Al-Andalus

>yes goy, you should take in those peaceful Muslim migrants! Remember Al-Andalus! They wuz scientists n sheeeeeeit!

Totally not used for multicultural propaganda purposes

It's the truth though. Muslims aren't all savages you know.

They had Shariah with Jizzya/Dhimmitude ofc as they were islamic. Its not something you can talk away. Islam is for world hedgemoney in its core..

kek

Now you're just being silly. I dont know why or how you correlate the achievements of Al Andalus with todays migrant and refugee debate in Europe. I bet you also believe in cultural marxism and that academia is marxist jewish propaganda.

>Sorry, I assume most posts like that are sarcastic.
I can see why you did.

Al-Andalus is pushed as glorious multicultural society in education here in Europe. Christians are portayed as evil white racists that deserve to be ruled by peaceful Mudslimes. If you aren't from Europe, you don't understand what I'm talking about. Al-Andalus, regardless of the real history, is a main component of white guilt and (((tolerance))) in Europe.

I made this thread because I'm currently reading a book by a lefty newspaper about Charlemagne and they straight out call Muslims superior to frankish savages. Imagine if someone today called modern Islam inferior to Europe. He would be dead in the matter of weeks and lefty media would be outraged.

>unironically defending the religion of piss

Nice archtechture and some inventions doesnt take away from what the islamic centuries long occupation of Iberia was: Violent and Opressive. It was Jihad fi sabilillah, expanding the realms of Sharia'ah and supremacy over the lesser beings (the non muslim) and keeping them under dhimmude/2nd class citizenship in humiliation.

it was the middle ages, what do you expect

Al andalus was fine the problem came with the almoravids and the rest of invasions

Its core islamic and islam is around today, thats my point. Islam has no room for a metaphorical understanding of the central texts (Its even considered apostasy) like other religions and it has given us the situation we have now with islam no being able to combine with the modern secular world.

Like I already said, you seem to have already made up your opinion about this, and you obviously don't want earnest discussion. You just want to circlejerk about how much you hate leftist cucks.

They were too busy murdering each other for clay to worry about who was worshipping the dead kick on a stick over the loli rapist mass murderer so in a way it was multicultural.

As an Alberto, I can say you're wrong. They are praised for advancements in science since iberians were incredibly backwards at the time compared to the rest of Europe and for bringing tasty oranges and almonds here. Besides that, Afonso is still seen as a great hero for slapping his mother, telling Leon to go fuck themselves and riding south with a giant sword, beheading everything that looked like it had been left in the sun for too long.

And I already told you that you were right

Al Andalus didn't exist. There were different rules and even kingdoms in the muslim part of Spain. When it hit its height it was when muslims didn't even follow the Quran and were basically hispanized/latinized

>Slapin his mother
>The woman who actually created the kingdom

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jadid
arrival of communism stopped that movement though

pic related is:
from left to right Sunni, Orthodox, Bektashi, and Catholic religious leaders in Albania

muslims are not a hive mind, they are not all the same - and that's why you have to judge individually when given the choice to do so, simply because it's more reliable than making a probabilistic inference

>inb4 european examples
my knowledge is about europe, simply

Al Andalus didnt exist. There was the Cordoban Caliphate and the Taifas. Which were mostly Iberians and pseudomuslims. The berber savages destroyed that culture and implemented strict Islam which caused massive waves of people migrating to the Christian kingdoms and converting to christianity. Al Andalus is an example of why dumb goatfuckers shouldn't be allowed to settle in Europe no the other way around

It was multicultural in the same way slavery was multicultural.

>iberians were incredibly backwards at the time compared to the rest of Europe
Iberia had the second highest per capita income in western Europe at the time of the conquest and lots of Franks inmigrated there.0

The woman who was fine with it being a county under the control of another kingdom.

To OP and anyone else, any good books on the subject?

Probably better then the medieval kingdoms at the time, but they definitely suffered all the problems that the other Muslim countries faced dynastic bullshit, in-fighting, revolts, etc.

The Christian kingdoms were more exclusive but at the same time were more unified which is why they won in the end.

Read The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise by Dario Fernandez Morera. It's a great book that disproves the bullshit of glorious muslim tolerance that is being pushed around today.

OK Veeky Forums and what do we learn from this lesson taught to us by the Fabulous Homo Caliph of Cordoba?

>If you're going to be a free-thinking faggot monarch you best back it up with a bad-ass army like Frederick the Great

I read one and it was fascinating. It was only about scholars and teachers learning in the huge universities of Spain during the Middle Ages.

Some female SJW professor wrote it and it sounded like a glorious paradise of learning with jews, christians and muslims all reading ancient Greek and Roman texts while happily chatting away.

Here's the Politically Correct fairy tale I read ->

>Menocal, Maria Rosa. 2002. Ornament of the World: How Muslims, Jews, and Christians Created a Culture of Tolerance in Medieval Spain. Boston: Little, Brown and Company; London: Back Bay Books. ISBN 0-316-16871-8

>Menocal died of melanoma on October 15, 2012.[2][3]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/María_Rosa_Menocal

feelsbadman.jpeg

Here's another UN approved tome she wrote on the subject ->

>The Arts of Intimacy: Christians, Jews, and Muslims in the Making of Castilian Culture (2008)

RIP Professor Menocal. Well done. It's a dirty job but someone has to trigger the alt-right.

Any Veeky Forumstorian worth their salt should read this one ->

>The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise by Dario Fernandez Morera

Then this one ->

>Menocal, Maria Rosa. 2002. Ornament of the World: How Muslims, Jews, and Christians Created a Culture of Tolerance in Medieval Spain

...then they should try to think for themselves without any fucking ideology at all.

>If I discard the politics and shit from these two faggots what actual history can I learn?

>Praising a dishonest person

Here are both books, if anyone's interested. Thanks for recommending!

>Menocal book
u.nya.is/ccgqfp.epub
>Fernandez-Morera book
u.nya.is/qyymsi.azw3

Yep, trying to validate your own "cucks and mudslimes are destroying Europe" worldview. Unsurprising. pic related

I live in Europe, I've been through a European education system.

We only ever learned about Islam in year 6, and it was purely in a R.E context and not a historical one. Islamic history was completely glossed over in favour of things like the world wars.

Muslism literally destroyed the Persian and the Byzintine empire and the cultural peak of >Al andalus was when islam was mostly ignored. Islam is a plague.Goatfuckers are a plague.

> Muslism literally destroyed
> the Byzintine empire

>Is the one true Prophet
>and army which bares his cross shall never be beaten

FTFY

>People with opinions different then mine must have come from certain background that I hate!

You mean Al-Hakam II? Didn't his army raped Normans and berbers?

>Al-Andalus is pushed as glorious multicultural society in education here in Europe. Christians are portayed as evil white racists that deserve to be ruled by peaceful Mudslimes.

You're really full of shit and I say this as a spaniard myself, this period of time is mostly covered based on the advancements brought and produced in the peninsula and the reconquista. There's no "side", there were pretty different collectives among the muslim community, just your persecution complex.

they didn't pay the toll.

People can change opinions, smart and mature people often do, but if someone ends their 'high level discourse' question by adding "so that we will cuck for Mudslimes", you can assume they are not part of that branch

'Multicultural paradise' is absolutely wrong, there was constant tension between Christians, Muslims and Jews and between Arabs and Berbers. People co-operated and tolerated each other because they had to, and together they created an incredibly prosperous and advanced civilization rivaled in the Abrahamic world only by Byzantium and Abbasid Iraq. 'Multicultural' might be an accurate way to describe their civilization in the sense that they adopted from cultures throughout the Mediterranean world and integrated various religious and ethnic groups into their elite culture, but to call it a 'paradise' would complete ignore how rife with religiously and ethnically driven social conflict.

I'm European and I've taken a course on this. We noted the general ability of Muslims, Christians and Jews to tolerate each other and their integration into a common civilization, but nowhere did anyone imply it was a 'glorious multicultural society'. We looked at cases where Muslims and Christians clearly didn't get along, I especially remember one account of a priest who was executed just for explaining the Christian faith to some Muslims who asked about it. When looking at the Reconquista it was emphasized that it wasn't just a black and white conflict between Muslims and Christians but was driven largely by more pragmatic politics, and Christians certainly weren't demonised. We also looked at how the same thing happened in reverse in Norman Sicily, where Christians ruled over Muslims and likewise built an incredibly prosperous and advanced civilization.

>they straight out call Muslims superior to frankish savages
Well in the time of Charlemagne that was mostly accurate, even if 'savages' is going too far (I assume you added that word yourself for dramatic effect).

>muslim accomplishments downplayed for centuries
>any attempt to have an unbiased conversation about them is co-opted by those who consider reapproaching the topic as an attack on the west or as a method to defend islam as le religion of peace

I just wanna talk about Averroes :(

The nice architecture was either created by the visigoths, or was a Greek replication. In either case, the architecture itself pre-dates Islamic Spain.

>I especially remember one account of a priest who was executed just for explaining the Christian faith to some Muslims who asked about it

Damn, that sucks. All of the people involved should've know better. Sucks to be a dhimmi under Sharia.

At what points were interfaith debates acceptable? Supposedly Istanbul under Suleiman was a better place for that.

You can't be unbiased when it comes to Islam. It is an expansionist religion in its core, seeking to destroy and convert anything that's not Muslim.

You're one of the good ones Averroes!

Al-Andalus was pretty cool, except for towards the end, with the Almohads and what not. It certainly wasn't a "multicultural paradise", but it was also no more hell than the succeeding Christian rule. Overall, FPBP.

Thank you

I think I can. I recognize that aspect of it and see in it's approach the same interest of any "great" or "powerful" movement. Islam just doesn't pretend that it's politics and religion aren't intertwined.

The only way you can pursue greatness through peace and exclusively defensive conflict is in Civilization on lower difficulties.

>Then again, judging by the OP of this thread, you already have an answer in your mind and you just want validation of your worldview.
Then give your answer, and if he challenges it, beat him in argument.

Have you so little faith in your beliefs?

Mate, you can acknowledge the success of past Muslim states and also reject them being used as a modern tool for multiculturalism.

The architecture was most heavily influenced by Umayyad and Abbasid architecture of the Middle East, with the Great Mosque in particular being explicitly designed after those built in Damascus and Jerusalem. The only Visigothic influence might be in the extensive use of horseshoe arches, though they way in which they were used was a unique innovation and they had actually been used in earlier Umayyad architecture before the conquest of Iberia, so it's hard to say what role the Visigoths actually played. The mosaic decorating some parts of the mosque are the only completely foreign aspects, as they were probably made by Byzantine workers.

Also the architecture which survives is only a tiny fraction of what was built, basically just the stuff that was converted into churches. There were fifty mosques in Cordoba for example, but only one survives.

Yeah, it was ridiculous. The priest was even promised protection by the Muslims he was explaining it to, but they came back later and accused him of blasphemy because he had said Muhammad was a false prophet.

>At what points were interfaith debates acceptable?
The Mughal Empire, especially under Akbar and Jahangir, was very open to that. Early Abbasid Iraq too, though it varied depending on who was in power.

There's a good and pretty level-headed article of the topic on page 392 of this: ia800208.us.archive.org/20/items/MedievalIslamicCivilizationAnEncyclopedia/23186620-Medieval-Islamic-Civilization-An-Encyclopedia.pdf

>Islam has no room for a metaphorical understanding of the central texts (Its even considered apostasy)
modern salafi sunni islam doesn't but most muslim denominations do. historically a rational examination/metaphorical understanding of religious text was very common among muslim scholars and it still is among shia and sufi groups.
unfortunately most muslims are uneducated sunnis who are easily deceived by salafi preachers who tell them that they stand for real islamic tradition and orthodoxy when in actuality their sect is a very recent development and really rejects a lot of lived tradition in favor of a sort of neo-traditionalism with newly invented idea presented as the old wisdom of the prophet and his companions

Islam is a legit threat to our freethought and our civilization. Non-Muslims should feel threatened just by Islam solely existing.

Thanks. Reading now.

You know, I referenced that encyclopedia a fair bit while writing a final paper this semester.

I should have this tabbed on my phone just to glance at while I'm walking or taking the bus.

What the fuck are you talking about? I live in Britain, there's nothing of the sort here.

I feel the same way, but not while I'm trying to play objective observer of history that is cognizant of ancient and modern bias.

Well at least they're honest that "multiculturalism" means submitting to the will of Muslims, paying Jizya, and being a second class citizen in your own homeland.

In America, Europe is a hellscape under Sharia law where on every corner one may find a group of young "asian" men grooming a white girl, a kebab shop, and a blood soaked "asian" preaching about the evils of the white man after having murdered a policeman or soldier.

The period of prosperity came when there were only iberians and some arabs. When berbers started to inmigrate it became a shithole

The christian kingdoms were quite more advanced after 1065

Berbers were there from the start. You're thinking of when they took over as the elite.

>Berbers were there from the start
In the same number as arabs. It was a small population until the almohavides.

>almohavides

I just mixed almohades and almoravids and used my autistic terminology

That "there can only be us or them" mentality is a legit threat to freethouht. It's the same reason that drives them against us.

The Quran compels believers toward imperialism. If Muslims or Christians aren't trying to unite the world under their faith, then they're honestly not doing it right because their beliefs are neutered by secularism.

Well, okay then, but I'm from Germany and we spent entire 6 months on how glorious al-Andalus and how evil the Reconquista was.

Muslims specifically divide the world on Dar al Islam (House of Islam) and Dar al Harb (House of War). Dar al Islam is a part under full Muslim control. Dar al Harb are the lands of non-Muslims, which should be taken by jihad.

We have every reason to feel threatened by them, because they drew the first blood. They tried to force us into dhimmis before, and they will surely try again. There will never be peace between them and us.

>Salafis specifically divide the world on Dar al Islam (House of Islam) and Dar al Harb (House of War)
ftfy

Salafis will openly kill you. "Moderates" will secretly cheer for Salafis to kill you while hypocritically pertaining their peaceful muslim image. But they all work toward the same goal, Dar al-Islam.

It was shit for most of its existence, libs just like to push their

>muh caliphate

narrative and ignore all the rest.

>Salafis
The moral of the story is that fundamentalists should be killed for trying to follow their religion properly.

I can get behind this. Maybe reeducate the children, but the adults need to go and stay gone.

fitna means splitting of the community, disbelief is kufr and disbelief in addition to association of god with other deities is shirk

mushrikun are polytheists, people who practice shirk. christians and jews may be kafirun (unbelievers) but they are not included under mushrikun

>arrival of communism stopped that movement though
Total kek

You're talking shit, t. another European