Why has the mid-east become a backwater.

[Lemon law]

Some 4000 to five thousand years ago, the Mid-east was the cutting edge of Western civilization. The garden of Eden was rumored to be in Iraq, and Egypt and Babylonia were the kick as military powers of the day. The libraries of Alexandria held the the cutting edge human knowledge of the day. As mankind begin slowly transitioning away from the stone age to the bronze age to the iron age in that time frame.

Yet long before the birth of Christ, the cutting edge of human Western civilization was moving to the North of the Mediterranean. As Greece grew new governmental models and military formations. Rome thrived while Cartridge fell. And soon Rome was the moving North and South East and West to become undisputed master of the known Western world while Egypt and the entire mid-east became backwaters.

In my mind, and somewhat the thesis of this thread, the answer is simple. Water water and water coming in the form of rainfall. And at that time, don't call it man made climate change, call it simply climate change. A better climate can support a greater population even if the technology is inferior. And as the mid-east transitioned away from an Agricultural to a herding technology, in Europe, we talk about how many cows an acre of land can support, and in the mid-east the measure is how many acres does it take to support one cow.

Which is why the post fall of Rome Europe steeped in ignorance was able to over run the rising Muslim nations during the crusades. Only to have the Europeans become amazed at how much more advanced in civilization and technology that the Muslim civilization was. And also found out that the Arabs had a monopoly on far eastern trade routes and good Europe coveted. Which in turn inspired Europe to develop the long range sailing ship and the new sciences that advanced human civilization forward.
And when Columbus got this bright idea of sailing directly West to find China, he ended up being a total scientific fool, by figuring China was only 3000 miles away. When it was in fact more than 10,000 miles away. And instead discovered a whole American landmass in between. To some extend we can say Columbus was not the first, the Egyptians and Viking beat him to it, but the Egyptians lacked the technology of the sailing ship to exploit it.

What followed was a 500 year era of colonialism now totally ending now, technology is held in common by the larger world, and now we discover that the Muslim world has the bulk of that other fluid, namely the bulk of the world's oil.

What a world, what a world.

 

[Infohawk]

Wow there is so much wrong with your post. What an incoherent mess.

At times you're suggesting the middle-east was part of the Western world. It is not. Cartridge? Do you mean Carthage? That's more than a typo and suggests you have no idea what you're talking about.

Most people seem to agree oil is running out. And the Middle-East has had oil for decades now and still hasn't gotten out of its mess.

The middle-east became a backwater because a tribal religion (Islam) became dominant and Islamic society didn't evolve (unlike Christian and Jewish culture.)

"To some extend we can say Columbus was not the first, the Egyptians and Viking beat him to it, but the Egyptians lacked the technology of the sailing ship to exploit it. " This is the stupidest thing I've read in a long time. The Vikings were Europeans. WTF are you talking about the Egyptians for? It's like saying Indians were the first to land on the moon but they didn't have the space craft to do it. Are you drunk?

Europe has dominated because it was the first society to expand individual freedoms. Some people used it to search for riches (like Columbus) and others used it to research science and technology.

Finally, Egypt hasn't really accomplished much yet. Even if they fully transition to democracy they are 200 years behind the West.

 

[Bateluer]

To some extend we can say Columbus was not the first, the Egyptians and Viking beat him to it, but the Egyptians lacked the technology of the sailing ship to exploit it.

Please explain how the Egyptians discovered the American continents. Without using Ancient Alien Theory or Atlantis.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

How about "there's nothing there?"

The climate sucks. The soil sucks. The lack of rain sucks. It sucks.

 

[CanOWorms]

Wow there is so much wrong with your post. What an incoherent mess.

At times you're suggesting the middle-east was part of the Western world. It is not. Cartridge? Do you mean Carthage? That's more than a typo and suggests you have no idea what you're talking about.

Most people seem to agree oil is running out. And the Middle-East has had oil for decades now and still hasn't gotten out of its mess.

The middle-east became a backwater because a tribal religion (Islam) became dominant and Islamic society didn't evolve (unlike Christian and Jewish culture.)

"To some extend we can say Columbus was not the first, the Egyptians and Viking beat him to it, but the Egyptians lacked the technology of the sailing ship to exploit it. " This is the stupidest thing I've read in a long time. The Vikings were Europeans. WTF are you talking about the Egyptians for? It's like saying Indians were the first to land on the moon but they didn't have the space craft to do it. Are you drunk?

Europe has dominated because it was the first society to expand individual freedoms. Some people used it to search for riches (like Columbus) and others used it to research science and technology.

Finally, Egypt hasn't really accomplished much yet. Even if they fully transition to democracy they are 200 years behind the West.

lol

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Europe has dominated because it was the first society to expand individual freedoms. Some people used it to search for riches (like Columbus) and others used it to research science and technology.

It had the resources to take the wealth of other nations. That's what they did with it unless you are suggesting the Conquistadors were spreading freedom and democracy.

 

[Infohawk]

It had the resources to take the wealth of other nations. That's what they did with it unless you are suggesting the Conquistadors were spreading freedom and democracy.

Are you going the CanOWorms route and acting like Europe is only built on colonialism? That ignores the facts that most production was done in Europe and the colonies were mostly a source of luxuries. A country like Germany was doing fine without significant colonies.

And of course the Conquistadors were not spreading freedom and democracy. And only white male property owners had the right to vote in early America. And yet in Europe and America individuals had more freedom than elsewhere and gave it to others faster than others did.

 

[CanOWorms]

Are you going the CanOWorms route and acting like Europe is only built on colonialism? That ignores the facts that most production was done in Europe and the colonies were mostly a source of luxuries. A country like Germany was doing fine without significant colonies.

And of course the Conquistadors were not spreading freedom and democracy. And only white male property owners had the right to vote in early America. And yet in Europe and America individuals had more freedom than elsewhere and gave it to others faster than others did.

Where did you learn this revisionist history? Were you taught this at a white supremacist compound in Idaho?

 

[Infohawk]

Where did you learn this revisionist history? Were you taught this at a white supremacist compound in Idaho?

Wow right to the trolling. Sorry but I'm ignoring you in this thread.

 

[sandorski]

Recently watched something that stated that around 1000AD a Muslim Imam made the declaration that Education/Math/Science was evil. It became mainstream and what was a very advanced civilization, declined and lost its' edge.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Are you going the CanOWorms route and acting like Europe is only built on colonialism? That ignores the facts that most production was done in Europe and the colonies were mostly a source of luxuries. A country like Germany was doing fine without significant colonies.

And of course the Conquistadors were not spreading freedom and democracy. And only white male property owners had the right to vote in early America. And yet in Europe and America individuals had more freedom than elsewhere and gave it to others faster than others did.

You mentioned "freedom" and Columbus. Columbus and those who followed brought wealth to Europe and death to millions in the Americas. It is what it is. While it may have risen technologically above the middle east, there was a price to pay for it. Consider how many of themselves they killed with their wars.

 

[CanOWorms]

Wow right to the trolling. Sorry but I'm ignoring you in this thread.

Making up history is trolling.

First society to expand individual freedoms? Are you for real? They oppressed and enslaved billions of people for centuries.

Most production was done in Europe? Why don't you ask yourself why? Maybe it's because they enslaved everyone else and either deindustrialized them or prevented their industrialization. Before colonialism, Europe had a low GDP.

Germany also had many colonies. They also weren't even a big player until much later, too, so your citing of them is interesting.

They gave freedom faster than others did? No. They lost their slaves faster than others did. You seem to suggest that they voluntarily relinquished their colonies.

 

[charrison]

lack of democracy and freedom.

 

[Infohawk]

You mentioned "freedom" and Columbus. Columbus and those who followed brought wealth to Europe and death to millions in the Americas. It is what it is.

Please try to read more closely. Yes I mentioned "freedom" and Columbus. The point was that Columbus discovered America as opposed to the Egyptians because he had the freedom to do so. I'm not saying he was a great guy but that he wasn't on the bottom of some Indian caste system where he wasn't allowed to pursue his own interests.

While it may have risen technologically above the middle east, there was a price to pay for it. Consider how many of themselves they killed with their wars.

Are you a Luddite now? Technology nets positive for societies. And it's not like the middle-east did away with wars because of they were backwards.

Sometimes I get the feeling you just like to disagree with me for the sake of it. Like how several times you've accused me of being pro-Iraq war when I was not. Here you are trying to act like I'm saying that Columbus spread democracy and cheer when I never said that.

 

[Infohawk]

...

What part of ignoring don't you understand? (Next thread if you want to have a serious conversation you should try not to play the race card so soon.)

 

[CanOWorms]

What part of ignoring don't you understand? (Next thread if you want to have a serious conversation you should try not to play the race card so soon.)

I'll respond to your lies regardless of your cowardice. I don't want someone else to stumble upon your revisionist history and think that it's the truth.

 

[XZeroII]

Some 4000 to five thousand years ago, the Mid-east was the cutting edge of Western civilization.

What exactly do you think "Western civilization" is? I'm just stumped at how someone could put that sentence together.

 

[Infohawk]

Some 4000 to five thousand years ago, the Mid-east was the cutting edge of Western civilization.

What exactly do you think "Western civilization" is? I'm just stumped at how someone could put that sentence together.

Yup. That and "Cartridge" and the Egyptians discovering the Americas except for the fact they didn't have the sailing ships to do it makes me think Lemon Law was high when he wrote this.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Please try to read more closely. Yes I mentioned "freedom" and Columbus. The point was that Columbus discovered America as opposed to the Egyptians because he had the freedom to do so. I'm not saying he was a great guy but that he wasn't on the bottom of some Indian caste system where he wasn't allowed to pursue his own interests.


Are you a Luddite now? Technology nets positive for societies. And it's not like the middle-east did away with wars because of they were backwards.

Sometimes I get the feeling you just like to disagree with me for the sake of it. Like how several times you've accused me of being pro-Iraq war when I was not. Here you are trying to act like I'm saying that Columbus spread democracy and cheer when I never said that.

Stop being so sensitive. I'm pointing out certain negatives associated with Europe's rise. I'm largely responding to this-

Europe has dominated because it was the first society to expand individual freedoms. Some people used it to search for riches (like Columbus)

Columbus was an agent of a monarchy. His "individual freedom" was that he got a commission, which BTW was how things were done through the ages.

As far as being a Luddite, I have no intention of living in a cave, thanks. When looking at a comparison between to regions the good and the bad comes in. Endless wars and the ability to wage them was a result of how technology was used. It increased the standard of living, but tended to wreck things around them.

Everything has positives and negatives.

 

[Lemon law]

Why is this forum threatened by ideas and why should this forum shout down ideas on the claim of revisionist history.

Here we are all in the 21'st century, and in my lifetime we are seeing the whole world change. When I was a young boy, the entire world was a far smaller place than it is now, with entire regions of the globe untouched with modern ideas, and now human technology has spread universally all over the globe.

Why should we champion the idea that a past era of European colonialism was per say good or bad. It happened, its shaped our current world, and now our world is now rapidly becoming one world. What will the 22'nd and 23'rd century look like, I may not live to see it, but lots of forces will shape it.

 

[CanOWorms]

Why should we champion the idea that a past era of European colonialism was per say good or bad. It happened, its shaped our current world, and now our world is now rapidly becoming one world. What will the 22'nd and 23'rd century look like, I may not live to see it, but lots of forces will shape it.

Why should we champion the idea that a past era of the Holocaust was per say good or bad. It happened, its shaped our current world, and now our world is now rapidly becoming one world. What will the 22'nd and 23'rd century look like, I may not live to see it, but lots of forces will shape it.

 

[Infohawk]

Stop being so sensitive. I'm pointing out certain negatives associated with Europe's rise. I'm largely responding to this-



Columbus was an agent of a monarchy. His "individual freedom" was that he got a commission, which BTW was how things were done through the ages.

As far as being a Luddite, I have no intention of living in a cave, thanks. When looking at a comparison between to regions the good and the bad comes in. Endless wars and the ability to wage them was a result of how technology was used. It increased the standard of living, but tended to wreck things around them.

Everything has positives and negatives.

I'm not really being sensitive it's just tiring hearing you go on about irrelevant things. Of course everything has its positives and negatives. What we're talking about hear is why the middle-east has been relatively backwards.

Columbus was the one who went to the monarchy seeking funding for the trips. It was a very entrepreneurial endevour and he became wealthy.

 

[Lemon law]

The other thing to mention is that I somewhat limited my post to "Western civilization"
when many things were co-happening in the far east, mainly in China. And "Chinese civilization" may largely predate the "Western Civilization." Even though China has always been the most populist nation on Earth. But oddly, at exactly the same time that Europe made their voyages of exploration, China was turning only inward, and for 500 years, even after Mao, China was still turning only inward. But in the last 30 years China is turning outward in a big way.

Face the facts girls and boys, the world is a changing, those that take advantage of the changes can benefit, those that try to resist change will get steamrolled by inevitable changes.

 

[spidey07]

The problem is Islam, always has been, always will. Stop denying the obvious.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I'm not really being sensitive it's just tiring hearing you go on about irrelevant things. Of course everything has its positives and negatives. What we're talking about hear is why the middle-east has been relatively backwards.

Columbus was the one who went to the monarchy seeking funding for the trips. It was a very entrepreneurial endevour and he became wealthy.

There's a lot of reasons that the ME is backwards, and a significant part of that was because that's precisely how we want it. After the Ottoman Empire, England created the mess known as Iraq, and did so with the intention of keeping it primitive. Oil cause us to overthrow a democratically elected leader.

Between the greed of the leaders and our backing their suppression of freedom there wasn't a lot of the latter to be had. Then toss in Islam and that most of what they have is oil (which they don't benefit from) and sand, it's not rocket science to figure out what's what. Yes it involves Europe. Yes it involves the tensions between the US and the then USSR. Yes it involves oil and religion. Yes it involves no real opportunity because of tyranny.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but the ME is what it is in large part because that's how we want it. How do you think Egypt is in it's current stage? We made the worlds richest man out of a dictator because it was expedient to us. Same with the Shah, Saddam, and a whole lot of others. Then we have the opportunists who move into the power vacuum as happened in Iran.

People in the ME aren't up to our standards because they never had a chance.