Do you personally think that Ottoman rule or European rule was more beneficial for the Arab world?

May 2014
16,699
SoCal
#32
Definitely none..... Turks ruled the region for almost 900 yrs w/o producing a single scientist... at least no one I know of. Turks being nomads from Central Asia had no culture and so everything they had they adapted from the existing middle eastern culture. For instance, Turks are among the only ones who converted to a religion of their subjects. The romans being the only other example i can think of.
Did European rule actually result in the Arab world producing many scientists, though?
 
Dec 2015
482
Middle East
#33
To prove Muslim invaders committed no persecution of Hindus and to secularize Indian history with false narrative.
Awww poor hindus..... Meanwhile under indigenous rule 16% of the Indian population are dalits or untouchable.....

Did European rule actually result in the Arab world producing many scientists, though?
Of course not.... which means Turks and Europeans are not that different after all.
 
Apr 2019
170
India
#34
Awww poor hindus..... Meanwhile under indigenous rule 16% of the Indian population are dalits or untouchable.....
But atleast we always had scope of undoing any malpractice. Indian laws were never rigid. We don't even know how this practice started at the first place because many of Indian kings belonged to that 'dalit' category.
Although wikipedia is not that reliable but still you can read this article for basic understanding of Indian caste system:
Caste system in India - Wikipedia
Also don't forget British treated all of Indian as almost untouchable. So did most of Islamic rulers. They considered Indian unpure and inferior.
India is extremely diverse so the practice was not uniform across India.

Self-rule is always far more superior than foreign rule specially when religious difference is involved.
 
Apr 2019
170
India
#35
Gotcha; that makes sense.
Actually leftists across the globe are almost same. They are anti-culture, anti-religion, anti-family, anti-tradition, anti-aesthetics, anti-establishment and truth to be told anti-existence. They are extremely intolerant of free thinking. They dominate media, universities, many political parties and upper house of parliament in India. They have fixed narrative about everything in this world and they only let their type of people inside their circle.
Although in India surprisingly they get along Islamic and Christian fundamentalists(due to their shared hate for Indian culture) very-very well.
Their aggressive confidence is embarrasing. It's hard to find a person in their lot who contributes to the society in positive way. But they still lead luxurious lives behind closed doors.
 
Likes: Futurist
Dec 2015
482
Middle East
#36
Self-rule is always far more superior than foreign rule specially when religious difference is involved.
Well maybe Indians are destined to be ruled by outsiders most notably by Middle Easterners. I believe in the out-of-Anatolia theory so that means that the Aryans came from.... say the Mitanni Kingdom in the Middle East to rule India, then several successive Persian empires ruled India, then came along the Arabs, then came along the Turks who adapted a Middle Eastern religion and finally came along the British who also had adapted a Middle Eastern religion.
 
Apr 2019
170
India
#37
Well maybe Indians are destined to be ruled by outsiders most notably by Middle Easterners. I believe in the out-of-Anatolia theory so that means that the Aryans came from.... say the Mitanni Kingdom in the Middle East to rule India, then several successive Persian empires ruled India, then came along the Arabs, then came along the Turks who adapted a Middle Eastern religion and finally came along the British who also had adapted a Middle Eastern religion.
Hell ! Dear Mr Seer can you please tell us poor Indian a way to repel this bad luck. o_O
 
Likes: Futurist
Mar 2016
748
Antalya
#38
How about neither,

I am assuming you mean in the context only of 19th and 20th centuries given European rule did not happen in large areas until then?

Ottoman points in favor-

1. united rule for diverse populations with some structures in place to address inadequacies
2. slightly more legitimacy than Europeans in most regions of ruled areas
3. stronger sense of history and identity which might have blossomed into cultural renewal with new technologies and social changes inspired rather than imposed by the west

European points in favor-
1. modernized certain parts of the infrastructure more quickly
2. aside from things which touched core European financial interests large areas were left to mostly autonomous rule
3. western education focusing on technocratic solutions and systematic analysis brought millions of people into a new global order

Ottoman negatives-

1. often reactionary, concentrated power in a way that was open to abuse
2. had little interest in improving infrastructure outside of core territories
3. brutal policies vs minorities and anyone who questioned Ottoman legitimacy

European negatives-
1. killed millions establishing their rule
2. quashed local identities and left power vacuums left and right because short term interests were prioritized
3. transferred wealth on a large scale via regulatory tariffs and restrictive economic impositions
Good summary. In short, both were not beneficial, but European did more damage than Turks.
 
Mar 2016
748
Antalya
#39
Definitely none..... Turks ruled the region for almost 900 yrs w/o producing a single scientist... at least no one I know of. Turks being nomads from Central Asia had no culture and so everything they had they adapted from the existing middle eastern culture. For instance, Turks are among the only ones who converted to a religion of their subjects. The romans being the only other example i can think of.
Intellectual stagnation is not a conscious effort. It is a product of Turkish culture where utter most importance is put to military and military technology, but the rest is ignored. Also claiming Turks had no culture is not true. Turks had great military and organizational culture, far superior to anything out there. Turks also employed advanced metallurgy and sword craftsmanship. They were not as civilized as Persians tho.
 

Similar History Discussions