Why does no one discuss Arab Imperialism?

In the Marxist version of history which dominates schools, universities and the media, Islam and Arab culture are portrayed as wonderful, peaceful expositions of high civilization. Anglo-Saxon, white European culture is depicted of course as racist, imperialistic and insufferably barren in comparison. This typifies postmodern insanity. Arab armies, gangs, thugs, and oppressors ranged out from the Arab sands circa 632 A.D. to conquer territory and convert cultures from Morocco to Indonesia, to accept the Arab political ideology called Islam. The Western nations left their colonies. The Arabs never have. That is why the Islamic world is in such a sorry state.

The poverty of Arab culture informs Islam.

Without the Arabs of course Islam would not have existed. Unless you believe that ‘Allah’ the moon deity, instead of choosing Arabic, would have picked another obscure language like say for instance Swahili, Mongol, or maybe Gaelic Welsh. Perhaps he would have identified not the Arabs, but the plucky Nepali, Bush-man, or the redoubtable rice farmer from Han China, or those marauding Danes, to be the distribution channel of his monotheistic gibberish contained in the Koran.

But alas for mankind it was the desperate pagans of Arabia, steeped in moon cult fetishism, poverty, illiteracy and losing out to Jews and Christians in the market of ideas, economics and political power, which were chosen by the great moon deity, to disseminate ideas about supremacism, world-domination and submission to Islam – and by extension eradicating all competitive beliefs.

Arab imperialism has never gone away. Say what you want about Western imperialism but the West eventually left their empires – sometimes much to the detriment of the conquered territory. Contrary to Marxist revisionism Western imperialism was not a net negative. The most successful empire morally, economically and politically was the British. If a ‘native’ culture was conquered by the British it was usually much to their benefit. Occupation by the French was likewise in most cases, a net positive gain for the subjected land in question. Even Russian civilisational development of central and east Asia and Siberia had before the Communist revolution, a positive impact on non-Russian lands. The same cannot be said of German, Belgian or Italian imperialism.

In these expansions education, medicine, infrastructure and modern political-economic theory were exported to conquered lands. Dragging backwards cultures into the modern era was part of what Kipling called the white man’s burden. On balance given the long view of history, European ‘white’ imperialism was of course inevitable. Globalising markets, globalised supply sources of raw material, international trade routes, and military balances of power all mandated an expansion by Europe into the New World, Asia and Africa.

White imperialism premised on early forms of capitalism and the rapid development of our modern world, is in fact part of a civilizing mission to bring political-economic and cultural stimulation to primitive areas of the globe. While unbalanced, violent, bloody and chaotic such a process in the longer-term view of history is necessary and moral.

Even after taking into account the barbarity enacted by some Westerners against particular native cultures, on balance, the process was one of civilization not of regression. Africa in the past 50 years proves that point. Uganda is not better off since the British have left. Nigeria (increasingly Moslem dominated), Ghana, Zimbabwe, Kenya, and Egypt are worse off.  With the Marxist ANC controlling South Africa and initiating an anti-White program of retribution (ignored by the Fake News Media), we can add South Africa to list of states which were better off under British control.

In 1950 per capita GDP in Ghana was higher than in South Korea. Thanks to US military protection against North Korea, US and European investment in Korean markets and a Western styled political-economic system, South Korea is now a rich industrialized country exporting product to the world. In the past 50 years the Africans have collected $700 billion in welfare from richer White nations. The African elite have used the money to buy weapons from Western nations; start wars; enact genocides; hide money in Swiss bank accounts and engage in the rape and destruction of the world’s richest continent. There is a reason why India has lifted 300 million out of poverty in the past 40 years and Africa has not. And it has nothing to do with White oppression – quite the opposite. 

Nigeria, rich in oil and other resources, with a commanding presence on the Atlantic trade routes is now riven by a Moslem dominated civil war against Christians - studiously ignored by the Fake News media.  Moslems murder 20 Christians a day on average in Nigeria.  The economy is roughly 1/5 of what it should be in size, and per capita living standards a tithe of what the country's potential would indicate they should be.  Is Moslemifying Nigeria better or worse off, without British protection?  The problem in Nigeria is Muhammadism, and Arab culture. 

The extended Arab empire, which now enslaves almost 2 billion cult members, is a shamble and a mess.  It has been for at least 1000 years, when the Christian and Zoroastrian empires, upon which the Arab hordes had feasted, began to wither and die – the host being sucked dry by the parasites.

From Morocco to Indonesia, the Arabs during 200 years conquered, subdued and converted non Moslems. The resident cultures; Jews, Christians, Greeks and Semitics in the Near East; Berbers, Christians, animists, Jews, Semitics in North Africa; Farsi, Turks and Pathans in Central Asia; and various ethnicities from India to Bali; were all converted or conquered by marauding Arab armies. The Arabs brought with them Islam – the epitome and embodiment of Arab culture.

Culture is king. Islam came from Arabia and is premised on a 3.000 year old moon cult. It only stands to reason that the moon cult practices of Arabia embody the ideology of Islam. Islam is of course not a religion but a construct to organize and subdue society. The main ideas of Islam; submission; blind loyalty; ritual; a belief in little devils; kissing of holy rocks; male supremacy; the union of church and state; and a swaggering prideful intolerance all come from Arab culture. You can’t divorce British culture and English institutional development. The Magna Carta, parliamentary democracy, the industrial revolution all came from a certain culture. It is the same with Islam.

The great Arab invention was of course Islam. There was no golden age of Islamic development. Arabs conquered, squatted and managed more advanced empires – the Jews, the Christian states, Byzantium, Persia, the Egyptians and so on. The Muslims invented nothing. All the so-called inventions by Muslims – some in medicine, some in math, some in astrology – all came from previous societies and other cultures. Nestorian Christians for example were the ones to ‘discover’ ancient Greek writings on medicine and advanced calculus and geometry, all of which pre-dated Arab imperialism by 1100 years.

Sadly, for a large part of the world, the Arabs conquered and never left. The poverty of Islam is premised on its failed Arab culture and paganism. Compare today the Arab culture of Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Libya and Morocco with the plurality of Israel, France or the USA. There is a reason why Islam is a fascist disaster. The reason comes from its Arab cultural heritage and legacy. Incredibly no one in the West discusses it. If the ‘neo-con’ crusading American is to be criticized for the failed Iraqi project, why then is no one demanding a roll back of Arab imperialism, and its destructive ideological construct named Islam?