h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hope you don't mind me bringing this here, but as no one else picked up on your post I didn't want to derail the main thread!

>"And yet, as I understand it, one of the most tolerant societies of history was an Islamic state - the Ottoman Empire. "
>For a person whose ancestors needed to live within this borders of >this Empire for almost 500 years that's an interesting statement Ictoan!

I did preface it with 'as I understand it' meaning that I do not pretend to be an expert on the Ottoman empire, just that of the comments I have come across this was the impression I got.

>Tolerant in what respect? The way it took over so many cultures and >countries or in the way it treated its non Muslim subjects?"
The later, the Ottoman Empire that I have read about seems to have been quite happy to have non muslims residing and worshipping within its sphere of influence. Obviously, over the 500 yrs of its existence I'm sure there will have been periods both like this and akin it, but the general impression I got was that all sorts congregated fairly happily within its walls.

Can I take it from your response that what I have read has been somewhat biased?

I realise as well that taking over other peoples lands is not particularly tolerant, but within the constraints of that thread I was thinking more of internal policy.

"Hope you don't mind me bringing this here, but as no one else picked up on your post I didn't want to derail the main thread!"

Not at all! The other tread, I realized, wasn't very appropriate place to put my post on the first place



I know what you mean. I, myself, have stumbled several times on similar discussions in books or articles. The authors were claiming that in the Ottoman Empire the pressure on the population wasn't any different compared to any other Middle Age society at that time - high taxes, forced labor, etc. The same people actually consider that non Muslim population of the Ottoman Empire were lucky compared to people in Western Europe at that time, because, being "infidels", they were not expected to join the military forces, so they were not suffering from the continuous wars the Empire was in.

But majority of historians agree that being "infidel" the nations enslaved by the Empire were not considered proper subjects - not allowed to go to schools, lacking any legal or, of course, religious rights. There are far too many examples of whole villages killed for the land, the belongings, a real or imaginary offence to a Muslim or just because they refused to convert to Islam.
"According to some Bulgarian historians' estimations, the beginning of the Turkish oppression in the 15th century found Bulgaria with a population of about 1.3 million. Those were the then demographic parameters of any of the large European nations, for example, the population in the present-day territories of England, France or Germany. One hundred years later, the Bulgarians were already down to 260 000 people and remained as many in the course of two more centuries." That's from the book "Bulgaria Illustrated History"

But you don't need to look in very fancy books, just look through some newspapers - there is a very strange discussion going on, between EU, Turkey and Armenia, weather or not the killing of some 1.5 million Armenians was actually an act of genocide or not!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4092933.stm

A bit strange thing to argue about if you ask me, but hey, what do I know about politics

In any case, I guess we are all just human - can never make a perfect tolerant society. But may be trying is enough?

Hi, thanks for the info! Seems my impression of the Ottoman Empire was a little on the uninformed side I should know better than to post without really reading up on a subject first!

I think the you have probably hit the nail on the head. There was also mention, in the original thread, that Muslims could only be taxed a certain amount (according tot he religion) so non muslim inhabitants were worth good money to the various leaders, hence the tolerance.

I think also that there is an element of city/country, especially at that time. You could get away with a lot more in the country than you could in town.

Ah well, I come away a bit more educated and knowledgeable about the world and its history, which is always a good thing!

"In any case, I guess we are all just human - can never make a perfect tolerant society. But may be trying is enough"

True enough! Providing it is the tolerance one tries to perfect and not the society as a whole, that way madness lies.

"Ah well, I come away a bit more educated and knowledgeable about the world and its history, which is always a good thing!"

Well, I don't know about how knowledgeable one can be about such a distant past, there are sooo many different sources that make it seem too perfect or too evil I guess it all comes down to personal experience.

But the reason why I started up this discussion based on your comment was because I think it's good for people to know what actually happened in that part of the world for far too many years. At least from the point of view of the people who lived there

Because this is the basis for many conflicts still. This suspicions between Muslims and Christians is almost "inherited" from mother to a child in many of the Balkan countries. I don't mean that the people are naturally hostile, it's just that they still remember what their ancestors and countries went through. Which, by itself, is good because that's what should keep us from repeating it. The same way we keep remembering the victims of the Holocaust not to blame the Germans but as a way to make sure it never happens again.

The problem comes when a country is not doing fine, the people are getting more and more poor, and less and less secure (which happened after the fall of the communism). And it becomes so very easy for a mad man to come and point a finger and say these Muslims or these Christians are the reason behind it! It's all their fault. And then the fight starts... Frightening really

So in a way I think that educating the people and giving them a better living standard might be the key to increasing the tolerance... I know it sounds a bit.. materialistic but it's just an idea

It is a difficult issue, I do agree. And being educated beyond 'they did this to us' is a good idea.

Thing is, too many people are more than willing to write off their own ancestors misdemeanors as 'past history' whilst at the same time continuing to bear a grudge against any party whose ancestors did the same thing to them.

I do also wonder how far we can get with countries who are currently in turmoil by promoting peace and understanding and cohabitance.

If you look at the 'stable' countries today, I'd say that probably all of them reached their current state of governance and societal organisation through centuries of conflict, bloody uprisings and so forth. The thing was, it was all internal in so far that there was nobody outside trying to impose a new way of thinking.

OK, times were different globally. But I do wonder if a country can ever be bought to a tolerant, peaceful state through external agents, without effectively being an invading oppressive force. And oppression is no way to go since when they eventually leave, everyone goes back to their old grievances which will merely have fastered during the time of occupation.

On the other hand, it isn't really on to just stand on the sidelines and watch people being killed for no real reason.

I dunno what the answer is, but learning from history would be a good start. And learning it for real, rather then the populist versions. It is never as black and white as it is made out to be.

But as the years go by, so certain things become embedded in comunal memory.

"So in a way I think that educating the people and giving them a better living standard might be the key to increasing the tolerance... I know it sounds a bit.. materialistic but it's just an idea"

Missed that point! An interesting one, but to put it another way, if you give people a higher standard of living, arn't they then more likely to defend what they have got from perceived threats?

"I dunno what the answer is, but learning from history would be a good start. And learning it for real, rather then the populist versions. It is never as black and white as it is made out to be."



We often forget to mention the cultural achievements of our "enemies" for example. Which could be a good start for promoting tolerance! Now-a-days history lessons are limited to which king of ours defeated them and which king of their invaded us and stole our things.

"An interesting one, but to put it another way, if you give people a higher standard of living, aren't they then more likely to defend what they have got from perceived threats?"

Yes, definitely. But I think that would be more likely to cause a hostility to an outside threat, rather than towards an ethnic group within the same country, as we saw in the Balkans few years back. Presumably all the people within the same country would have the equal opportunities and way of living and wouldn't go fighting about the "goodies".
Of course hostility to another country is also a problem. But I think today is a bit more difficult to start a war against a country. If you are not USA of course

I guess, the most difficult thing for the rest ot the world, which is not involved in the conflicts, is what you mentioned earlier "On the other hand, it isn't really on to just stand on the sidelines and watch people being killed for no real reason."
Now that's a hard decision to make!

Yes, I do think sometimes there is perhaps reason to say 'oh, let them get on with it' on the international stage as much as there is on the playground.

Thing is, on the national stage, it isn't two people who equally hate each other, its a few of each side killing lots of the other side. It's the innocents, as always, who suffer.

"Now-a-days history lessons are limited to which king of ours defeated them and which king of their invaded us and stole our things."

Oh yes, witness Scots/English history. The number of people think it is about scotland vs. england and falls down to that divide is astonishing. I've even had people telling me there were no Scots fighting for the English, which is documented history. But I suppose people invest a lot of themselves in the various false istories. And, as you say, without being there you can't know for definite what it was like.

"But I think today is a bit more difficult to start a war against a country. If you are not USA of course"

Or Russia. I'm getting more than a bit bit worried about Mr. Putin. Saw a programme about the history of the current Chechen rebellion, which doesn;t particularly backup the role of Mr. Putin as an international terrorism breaker. Not that I can condone the rebels acts, but there's a hell of a lot of injustice they've been subjected too.

And hell of a lot of petrol too as they say

Yes, I know, it's not a laughing matter! It's just sad! And only comes to show that on international level countries also behave as kids in the sand box. The big bullies are always on to something...