French    German    Spain    Italian    Arabic    Chinese Simplified    Russian

Western Civilisation

Join Gab (@StFerdinandIII) Western Civilisation was and is superior to anything Islam has developed.  Islam has not aided in the development of the modern world; in fact civilisation has only been created in spite of Islam.  Raising the alarm about the fascism called Submission since 2000.  

Back

Books Reviewed - Recent Articles

Emmet Scott 'The Impact of Islam' and the mythical Golden Age of Muhammadan Spain

Just another anti-Christian lie from the post-Enlightenment cult.

Bookmark and Share


 Part One here.  Part Two here.

Emmet Scott dispenses with the ignorant post-modern myth of the Muslim ‘Golden Age’ in Spain.  In reality it was a period of slavery, Christian persecution, endless raids north into the Christian enclaves of northern Spain and France (even into Switzerland), despotism, high taxes and the neutering of technology and innovation (the Blast Furnace was invented by Christians in Catalonia in the 12th century, a series of discoveries that Muslims never made, anywhere in the world, and this is one example out of hundreds).  Islamic Spain was a squatter’s empire, squalid, splendid for the few, an evil nightmare for the many.

 

Muslims invaded Spain in 711 A.D. and within a few years had conquered the Arian-Catholic and very wealthy Visigothic empire, with only a few redoubtable Christian states holding out in the north, clustered along the Pyrennes.  Don Pelayo and his small band of Christian fighters memorably saved Spain and probably most of France with their improbable and dramatic victory at Covadonga in 722 A.D.  I am sure this miraculous defeat of Muhammad’s cult will soon be rewritten as a display of White Catholic racism and intolerance toward liberators and enrichers.

 

An example of an egregious lie is the myth that Cordoba was the richest, grandest city on earth during the Muhammadan occupation.  A city of great vastness, teeming with all sorts of 'inventions', superseding the 'dark age' Visigothic city.  In actual fact Cordoba was never a megapolis.  Archaeology reveals that the Muhammadan city was no bigger than it was under the Visigoths.  Perhaps a new wall, some new structures, or a new suburb may have been built, but in essence it remained a city of 50.000, not 500.000 as given by Arab chroniclers and anti-Christian post-Enlightenment commentators.  Technology would have been neutered given the dogmatic totalitarian strictures of Sharia, still evident and on display in today’s Muhammadan world.  The Jewish-Christian craftsmen and literate society would have been the basis of any Muhammadan construction or culture; non-citizens who paid the Jizya and whose men and women were open to rape, torture, enslavement or forced labour.  A paradise it was not.

 

But a very different picture of the Spanish Caliphate has been painted by other writers. Consider for example the statement of Richard Fletcher, an author very well-disposed to Islam and its culture: “Moorish Spain was not a tolerant and enlightened society even in its most cultivated epoch.”  Indeed! One would never suspect from the descriptions of Messrs Briffault, Lewis, and many others, that Islamic Spain was the center of a vast slave-trading empire whose rulers believed it was their religious duty to wage ruthless war against their Christian neighbors to the north on an annual or even twice-yearly basis.

 

Muhammadans endlessly persecuted the Christians from 711 to 1492 A.D.  History’s longest war (the Reconquista), but also its longest foreign subjugation and destruction of a people and culture.

Harsh reprisals with mutilations and crucifixions would sanction the Mozarab (Christian dhimmis) calls for help from the Christian kings. Moreover, if one dhimmi harmed a Muslim, the whole community would lose its status of protection, leaving it open to pillage, enslavement and arbitrary killing.”    ferocious persecution of both Jews and Christians which occurred in Spain in the thirteenth century during the rule of the fanatical Almohads.  equally fanatical predecessors, the Almoravids, who caused havoc in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries.

 

Louis Bertrand, writing in 1945, before the epoch of political correctness: “From the outset of the Almoravid invasion the destruction of Christian churches had begun. Among them was destroyed a very old and very curious basilica in the neighbourhood of Granada, the church of Gudila. The faquis commenced to persecute the Christian Mozarabs [Christians under Muslim rule] so intolerably that they begged the King of Aragón, Alfonso the Warrior, to come and deliver them. The Aragonese did not succeed in taking Granada. When they retreated, the faquis avenged themselves on the Mozarabs in the most merciless fashion.

 

Christians were not tolerated.  Under Sharia they paid heavy taxes, had to perform duties and obligations in time and labour for their Muslim masters, had their women raped and many sent to harems, had no legal rights, were not able to openly practice their religion, could not build new churches and indeed saw thousands of churches and Christian built edifices converted into Mosques or simply torn down.  They were also expelled and forced out of Spain by their Muhammadan overlords on many occasions.

 

“Already ten thousand of them had been compelled to emigrate into the territory of Alfonso to escape their enemies’ repression. The remainder were deprived of their property, imprisoned, or put to death. Many of them were deported to Africa. They were established in the neighbourhood of Salé and Meknes, where oppression of all kinds compelled them to embrace Islam. Ten years later there was a fresh expulsion. The Christians were again deported to Morocco en masse.”

 

The impact on Catholic-Spanish culture, by the Muhammadan fascist savagery and intolerance must have been immense.  The only way to eject the Muhammadan invaders was to be more ruthless, more intolerant, harder, tougher and more militaristic than they were.

 

“Finally, it was not without contagion that the Spaniards lived for centuries in contact with a race of men who crucified their enemies and gloried in piling up thousands of severed heads by way of trophies. The cruelty of the Arabs and the Berbers also founded a school in the Peninsula. … Whilst I do not necessarily endorse Bertrand’s opinion (I feel he has slightly overstated the case), it is nonetheless true to say that their long contact with Islam most certainly did not foster the development of humanitarianism in the Spanish character.

 

Far from a Golden Age, Muhammadan Spain was a disaster.  It stopped progress, effaced technology and trade, enslaved and killed literally millions of people over 800 years and deformed Catholic culture in Spain.  It also exhausted the resources, energies and foci of Catholics for 800 years, obstructing the creation of innovations and discoveries and retarding the growth of civilisation.

 

 

The Impact of Islam, by Emmet Scott (part two)

Islamophilia is the problem leading to ignorance and destruction.

Bookmark and Share

 

Part One here.

Emmet Scott rightly identifies the source books of Muhammad’s cult, to be the generators of 1400 years of war and Jihad.  Jihad is the ‘6th pillar’ of Islam, and according to Muhammad, the 2nd most important.  What pray tell would be the ‘1rst pillar’ of Muhammandanism and the most important one asks?  Well, it is to ‘obey the Al-Lah and his only prophet, Muhammad’.  Surprising. 

 

The 2 most important fundamentals of Muhammad’s cult is to obey the Al-Lah or Lord of Mecca (who at the time of Muhammad was Baal the moon deity) and Muhammad himself.  After that, to be truly pious, you needed to wage Jihad against the Kufar or unbelievers.  Jihad is not about a spiritual struggle.  That concept is confined to Sufism a small, insignificant Muslim sect of mystics, who have turned the verses of Jihad into metaphors for spiritual combat.  For mainstream Muhammadans, Jihad means war.

 

Indeed, the waging of jihad or holy war is fundamental to Islamic custom and belief: Since the first flush of victories in the seventh century, conquered infidels have been presented with a simple choice; either convert or pay a poll tax, known as jizya. But the important thing has always been to establish political control. This being the case it is clear that Islam is not a religion at all in the ordinary sense of the word, but a totalitarian political ideology with religious pretensions, a fact noted by Rebecca Bynam in her recent work, Allah is Dead: Why Islam is not a Religion.

 

Muhammad led the Jihad, in person, averaging 2 conflicts per year during the establishment of his totalitarian regime.  There has not been a single year in the past 1400 years, where Muslims, somewhere on the globe were not waging Jihad against non-Muslims.

 

Muhammad: He is said to have initiated sixty wars and raids and to have participated in at least twenty-seven of these. Many of these engagements involved massacres of unarmed men and boys. The Prophet of Islam is said to have ordered the killing of all the men and post-pubescent boys in the Jewish settlement of Banu Quraiza, and to have led a series of unprovoked attacks against other Jewish communities in Arabia. During his lifetime, almost all the Jews of Arabia were either killed or forced to convert to Islam. The Prophet is said furthermore to have ordered the assassination of political opponents and encouraged his followers to take up the sword in the propagation of the faith, declaring that a night spent in arms in the cause of Islam carried more merit than a lifetime of fasting, prayer and good works. Before he died, he is reported to have enjoined on his followers to “fight with the peoples” until the whole world should confess that there was no god but Allah.

 

it is doubtful if there has been a single year in which Muslims, in some part of the world, have not been fighting against infidels. In the history of relations between Europe and the House of Islam alone, there was continual and almost uninterrupted war between Muslims and Christians since the first attack on Sicily in 652 and on Constantinople in 674. In the great majority of these wars, the Muslims were the aggressors. And even the short periods of official peace were disturbed by the “unofficial” activities of corsairs and slave-traders. For centuries, Muslim pirates based in North Africa made large parts of the Mediterranean shore-line uninhabitable for Christians, and it is estimated that between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries alone they captured and enslaved something in excess of a million Europeans.

 

The only Muslim medieval ‘historian’ of note that Muslims and their many apologists can name is Khaldun.  Even this mis-represented figure stated that Jihad was an obligation.

 

Spain. A native of that country, Ibn Khaldun, gave, several centuries later, a very similar account to the one quoted above of Islam's attitude to war: In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the [Muslim] mission and [the obligation to] convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. Therefore, caliphate and royal authority are united [in Islam], so that the person in charge can devote the available strength to both of them [religion and politics] at the same time.

 

The Jihad and endless expansion fed the unlimited demand for Slaves.  25 million or more Whites (slave comes from Slav or Eastern European Whites) and 40-100 million Blacks were enslaved by Muslims over 1400 years.  Curiously various anti-White terrorist groups such as BLM do not mention the two over-riding aspects of Black Slavery:  1-Blacks sold other Blacks into Slavery and 2-Muslims were the greatest of the Black slave traders and imported 4-10 x more Black Slaves than were trans-shipped over the Atlantic. 

 

Historian Hugh Trevor-Roper explains how the enormous wealth accumulated by the caliphate in its expansion across Asia and Africa enabled it to purchase what it wanted from Europe. What the Muslims wanted, above all, was “eunuchs and slaves.” He continues: “It was one of the functions of the Vikings to supply these goods. Half traders, half pirates, they ranged over all northern Europe, and in their ranging, or through the method of piracy, they collected furs and kidnapped human beings. For preference they dealt in heathen Slavs, since Christian States had less compunction in handling a slave-trade in heathen bodies – they could always quote that useful text, Leviticus xxv, 44. So the Vikings fed both Byzantium and the rich new civilization of Islam with the goods which they demanded and for which they could pay.

 

In doing so they penetrated all the coasts and rivers of Europe.”  In the above quotation Trevor-Roper repeats the erroneous notion, prevalent until the last decades of the twentieth century, that Byzantium somehow escaped the ravages of the Saracens and that in her territory there continued to flourish an intact and prosperous branch of ancient Rome. Constantinople, he imagines, like Damascus, was a wealthy recipient of Russian slaves. Yet by the end of the seventh century, as I have shown in great detail in Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited, the formerly great power of Eastern Rome was little more than an impoverished rump, cut off, just as surely as the West, from the wealth and learning of Asia.

 

Muslim conquests of lands around the Mediterranean, must have, as common sense and factual detail support, deranged, shrank, and neutered the Christian states in both the East and West.  This would have resulted in social-economic decay as trade routes were cut off, various raw materials and goods were diminished in trade, economic exchange was impoverished, and technological advances regionalised.  The impact would have been vast and from the 8th to the 10th centuries Christian and Christianising Europe, beset by Magyars, Muslims and Vikings would have been close to extinction. 

 

The Muhammadan Jihad has many facets and features:

1-War, and the elimination of the Infidel and the eradication of non-Muslim civilisation.

2-War, and the subjugation and taxation of ‘Dhimmis’, non-Muslims including the ‘Peoples of the Book’, wherein Muslims live off the Dhimmis and their taxable largesse.  This precludes the complete destruction of the Dhimmi-civilisation and is at odds with those within the cult who want to completely efface all non-Muslim cultural artifacts within the conquered states.

3-Cultural, where Muslims enshrine their cult as the apogee of societal development in conquered lands, usually using Dhimmis as slaves and providers of money and tax.

4-Sex slavery and the use of women as sex-chattel, and eunuchs as warriors, advisers, or slaves.

 

Jihad has nothing to do with a ‘spiritual struggle’.  It is about conquering the globe for Muhammad.  The exact nature of Muhammadan governance will vary on a scale from completely eradicating the non-Muslim culture, to using it for the purposes of tax-slavery, sex-slavery and abject Dhimmitude, thereby creating a façade of ‘tolerance’ which sends the Islamophiliacs into sighs of delight and delirium.  Ignorance is not bliss.  It is just ignorance.

 

The Impact of Islam, by Emmet Scott (part one)

The Anti-Catholic, Islamophiliac view

Bookmark and Share

 

Emmet Scott’s very good book, ‘The Impact of Islam’, will never be used as a teaching aid. You won’t hear the English historian quoted by academics, or on the BBC, defending Henri Pirenne’s thesis that Islam greatly contracted Mediterranean life, economy, civilisation and thanks to its barbarous obsession with Jihad (Spain, Italy, France), White slaves, destruction and rapine, helped disrupt European life to such an extent, that it gave a simple-minded pretext for anti-Catholics to declare a ‘Dark Age’ from 500-1500 A.D.

 

This calumny is oft repeated, and a lie spouted by the ignorant, including such atheist luminaries as Voltaire and Diderot. The simple-minded sloganeering could have at least, given their ‘intellectual’ pretensions, looked for ‘root causes’ as to why life may have been forcibly contracted in Europe post the advent of the Muslim Jihad.  For most anti-Catholics proof is optional, and of course, those saintly, revered Muslims are immune to any form of critique.

 

The illiteracy of the ‘Dark Age’ myth, is anti-Catholicism.  This in turn means an ‘ennobling’ of the ‘noble savages’ of Muhammad’s cult.  As Scott writes (edits are mine):

 

The source of this “Islamophilic” viewpoint is a frankly anti-Christian mindset which first appeared during the Enlightenment and thereafter spread inexorably throughout Europe and the Americas. This anti-Christian bias has now become the default mode of thought in academic circles in the West: As Christianity was “talked down” so it became, as the twentieth century progressed, more and more the custom to “talk up” Islam.

 

Take for example the following quote from Bernard Lewis, the doyen of Middle Eastern studies at Princeton, whose 2001 book What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response, looked at the decline of the Islamic world vis à vis the Christian, from the Middle Ages onwards:  “It is often said that Islam is an egalitarian religion. There is much truth in this assertion. If we compare Islam at the time of its advent with the societies that surrounded it – the stratified feudalism of Iran and the caste system of India to the east, the privileged aristocracies of both Byzantine and Latin Europe to the West – the Islamic dispensation does indeed bring a message of equality. Not only does Islam not endorse such systems of social differentiation; it explicitly and absolutely rejects them. The actions and utterances of the Prophet, the honored precedents of the early rulers of Islam as preserved by tradition, are overwhelmingly against privilege by descent, by birth, by status, by wealth, or even by race, and insist that rank and honor are determined only by piety and merit in Islam.” (p. 82) Furthermore, “… though this pristine egalitarianism was in many ways modified and diluted, it remained strong enough to prevent the emergence of either Brahmans or aristocrats and to preserve a society in which merit and ambition might still hope to find their reward.

 

Lewis and other academics are absurd in their claims of Muhammad ‘brotherhood’, equality and tolerance.  The cult was spread by fire, sword and death.  Non-Muslims lived as Dhimmis or non-citizens with no rights, an obligation to pay Jizya or a poll tax along with other onerous taxes and duties; and defined within Muhammadan society as inferior, akin to livestock, the women used in harems and for pleasure, the men in a form of bondage working for their Muslim masters or marched off within Muhammadan armies to war.

 

The reality is that the three groups identified by Lewis as not sharing in the general beneficence of Islamic egalitarianism and freedom – women, slaves, and non-Muslims – suffered, throughout the centuries, indescribable hardships at the hands of their Muslim masters; and two of these groups, women and non-Muslims, continue to suffer to this day. That there are no more slaves in Islam (or very few, officially, at least), is due entirely to the efforts of Westerners during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

 

The myth of Islamic tolerance is in fact one of the most pernicious to have gained currency in Western belief over the past century. In fact, Jews and Christians were anything but “protected” under the aegis of Islam. The dhimmi communities, as Bat Ye’or has shown in great detail in her excellent series of books on the subject, was subject to a whole raft of humiliating and degrading laws which rendered their lives almost intolerable: One of these was the compulsory wearing of distinctive clothing – an endearing feature copied by the Nazis in their persecution of the Jews during the twentieth century.

 

Academics are usually in thrall to Totalitarianism. They have defended mostly en-masse, Nazism, Communism, variant strains of Socialism, Covid Totalitarianism, GlobaloneyWarming, and other ideologies in which power, might and human debasement are essential elements of the program.  It is not a coincidence that most academics, the ‘scientists’, the news-readers, the editors, the text-book writers and Wikipedia editors are Islamophiliacs.  It is simply part of the pattern.  As Scott notes, these lustrous ‘experts’ miss the entire point of the Koran-Muhammadan cult: enslavement of non-Muslims.

 

A fundamental precept of Islamic law – again, underlining its political nature – is that Muslims occupy a privileged position and have a right to live off the labor of infidels – whether they be dhimmis living under Islam or unconquered infidels living outside the House of Islam’s borders. As may be imagined, such a teaching could only breed a parasitical and lawless attitude which positively encouraged robbery and piracy.

 

The effects of enslavement of civilised non-Muslims leads to civilisation’s decline.

 

No Christian or Jewish communities could possibly prosper under such a pernicious system; and there are very good grounds for believing that it was this very system which turned vast areas of formerly fertile agricultural land in the Middle East and North Africa into semi-desert within a few decades during the late seventh century: Incoming Arab nomads grazed their goats and camels on the cultivated fields of the conquered Christians and Jews, and these dared not complain.

 

Muslim hordes spread across civilised Christian lands from Arabia to southern France.  They squatted on rich Byzantine Eastern Christian lands (the Levant, Syria, North Africa) and rich Arian-Catholic lands in Spain (the Visigothic empire).  These Christianised areas were some of the richest on the planet.  All forms and manner of culture, technology and advances were being made.  Algebra for example is a 2nd century Greek-Christian invention (Diophantes et al), and was simply renamed by ignorant Arabs.  Advanced economies used complex irrigation systems, trade routes were extended, money fuelled exchange and refined products impressive in diversity and scale.  The Arabs had none of this.  They simply came, overwhelmed and squatted.

 

Indeed, the process of importing new technologies into the West had begun in the sixth century, before the appearance of Islam, with the appearance there of such Oriental technologies as the stirrup and silk-making. The spread of these eastern ideas seems to have been disrupted for three centuries by the arrival of the Arabs, and then resumed in the latter tenth century. And we should note than even those things which did originate in the Middle East, such as alcohol distillation, algebra, the windmill, etc., were rarely, if ever, the work of Arabs or even Muslims. Almost invariably they were ideas deriving from the work of Persians, Syrians, or Egyptians, who were permitted to continue their work for a short time after the Arab conquests. Once again, it is safe to say that these things would have arrived in the West irrespective of whether Islam existed or not.

 

What did Muhammadans actually bring?  Destruction.

 

What Islam did bring to Europe was war and slavery, on a massive scale. The House of Islam in the tenth century had little use for any of the produce and natural resources of Europe, except one; the bodies of the Europeans themselves. Young women and boys were preferred, but during the tenth century Europeans of almost any age or class, and in almost any part of the continent, could find themselves in chains and on a ship bound for North Africa or the Middle East.

 

Scott rightly documents the culling of White slaves for the Muhammadan cult, with the predations of Vikings.  The onslaught of the North-men is directly connected with obtaining and selling White slaves to Muslims.  Dublin and many other cities were founded to provide a locus for the aggregation and sale of White slaves, many of them ending up in Muslim markets.

 

For the whole Viking phenomenon, which saw Scandinavian pirates wreak havoc throughout the north of Europe for several centuries, was a direct result of the Muslim demand for European slaves. The majority of slaves sold by the Scandinavians to the caliphate were Slavs from east of the Elbe, and indeed the word “slav” implies “slave” in most European languages to this day.

 

But since White Lives Don’t Matter, no one cares about this do they? More to come from Scott’s book.