The Western Backlash Against Islam

Discussion of current events
User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1164
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Learn about Islam from Raffles

Post by cassowary » Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:30 am

The west is slowly finding out about Islam what we knew long ago. It is an intolerant, hate filled religion that inspires violence.

Recently, I found out that Singapore's founder, Sir Stamford Raffles knew this in the early 1800s! I came across the work of a National University of Singapore (NUS)'s academic, Syed Muhammad Khairudin Aljunied.

Aljunied is leading the charge promoting a revisionist history of much praised Raffles after discovering Raffle's criticism of Islam. It is refreshing to read something from an era when the west permitted free speech which is being strangled by the Left.

Here are Aljunied's work:

Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles’Discourse on the Malay World: A Revisionist Perspective

From Noble Muslims to Saracen Enemies: Thomas Stamford Raffles’ Discourse on Islam in the Malay World

Let me sum up what Raffles said, according to Aljunied.

Aljunied claimed that in his research, Raffles had written letters giving an unflattering view of Islam. Raffles had called Islam a "robber religion," because it allegedly encouraged piracy on merchant shipping disguised as jihad.

Raffles also allegedly said that the Malays declined after they converted to Islam from Hinduism/Buddhism. That's because during the pre-Islam period, the Javanese built great monuments which are still here today - such as Borobodor, a world heritage site, when they were still Hindus/Buddhists.

After conversion, the Malays did nothing comparable. Raffles also wrote that while the Buddhists/Hindus went about peacefully in their commerce and industry, the Muslims were always fighting. If they did not fight each other, they were fighting infidels.

Note that the Thomas Jefferson met the Muslim ambassador from Tripoli about the piracy of merchant shipping along the Barbary Coast. The Ambassador juistified the piracy as holy war against the infidel. So Raffles' alleged claim rings true.

Raffles, according to Aljunied, wanted to revive the Hindu/Buddhist heritage in the Malay world because it would serve British commercial interests better. I suppose Raffles thought that constant piracy was bad for the business of the East India Company, his employer.

I have always argued that Islam inhibits progress in this forum. What do tourist see in Egypt? The pyramids and other monuments built in pre-Islamic times. So, if Aljunied got his research correct, my respect for Raffles is now even higher.

He founded Singapore as a free port with a lazziez fiare economy. Under the East India Company, government spending was very low and so were taxes. Admittedly, it was too low. While the size of the government sector has grown, Singapore is still the closest to the laziez faire system, much admired in the 19th century.

neverfail
Posts: 1135
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: The Western Backlash Against Islam

Post by neverfail » Sun Mar 19, 2017 6:14 pm

Well, the Muslims are historically not the only ones into the pretense of waging "holy war" as a hypocrite's smoke screen for the greed and lust of piratical theft and mayhem.

For at least a century after the reformation the emerging protestant mercantile powers of north-western Europe did exactly the same thing to ships and on-shore settlements of Catholic Europe. Holy war against Papism.

Did you know that as it emerged and grew in the early 17th century the Amsterdam based Dutch East Indies company aggressively carved out their empire of commerce and trade by (often with bloodshed) taking over the trading posts in maritime Asia and the sea routes back to Europe originally controlled and by the Portuguese ? Whilst the motives of the principals of the corporation may have been to have maximized shareholders' profits, I am sure that the the (Calvinist) armed sailors who did the fighting were motivated to ferocity by the sense that they were doing God's work by bringing low a rival Catholic commercial power.

Whilst Portugal was the Catholic enemy power as far as the Dutch were concerned, by contrast Portugal was a traditional ALLY of England: so catholic or not the English were content to leave to leave Portuguese vessels and townships alone. It was a different matter with Spain. Whenever war broke out English monarchs had no reservations about letting their privateers loose on the Spanish main. I have no doubt that like the Calvinist Dutch the protestant English had a similar holy war attitude towards the Spanish.

Francis Drake in particular, who almost lost his life along with his parents to Queen Mary Tudor's blood stained inquisition against all known protestants in her realm, had a particular vendetta to wage against anything Catholic.

Just thought that you would like to know that Christians can do it too, Cass. :mrgreen:

(Yes, you need that insight like you need a hole in the head, I am sure!) :)

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 757
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: The Western Backlash Against Islam

Post by Milo » Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:37 pm

What I an trying to chronicle here is the "Backlash Against Islam" not a historical accounting of it.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1164
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: The Western Backlash Against Islam

Post by cassowary » Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:28 pm

Milo wrote:
Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:37 pm
What I an trying to chronicle here is the "Backlash Against Islam" not a historical accounting of it.
I see. But it is connected. I was trying to point out the difference between western reaction to Islamic terror in the 19th century to its current feeble response.

Raffles spelt it out correctly while modern day westerners use weasel words to describe Islam.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1164
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: The Western Backlash Against Islam

Post by cassowary » Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:24 pm

neverfail wrote:
Sun Mar 19, 2017 6:14 pm
Well, the Muslims are historically not the only ones into the pretense of waging "holy war" as a hypocrite's smoke screen for the greed and lust of piratical theft and mayhem.

For at least a century after the reformation the emerging protestant mercantile powers of north-western Europe did exactly the same thing to ships and on-shore settlements of Catholic Europe. Holy war against Papism.

Did you know that as it emerged and grew in the early 17th century the Amsterdam based Dutch East Indies company aggressively carved out their empire of commerce and trade by (often with bloodshed) taking over the trading posts in maritime Asia and the sea routes back to Europe originally controlled and by the Portuguese ? Whilst the motives of the principals of the corporation may have been to have maximized shareholders' profits, I am sure that the the (Calvinist) armed sailors who did the fighting were motivated to ferocity by the sense that they were doing God's work by bringing low a rival Catholic commercial power.

Whilst Portugal was the Catholic enemy power as far as the Dutch were concerned, by contrast Portugal was a traditional ALLY of England: so catholic or not the English were content to leave to leave Portuguese vessels and townships alone. It was a different matter with Spain. Whenever war broke out English monarchs had no reservations about letting their privateers loose on the Spanish main. I have no doubt that like the Calvinist Dutch the protestant English had a similar holy war attitude towards the Spanish.

Francis Drake in particular, who almost lost his life along with his parents to Queen Mary Tudor's blood stained inquisition against all known protestants in her realm, had a particular vendetta to wage against anything Catholic.

Just thought that you would like to know that Christians can do it too, Cass. :mrgreen:

(Yes, you need that insight like you need a hole in the head, I am sure!) :)
I was not aware that Queen Elizabeth I waged a crusade against Catholics. Did she declare that as the head of the Anglican Church?

I think we need to make a distinction between a faith where its Founder himself plundered other faiths in the name of holy war with another faith where its Founder did not set such a personal example, even though His followers many centuries later claimed to be plundering others in the Founder's name.

The latter is easy to refute but the former is difficult to refute. That is why they are still waging jihad in the present day

But did it happen? Did Queen Elizabeth I called for holy war against Catholics? Or did she simply used already present hatred for Catholics (for past persecution against Protestants) as added fuel to an already sufficient motivation - greed.

neverfail
Posts: 1135
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: The Western Backlash Against Islam

Post by neverfail » Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:28 am

Milo wrote:
Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:37 pm
What I an trying to chronicle here is the "Backlash Against Islam" not a historical accounting of it.
Well, it just goes to show that what you want and what you get are not always the same. :mrgreen:

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 757
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: The Western Backlash Against Islam

Post by Milo » Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:05 pm

cassowary wrote:
Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:24 pm
neverfail wrote:
Sun Mar 19, 2017 6:14 pm
Well, the Muslims are historically not the only ones into the pretense of waging "holy war" as a hypocrite's smoke screen for the greed and lust of piratical theft and mayhem.

For at least a century after the reformation the emerging protestant mercantile powers of north-western Europe did exactly the same thing to ships and on-shore settlements of Catholic Europe. Holy war against Papism.

Did you know that as it emerged and grew in the early 17th century the Amsterdam based Dutch East Indies company aggressively carved out their empire of commerce and trade by (often with bloodshed) taking over the trading posts in maritime Asia and the sea routes back to Europe originally controlled and by the Portuguese ? Whilst the motives of the principals of the corporation may have been to have maximized shareholders' profits, I am sure that the the (Calvinist) armed sailors who did the fighting were motivated to ferocity by the sense that they were doing God's work by bringing low a rival Catholic commercial power.

Whilst Portugal was the Catholic enemy power as far as the Dutch were concerned, by contrast Portugal was a traditional ALLY of England: so catholic or not the English were content to leave to leave Portuguese vessels and townships alone. It was a different matter with Spain. Whenever war broke out English monarchs had no reservations about letting their privateers loose on the Spanish main. I have no doubt that like the Calvinist Dutch the protestant English had a similar holy war attitude towards the Spanish.

Francis Drake in particular, who almost lost his life along with his parents to Queen Mary Tudor's blood stained inquisition against all known protestants in her realm, had a particular vendetta to wage against anything Catholic.

Just thought that you would like to know that Christians can do it too, Cass. :mrgreen:

(Yes, you need that insight like you need a hole in the head, I am sure!) :)
I was not aware that Queen Elizabeth I waged a crusade against Catholics. Did she declare that as the head of the Anglican Church?

I think we need to make a distinction between a faith where its Founder himself plundered other faiths in the name of holy war with another faith where its Founder did not set such a personal example, even though His followers many centuries later claimed to be plundering others in the Founder's name.

The latter is easy to refute but the former is difficult to refute. That is why they are still waging jihad in the present day

But did it happen? Did Queen Elizabeth I called for holy war against Catholics? Or did she simply used already present hatred for Catholics (for past persecution against Protestants) as added fuel to an already sufficient motivation - greed.
I think the papacy of olden times is often conflated with the neutered one of today. In times past the Pope often had a large amount of land under his direct, political control, commanded armies on a scale equivalent to many other European states and was a hostage to political expediency, likely more often than not.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_States#Papal_army

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_of_Rome_(1527)

Certainly RCs have suffered persecution in the UK but the political context is important.

Anti-Catholicism among many of the English was grounded in the fear that the pope sought to reimpose not just religio-spiritual authority over England but also secular power in alliance with arch-enemy France or Spain. In 1570, Pope Pius V sought to depose Queen Elizabeth with the papal bull Regnans in Excelsis, which declared her a heretic and purported to dissolve the duty of all Elizabeth's subjects of their allegiance to her. This rendered Elizabeth's subjects who persisted in their allegiance to the Catholic Church politically suspect, and made the position of her Catholic subjects largely untenable if they tried to maintain both allegiances at once. The Recusancy Acts, making it a legal obligation to worship in the Anglican faith, date from Elizabeth's reign. Later, assassination plots in which Catholics were prime movers fueled anti-Catholicism in England.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ca ... ed_Kingdom

I rather have been an RC in England at that time than a Protestant in an RC dominated country!

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 1194
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: The Western Backlash Against Islam

Post by Doc » Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:42 pm

Can we call Ca-nada a nation of "hate" yet?

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-canad ... SKBN16R0SK
Exclusive: Almost half of Canadians want illegal border crossers deported - Reuters poll

The increasing flow of hundreds of asylum-seekers of African and Middle Eastern origin from the United States in recent months is becoming a contentious issue in Canada.
Hey AZ Maybe you can get Trump to immigrate to Canada in 2024 after he serves his time here as POTUS. :lol:
The classes and the races to weak to master the new conditions of life must give way {..} They must perish in the revolutionary holocaust --Karl Marx

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1164
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: The Western Backlash Against Islam

Post by cassowary » Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:32 pm

Doc wrote:
Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:42 pm
Can we call Ca-nada a nation of "hate" yet?

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-canad ... SKBN16R0SK
Exclusive: Almost half of Canadians want illegal border crossers deported - Reuters poll

The increasing flow of hundreds of asylum-seekers of African and Middle Eastern origin from the United States in recent months is becoming a contentious issue in Canada.
Hey AZ Maybe you can get Trump to immigrate to Canada in 2024 after he serves his time here as POTUS. :lol:
Canada needs to build a wall.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1164
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: The Western Backlash Against Islam

Post by cassowary » Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:35 pm

Milo wrote:
Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:05 pm
cassowary wrote:
Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:24 pm
neverfail wrote:
Sun Mar 19, 2017 6:14 pm
Well, the Muslims are historically not the only ones into the pretense of waging "holy war" as a hypocrite's smoke screen for the greed and lust of piratical theft and mayhem.

For at least a century after the reformation the emerging protestant mercantile powers of north-western Europe did exactly the same thing to ships and on-shore settlements of Catholic Europe. Holy war against Papism.

Did you know that as it emerged and grew in the early 17th century the Amsterdam based Dutch East Indies company aggressively carved out their empire of commerce and trade by (often with bloodshed) taking over the trading posts in maritime Asia and the sea routes back to Europe originally controlled and by the Portuguese ? Whilst the motives of the principals of the corporation may have been to have maximized shareholders' profits, I am sure that the the (Calvinist) armed sailors who did the fighting were motivated to ferocity by the sense that they were doing God's work by bringing low a rival Catholic commercial power.

Whilst Portugal was the Catholic enemy power as far as the Dutch were concerned, by contrast Portugal was a traditional ALLY of England: so catholic or not the English were content to leave to leave Portuguese vessels and townships alone. It was a different matter with Spain. Whenever war broke out English monarchs had no reservations about letting their privateers loose on the Spanish main. I have no doubt that like the Calvinist Dutch the protestant English had a similar holy war attitude towards the Spanish.

Francis Drake in particular, who almost lost his life along with his parents to Queen Mary Tudor's blood stained inquisition against all known protestants in her realm, had a particular vendetta to wage against anything Catholic.

Just thought that you would like to know that Christians can do it too, Cass. :mrgreen:

(Yes, you need that insight like you need a hole in the head, I am sure!) :)
I was not aware that Queen Elizabeth I waged a crusade against Catholics. Did she declare that as the head of the Anglican Church?

I think we need to make a distinction between a faith where its Founder himself plundered other faiths in the name of holy war with another faith where its Founder did not set such a personal example, even though His followers many centuries later claimed to be plundering others in the Founder's name.

The latter is easy to refute but the former is difficult to refute. That is why they are still waging jihad in the present day

But did it happen? Did Queen Elizabeth I called for holy war against Catholics? Or did she simply used already present hatred for Catholics (for past persecution against Protestants) as added fuel to an already sufficient motivation - greed.
I think the papacy of olden times is often conflated with the neutered one of today. In times past the Pope often had a large amount of land under his direct, political control, commanded armies on a scale equivalent to many other European states and was a hostage to political expediency, likely more often than not.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_States#Papal_army

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_of_Rome_(1527)

Certainly RCs have suffered persecution in the UK but the political context is important.

Anti-Catholicism among many of the English was grounded in the fear that the pope sought to reimpose not just religio-spiritual authority over England but also secular power in alliance with arch-enemy France or Spain. In 1570, Pope Pius V sought to depose Queen Elizabeth with the papal bull Regnans in Excelsis, which declared her a heretic and purported to dissolve the duty of all Elizabeth's subjects of their allegiance to her. This rendered Elizabeth's subjects who persisted in their allegiance to the Catholic Church politically suspect, and made the position of her Catholic subjects largely untenable if they tried to maintain both allegiances at once. The Recusancy Acts, making it a legal obligation to worship in the Anglican faith, date from Elizabeth's reign. Later, assassination plots in which Catholics were prime movers fueled anti-Catholicism in England.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ca ... ed_Kingdom

I rather have been an RC in England at that time than a Protestant in an RC dominated country!
Thanks for the information. That was interesting. Up to this day, the heir to the English throne cannot marry a Catholic.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests