Why is Muslim conquest called cultural enrichment and european christian conquest evil imperialism?

welt.de/geschichte/article115521400/Als-Muslime-und-Juden-eine-Symbiose-eingingen.html

alright well I read the article, and my German isn't perfect but it seems to me that he's reacting to someone saying that "the muslims are stuck in the 12th century" by pointing out that in the 12th century muslim spain was a better place than the rest of western europe, which is undeniably true, especially if you were a religious minority. Then things got a whole lot worse for you after the reconquista, which is also true.

He also however made sure to note that everything wasn't perfect and rosy under all muslims, and there was repression, but on the whole 12th century islam was more enlightened than modern day islam

>Sie folgten dem Grundsatz: "Die Tinte des Gelehrten ist heiliger als das Blut der Märtyrer.“ Eine Devise, die heutige Fanatiker offenbar vergessen haben.

the whole article is a bit of a non-sequitor and not really relevant to any modern arguments about the place of Islam in socieity, but it most certainly is not saying that it wished muslims had conquered Europe.

>which is undeniably true
It isn't. The almoravids were brutal and less economically developed that the christian kingdoms of Spain. Burgos was more important than Sevilla or Cordoba by this point

>equating immigration with systematic administrative colonization
???

Hätten die Franken den Vorstoß der Muslime nicht gestoppt, hätten sie Europa beizeiten durch die Finsternis des Mittelalters führen können.

"Had the Franks not stopped the Muslims, the Moors would have lead Europe out of the darkness of medieval times."

Well your interpretetion then differs from mine but I view it as a wish by the author about northern african muslim conquest over european christian rule.

Which is called imperialism I guess but its only bad when Europeans do it?

>muslim conquest of spain
>"migration"

yeah in 711 those northern african berbers sure just "migrated" to spain right?

Yeah that line struck me as a bit odd as well, that seems like an overly simplistic view of history to me. Though that said if the author is jewish his ancestors would probably have been better off in muslim southern france than christian. Or maybe he's a neo-pagan who just hates christianity for displacing germanic paganism.

The utopia of Muslim Spain is a 19th century myth.

Anyone who has historical knowledge beyond documentaries and wikipedia will know just how turbulent and war struck it was ever since the first Berber revolts.

Constant civil wars, usurpations, political intrigue that never works and violence breaks out etc.

The moment you step foot outside the walls of Cordoba you would enter a world arguably worse than Western Europe at the time, especially after the collapse of the last Umayyad.

>Though that said if the author is jewish his ancestors would probably have been better off in muslim southern france than christian. Or maybe he's a neo-pagan who just hates christianity for displacing germanic paganism.
he is probably non-religious and likes his people getting conquered by foreigners in general, regardless whether they are muslims or not.

what about Alhambra, obviously that wasn't built in a vacuum

anyway what is the context of this article, why was it written?

Or he's just picked up on the same meme that Hitler did.

Like the Renaissance.

It's funny when libcucks get called out on their hypocrisy and they all of sudden get a severe case of amnesia.

who are you talking to

al andalus = good because Islam

castillia and aragon = because reconquista

>Alhambra
It was built by christian engenieers under the service of the emir of Granada (vassal of the king Castile) in the XIV century

his strawman

is this true? It almost sounds like a WEWUZism, if christian architects built Alhambra why weren't they building anything like it in christian europe?

>What are you talking about goy? You must be imagining things again, stop asking questions!
Literally every time.

>Why weren't Christians building architecture in accordance with Islamic religious dictates in Christian Europe?
It is a mystery.

>, if christian architects built Alhambra
They didn't built it.They design it.Christian engenieers were superior to muslim ones and had experience building monumental buildings like the cathedrals in Seville or Burgos or fortresses like the Alcazar in Segovia.Granada was a vassal of Castile since the times of Ferdinand the saint which is usually forgotten.
>why weren't they building anything like it in christian europe?
El Alcazar in Sevilla was mostly built by Peter the Cruel of Castile.It existed before but he did a huge reform.The tiles there were built in Granada as Peter and the emir of Granada had a very good relationship.You have to take into account that the relationship between muslim and Christian kingdoms in Spain was usually pretty cordial for the most part and they influenced each other

>"Had the Franks not stopped the Muslims, the Moors would have lead Europe out of the darkness of medieval times."
This is a speculation, but it cold have turned out that way.

Are you implying it couldn't have?

>It is a mystery.
The Alcazar in Sevilla was built and reform in parallel with the Alhambra for example.It is a pretty underrated and gorgeous building

thats not my implication

my implication is that the author by choosing these words wishes for islamic conquest to happen or at least wished it to have happened in the middle ages.

>the darkness of medieval times
Muslims weren't more advanced than christians in the VIII century. And the main focuses of the "muslim golden age" were Persia and Spain the least Arab regions that practiced Islam

>It was built by christian engenieers
Source?

>my implication is that the author by choosing these words wishes for islamic conquest to happen
that's actually your implication, you really want it to be true
>or at least wished it to have happened in the middle ages.
that's different, his language doesn't say it directly, but it's positive towards the idea
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_Muslim_scientists_and_scholars

>And the main focuses of the "muslim golden age" were Persia and Spain the least Arab regions that practiced Islam

Not really. The main regions that became notable for a flourishing of literature and philosophy between the 9th and 13th centuries are also the very same regions that saw extensive Arab settlement.

You're right about there being some parity in the 8th century, but the gap began to substantially widen afterwards until it was closed and altogether surpassed around the 13th century.

I clearly said VIII century.When the muslims came to Spain they were behind culturally to the Visigoths.

Look at some of the years. Did Visigoths have grammarians, historians and biologists?
>clearly said VIII
Then you clearly said some other things.

Stop pretending you give a shit about facts. You just want to talk crap about arabs, because there's a few million of them in Europe and you hate their existence.

This is a very thinly veiled thread, with OP's strawman on top.

>Did Visigoths have grammarians, historians and biologists?
Yes and astronomers.
>Muslims weren't more advanced than christians in the VIII century
>Then you clearly said some other things.
>goat rapist logic
>Stop pretending you give a shit about facts
It is a fact that muslims weren't more advanced compared to christians.Specially when the most advanced place in the world was christian (ERE).It is a huge meme that muslims were sophisticated and invaded a bunch of barbarians when most muslims were just dessert niggers that barely knew how to read and got most of their knowledge from sacking and conquering land (Persia,Alexandria or Spain)

Post a few visigoth astronomers, grammarians or biologists.

Sources please. I am interested.

>dessert niggers
holy kek

Will the jannies clean this garbage up? /pol/ colonists are coming here in droves in an attempt to lower the level the dialogue so that it essentially becomes another /pol/.

>Why is Muslim conquest called cultural enrichment

Citation needed

Janitors and mods aren't in the budget buddy

are there really this many people itt making pretend Cordoba isn't constantly propagandized as some kind of Muslim led progressive multicultural utopia?

smelly dumb frogposting scum

>compared to western europe at the time

Even if some people make propaganda of this nature, this thread still doesn't have a point. A lot of different people make equally retarded propaganda on all manner of stances. All it proves is that uninformed laymen act like uninformed laymen. If OP isn't criticizing academic consensus, then he might as well be complaining about a Buzzfeed article.

First comment here.

Those who say that iberian península was better with muslims are to be ashamed.

After we Portugal and Spain evicted them we entered our own maritime renassance. With poets like Camões, Fernão Mendes Pinto, Cervantes, astronomers, biologians, matematicians, jewel massons...of the likes of Duarte Albuquerque, Afonso Albuquerque, inacio loyola and even the Saint Antônio.

The ummayad dinasty was of árabe origins, rulers of syria and polítical refuges from the abbassid.

Coincidência?

Like the way it's propagandized by others as a barbaric hellhole of oppressive foreigners stealing everything, I'd rather both just pissed off to another board so we can discuss the matter without /int/ or /pol/ memes involving modern immigration or reactionary/progressive politics.

t. duarte silva

that's fine my man, nobody thinks spaniards are subhumans incapable of creating greatness, the opposite in my opinion

but remember, if you have brown eyes or are slightly darker spaniard, you are considered subhuman by the makers of this thread

>Coincidencia?
nah, just irony

Utter horseshit.
"Uninformed laymen" done just pull their opinions out of thin air, they are taught them. If a substantial number of uninformed laymen hold the opinion that Islamic occupied Spain was a lost paradise of culture it is because they were taught so by academics.

The ONLY dissent from the people towards the visighots was because the nobles took the weapons from the people right before muslim invasion.
Other from that, to the first generation ir was indiferent, but later generations started being opressed, until they rebelled and destroy the caliphate.
After the caliphate died ir was divides on many small taifas with all types of crazy muslim rulers.

>but remember, if you have brown eyes or are slightly darker spaniard, you are considered subhuman by the makers of this thread

Your memes are stale and boring leftist, no one buys them anymore.

If you're so certain that OP's post is the academic consensus, then please link an academic article that states that the Muslim conquest was cultural enrichment while European Christian conquest was evil imperialism. Shouldn't be too hard if what you're saying is true.

I aM white european, blue eyed, brown hair slithy blonde beard, 1 meter and 81 centímeters tall, proud hispanic portuguese.

I belive that of all the best germanic people the best are English descendence, as of latin the hispanic are the best, not French nor italian (or romanians) but portuguese AND Spanish.

>""""/pol/ colonists""""
>not just people with a different opinion

nice boogeyman :)

King Sisebut
Saint Leander
Saint Isidore
Archbishop Eugenius Secundus

I guess a better term would be /pol/ rape-fugies.

Veeky Forums is not /pol/, and Global Rule #3 is in effect. Do not try to treat this board as /pol/ with dates. Blatant racism and trolling will not be tolerated, and a high level of discourse is expected. History can be examined from many different conflicting viewpoints; please treat other posters with respect and address the content of their post instead of attacking their character.

Once again.
Laypeople do not pull their opinions out of thin air. SOMEONE is teaching them these things, and no amount of sophistry on your part can obscure that.

>please treat other posters with respect and address the content of their post instead of attacking their character.

So how about you start doing that then, and stop attacking every opinion you don't like as /pol/?

>King Sisebut
>Saint Leander
>Saint Isidore
>Archbishop Eugenius Secundus
Ok, which ones are astronomers, grammarians or biologists?

Details, man. Those are just names, not sources. And on first glance, one is a king the others are priests. Only one of them comes close to what I would call a philosopher.

I'm beginning to feel arabs were actually superior to visigoths. Which is weird, I'm told arabs are genetic garbage, but genetics is what we are it can't be overturned like that.

>playing innocent
but 2 posts after convenient

That's literally the case with all knowledge. Unless you can prove this specific case is as you say, then you're saying nothing more substantial than people get taught the things they know.

>kings and priests cannot be intellectuals
LOL could you be any more transparently intellectually dishonest?

>still no sources
i think you're just annoyed they aren't hiding the truth about cordova being superior to western europe
you probably fear it might inform immigration policies

I asked for visigoth scientists who can rival what the arabs had in the 8th century, which you chose.

You failed. This is about the 3rd time I catch you lying. Read our chat from the beginning, you might learn for next time.

>then you're saying nothing more substantial than people get taught the things they know.

That's literally all you need to prove this point, nothing more "substantial" is necessary. Anything more is an excuse to engage in goal-post shifting and demand increasingly higher standards of proof, I used to see this tactic all the time in Holocaust denial threads. You're essentially pulling the "that's not a signed order from Hitler authorising the gassing of six million Jews, your proof is inadequate!" rhetorical defense.

No one calls Muslim conquest "cultural enrichment".
>Is someone trying to manipulate us into accepting foreign muslim rule?
to get feedback for wacky theories.

go back to /pol/ dork

>That's literally all you need to prove this point
No it's not. It's true people know what they're taught, but you've taken that to think that everything they're taught comes from academia, which is retarded. A good portion of it comes from media and home life. So once again I ask you. Prove that these laymen opinions are the result of actual historians instead of the History Channel. If you can't provide sources then gtfo.

>I asked for visigoth scientists who can rival what the arabs had in the 8th century,
Liar. You asked for examples of Visigoth astronomers, grammarians, and biologists.
>You failed
Wrong.
You dismissed the examples out of hand, because you are intellectually dishonest.

Looks like someone wasn't here last week.
archived.moe/his/thread/2334334/#q2334334

>i have no real evidence to show that academic consensus is what i claim it is

> A good portion of it comes from media and home life.
In other words people who receive their opinions from academia. Are you claiming that the people who work for the media are voicing opinions that are the exact OPPOSITE of what they are taught when they attend university?

I'd love to see you prove that claim.

>this triggers the sandcoon

>You have no evidence proving that Hitler ordered the gassing of six million Jews!

...

>analogies is the same as symmetries
>analogies are valid arguments

>An unsubstantiated claim and a /pol/ tier conspiracy as the OP
Isn't stuff like that delenda on Veeky Forums?

>taking /int/ tier trolling at face value

>In other words people who receive their opinions from academia.
I didn't realize Fox News received its opinions from academia.

>Why is Muslim conquest called cultural enrichment and european christian conquest evil imperialism?
Moorish Spain has negligible consequences today. European colonialism on the other hand...

The visighots were nobles not scientists, they were warriors and leaders at best, sometimes some became poets, law makers, insipiring the many diferent identities on Ibéria, trobadourism, and bullfigth.
The word they used for "scientist" was sephardite, literally " spanish jew".

Later when expelled Portugal and Spain became somewhat backward nations.

>apologia based on the inherently shifting goalpost of "academic consensus " is a valid argument

>le Fox News boogyman
Because every talking head and opinion maker on Fox News is a highschool drop out amirite?

Oh boy here we go.

That's not at all what I was implying. With all the horribly inaccurate shit they, and many other media outlets, say it's very clear that what they report is not received from academia. If it was it wouldn't be so utterly ridiculous.

Are you really going to tell me that the kinds of people who believe in the hacker named Veeky Forums have every last one of their opinions rooted in what they were taught in highschool and college?

>Belgian Congo
>Haiti
>Bengal famines of 1770 and 1943
>Sykes-Picot and Berlin Conference
Need I say more?

Well let's hope 500 years into the future when it isn't relevant to contemporary politics it will also all be viewed as cultural enrichment by all those nice benevolent multicultural Europeans.

arabs(not to mention others) were superior to europeans between 8 to 13 century, that's all you, my friend, need to know for half your brain to be turned upside down
the sources are in the thread, read it, enjoy

>Are you really going to tell me that the kinds of people who believe in the hacker named Veeky Forums have every last one of their opinions rooted in what they were taught in highschool and college?
Obviously.
You think their teachers in highschool and college have any better idea of who the hacker named Veeky Forums is?

Academia is riddled with the same inaccurate ridiculous shit you're complaining about. If it weren't, the graduates it produces would not display the traits you find so odious. If you put a side of beef through a meatgrinder and the ground meat that comes out is full of feces, you should probably take a look at your meatgrinder, and not stand around lamenting the phenomenon of spontaneous generation.

implying that I was wrong

The Making of Spain
> bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06rwgp7

Glorifies Muslim Golden Age of Al Andalus

> documentary maker
> ((( Simon Sebag Montefiore )))
> ancestors burned at the stake for being secret Jews

The Europeans were just there to make money and hightailed when the natives/slaves had enough (except continental Americas). The Moors on the other hand planned on permanently settling the Iberian peninsula. Also, the Spanish language has great Arabic influence.

How do you sleep at night? I couldn't imagine living life in such an intellectually dishonest way.

Seriously what possesses a man to just go on the internet and start telling lies?

>This much of a colonialism apologist

Lol what a horrible post, Islamic imperialism is inherently better because it lasted longer? I'm sure Urdu would have had a much a larger English influence in it if the English stuck around for another century or two.

It's always the same blatant white man especially evil rhetoric every fucking time.