews but extorting them through taxes and trade monopolies was much better for the economy than forced conversion.

That's no where near a good reason to keep people from converting to the Truth.

The Ottomans were far more religiously tolerant than most of their Christian European contemporaries. Jews fleeing the Spanish Inquisition were encouraged to resettle in the Ottoman Empire. I think the Sultan at the time event sent his fleet to Spain to evacuate the Jews. Now I'm not saying this was an act of pure altruism - the Ottomans recognised Jewish business sense, but they wouldn't be fleeing from a country where the policy was "convert or die" to another country if that country also had the same policy of "convert or die".

Mostly agree to this.

the Ottomans intentionally impoverished and crushed their Christian population via harsh religious taxation (the jizyia)

Jizyah isn't a harsh tax. It depends on how you use it.

You're "Balkan"? Which country? I'm Greek - so you can probably guess how I feel about the Ottomans, if my answer didn't give it away.

Born in Bosnia to a Bosniak mother and Croatian father - came to Australia when I was two. I’m not bothered by nationalism at all but when people ask, I say my background is Croatian since I went to Croatian school on Saturdays, went to Croatian events growing up etc. Partly because there’s a large Croatian community here going back to before WW1 while the Bosniak community is small.

Can I ask something?

Are you Muslim?

[Nea Byzantia]

the Ottomans intentionally impoverished and crushed their Christian population via harsh religious taxation (the jizyia)

Jizyah isn't a harsh tax. It depends on how you use it.

You're Muslim, though, so of course its "not harsh" to you. Its not your people getting milked and oppressed by the State to encourage their conversion.

[Cappuccina]

Jizyah isn't a harsh tax. It depends on how you use it.

You're Muslim, though, so of course its "not harsh" to you. Its not your people getting milked and oppressed by the State to encourage their conversion.

That's not what jizyah is for. The tax also only includes able bodied dhimmi men, also those who can't afford to pay it are exempt as well as the elderly, women, children, and the disabled/ill. Jizyah is more or less a reflection of zakat, an alm or tax required of Muslims.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Jizyah isn't a harsh tax. It depends on how you use it.

You're Muslim, though, so of course its "not harsh" to you. Its not your people getting milked and oppressed by the State to encourage their conversion.

Hence why I said "it depends on how you use it".

[Jolthig]

Jizyah isn't a harsh tax. It depends on how you use it.

You're Muslim, though, so of course its "not harsh" to you. Its not your people getting milked and oppressed by the State to encourage their conversion.

No, it's not because he's Muslim, but because Jizya isn't even supposed to be harsh in the first place. If anything Zakat is more "harsh" to Muslims than Jizya is.

[Kowani]

Well, not entirely. The Ottomans had good reason to discourage conversion. Conversion would have resulted in a catastrophic loss of money via taxation, so the Ottomans really had no economic or financial gain in converting most people to Islam. Retaining them as Christian and Jews but extorting them through taxes and trade monopolies was much better for the economy than forced conversion.

That's no where near a good reason to keep people from converting to the Truth.

Preventing the economy from collapsing tends to be a pretty good reason.

[Turbofolkia]

Born in Bosnia to a Bosniak mother and Croatian father - came to Australia when I was two. I’m not bothered by nationalism at all but when people ask, I say my background is Croatian since I went to Croatian school on Saturdays, went to Croatian events growing up etc. Partly because there’s a large Croatian community here going back to before WW1 while the Bosniak community is small.

Can I ask something?

Are you Muslim?

No, I'm not.

[Salus Maior]

You're Muslim, though, so of course its "not harsh" to you. Its not your people getting milked and oppressed by the State to encourage their conversion.

Hence why I said "it depends on how you use it".

How about not at all.

[Jolthig]

Hence why I said "it depends on how you use it".

How about not at all.

Why not?

[Salus Maior]

How about not at all.

Why not?

Are you seriously asking me if I approve of or otherwise permit taxes that would single out my people as second class citizens?

Between you and Amin, you're not making a very good show for Muslims in this thread.

[Jolthig]

Why not?

Are you seriously asking me if I approve of or otherwise permit taxes that would single out my people as second class citizens?

Between you and Amin, you're not making a very good show for Muslims in this thread.

So that this hypothetical state protects you and let's you practice your faith?

I'm saying so because you said it doesn't matter how Jizya is enforced.

[United Muscovite Nations]

It was also - on some perhaps very minor level - motivated by the serious beef between the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. Of course it was political, but you can say that about every war, including all the other Crusades, and the Venetians were very involved in those too.

It should also be noted that the Crusaders were excommunicated at the time.

They were quickly received back when the Pope realized they were successful.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Are you seriously asking me if I approve of or otherwise permit taxes that would single out my people as second class citizens?

Between you and Amin, you're not making a very good show for Muslims in this thread.

So that this hypothetical state protects you and let's you practice your faith?

I'm saying so because you said it doesn't matter how Jizya is enforced.

It wouldn't be necessary to enforce it if the hypothetical state protected us and let us practice our faith.

[Jolthig]

So that this hypothetical state protects you and let's you practice your faith?

I'm saying so because you said it doesn't matter how Jizya is enforced.

It wouldn't be necessary to enforce it if the hypothetical state protected us and let us practice our faith.

That's what the state would do is let you practice your faith.

[United Muscovite Nations]

It wouldn't be necessary to enforce it if the hypothetical state protected us and let us practice our faith.

That's what the state would do is let you practice your faith.

Excellent, then it won't force me to pay the Jizya.

[Salus Maior]

Are you seriously asking me if I approve of or otherwise permit taxes that would single out my people as second class citizens?

Between you and Amin, you're not making a very good show for Muslims in this thread.

So that this hypothetical state protects you and let's you practice your faith?

I'm saying so because you said it doesn't matter how Jizya is enforced.

My position is that no Islamic state should exist, period.

[Jolthig]

That's what the state would do is let you practice your faith.

Excellent, then it won't force me to pay the Jizya.

How exactly does Jizya force you to renounce your faith?