Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> If by “formal identity” you mean that Arab nationalism didn’t exist until the late 1800s/early 1900s, no quibbling

That's what I'm saying.

If UAE special services (some of whom are Baloch) are on here, yk. I got into a fist fight with an ethnic Baloch al-Nahyan bouncer a couple years ago in Novella (Iykyk)

But Islam was the first form of psudeo-globalism in the 8th century (along with the Tang Empire).

I agree with you that it was is Ajams that powered the "Islamic Golden Age" but that detracts from the fact that before the 19th century, Identity was inherently ephemeral.

But that does NOT mean Islam is inherently Arab. Say that shit and you will get a bullet in your jet in most areas

> I think GP is complaining the credit seems a little weird; the religious conversion happened due to violent conquest, not peaceful proselytizing

No argument there, but based on GP's history, it's just racism morphed as Islamophobia.

History was bad, and for some ethnic groups, "Muslims" were bad. No argument there from a Pahari/Koshur Hindu (I have Hindu/Sikh that died in the 1990s and 1947, but also protected Muslims in both decades - shit's tough)

But that's a statement for all fundamentalists. Doesn't matter what diety your rever - it's the -ism aspect that makes you a fundamentalist



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: