This thread is dedicated to all the glorious empires that were destroyed by Muslims.
Today: The Vijayanagara Empire
>see OP's pic
>expect a thread about Indian kingdoms, Hindu architecture, or something interesting like that
>it's just another Muslim hate thread
I don't know much about Vijayanagara. Southeast Asia is more my thing.
I've heard that it was among the biggest cities on Earth in the 16th century, though I don't know how true it is.
Also I have a bunch of pictures of it if you want me to post some.
I found it here and then did a reverse search; https://soundcloud.com/pilotredsun/like-warm-hedgehogs
Thanks, I really like that sun's face.
That is the only thing in post which did not happen in india, and the others only happened after islamic invasion.
There are no records of such things happening even in traveller logs of foreign travellers
You can count the number of empires Muslims destroyed on one hand. You'd need both hands to count the number of empires they created.
Meanwhile the records of Christians destroying every empire on Earth fill all Western history books.
>christians preserved cultures
Oh you're so funny mate what are the american native cultures which are all christian and spanish or portuguese speaking or the european pagans which converted or got massacred like the baltics and saxons and also middle easterners which lost their unique pagan culture and became christian and after that muslim.
Indonesia and Malaysia was rich in culture before it became Muslim.
The culture only survives in Bali today.
It's not only Muslims though. Khmer culture died after the Thais invaded and destroyed Angkor in the 1500s. Cham culture died after Viets invaded.
In SE Asia the only places were traditional culture survives is Burma, Thailand, and Bali.
Modern Khmer culture is pretty much a ripoff of Thai culture.
Indonesian & Malaysian culture is more like a Islamic bastard culture.
And Phillipines doesn't have culture
Laos and Vietnam has communist culture with traces of traditional culture
t. Indian Marxist
I hope Narendra Modi takes you off on helicopter flights and dump you in the Indian Ocean.
It's funny how in India, the whole dichotomy between nationalism and imperialism, the memory of oppression and exploitation etc is inverted in relation to the West.
In the West, leftists cannot shup up about the crimes of European imperialism, how African nationalism, Arab nationalism and other kinds of Third World nationalism are necessary to change that, how these oppressed peoples are deserving of sympathy and how white people have to pay reparations for their crimes.
Meanwhile in India, Marxist historians systematically whitewash the record of Islam as an oppressive, genocidal and totalitarian force that literally killed tens of millions of people and unleashed havoc and destruction in the whole subcontinent. And the Hindu nationalists that try to reclaim Indian heritage from oppression are depicted as "fascists" instead.
It shows two things.
1. Leftism is a cancer and they should be lined up and shot.
2. The relation between leftism and Islam goes further than mere convenience for criticizing the West.
I'd say, about this last point, that leftists inherently love Islam because Islam is a centralizing religion that requires rules by a priestly class, and that's the kind of rule that leftists want to universally establish, therefore they will support Islam against the West because the West "oppressed Muslim countries", and they will support Islam against India because "Islam improved India by oppressing it".
Hindu nationalists are pissed because India is a literal cesspit full of shit, rape and bad hygiene. It wasn't always like this. At a few points in history, India was one of the richest and most enlightened places in the world, but the descendants of those civilization builders and philosophers who live in the shit covered wasteland that is India today would rather try to assimilate and copy western culture because of their inferiority complex (one of the fine British legacies left in India). The India we see today is a joke compared to the Hindustan of the past.
50 years of Nehruvian socialism did that to the country.
Thank Shiva based Modi is here now so we can finally take off.
An aspect of Vijayanagara architecture that shows the cosmopolitanism of the great city is the presence of many secular structures bearing Islamic features. While political history concentrates on the ongoing conflict between the Vijayanagara empire and the Deccan Sultanates, the architectural record reflects a more creative interaction. There are many arches, domes and vaults that show these influences. The concentration of structures like pavilions, stables and towers suggests they were for use by royalty. The decorative details of these structures may have been absorbed into Vijayanagara architecture during the early 15th century, coinciding with the rule of Deva Raya I and Deva Raya II. These kings are known to have employed many Muslims in their army and court, some of whom may have been Muslim architects. This harmonious exchange of architectural ideas must have happened during rare periods of peace between the Hindu and Muslim kingdoms. The "Great Platform" (Mahanavami dibba) has relief carvings in which the figures seem to have the facial features of central Asian Turks who were known to have been employed as royal attendants.
oh boy history isn't black and white
No, indian leftists like islam because the average muzzie in india will literally vote for the party that promises them more islam.
Fucking gandhi had to ruin everything.
Its because the vijaynagara empire employed turkish mercenaries who eventually betrayed the empire.
It also created a self sufficient food production regime, and created the educated base on which the current economy of india is standing.
Modi really isn't gonna do too much
Gandhi was a pushover pawn for the Raj who people see as some sort of revolutionary but in reality he was just a dirty hippy. Did he have no honor? Did he not fear for the future of Hindustan when it was divided?
>WE WANT UNITED HINDUSTAN
>WE WANT MUZZIES TO BE GONE
Western pakistan and the North indian "nobility" that moved there were cancerous bastards that were better gone.
Even west bengal bounced back from the partition rather well
Wrong. I'd rather have a united Hindustan where relations among the common Hindu, Muslim and Sikh were stable as they had been for hundreds of years prior to the cancerous Europeans invasions which created divisions among Muslims and the rest of the population. A united Hindustan is what India needs, and the reality is that it won't happen, ever. At least not soon anyway. The people of India and Pakistan are too far up their own asses with meaningless nationalism that they fail to see that their unity is the only thing stopping them from progression. Oh, along with terrorism.
oh fuck off, there was no romantic idea of being united and stable. It was always a tinderbox going off over time, and it still does. Instead of de fanging islamic nationalism gandhi stoked it and ruined the chance of muslims as a whole coming under a common pan indian banner.
The post independence saudi influence of indian muslims just adds fuel to the fire.
>Indonesia and Malaysia was rich in culture before it became Muslim.
It was also chaotic as fuck.
The Islamic concept of Ummah created centralized states in Malaysia and Indonesia. Brunei being the classic. Islamic tribes in the Philippines stopped fighting their neighbours across the river when they converted to Jizzlam and only fought the boogaboo animists instead.
Clearly, the Islamic domination was not enough to civilize India. Even after centuries, the demented ideology based on a caste system, human sacrifices, which abhors the present and idolizes poverty and human misery, remains and grows strongly.
Brahmanism is a disgrace, and should have been wiped off the earth. But except for the Turkish sodomite Ghazni, no one seriously set out to eliminate this harmful ideology.
As for the Indian conservatives, I quote Hayek:
"Conservatism is only as good as what it conserves."
It's easy to be retard and a conservative. Is sufficient to want to preserve a dementia or a savagery. Incidentally, Brahmanism is both.
How did Islam contribute to technology? If Zoroastrianism was the major religion of central and western asia they would have supported the development of the same technology to build their temples, would they not?
hindu religion is kind of cynical towards life. it doesn't matter that much the point is to rise up through the ranks spiritually until you reach a spiritual enlightenment.
this a very basic summarization of it
Let's have at least one image showing the parts of the world conquered by Christians.
This leaves out Japan for some reason.
>It's only "culture" if its Indian Influenced
Fuck off Ranjeesh Punani.
Vietnam is Sinic. Still is despite their hatred of China.
Burmese-Thai have this weird combination of Sinic and Indian.
Philippines may be terribly westernized but they're one of the few Spanish Colonies that still speak their own language.
It was nobody's fault Poo in Loo culture lost out in Southeast Asia. You can't blame MUH ISLAMIC AGGRESSION as SEA was the site of the most peaceful spread of Islam ever: via traders making discounts for converts.
Well, maybe you can blame Vietnam, but East Asian culture > South Asian anyway.
There aren't any.
You have Muslims conquering a fifth of the world a thousand years ago, and Christians conquering the whole world, which only ended when the West stopped being Christendom.
yes, we should have 500 thology threads instead and talk about 3 kingdoms era china by playing dynasty warriors.
which is why their architecture is largely indian influenced, their names are largely indian influenced, and even in indonesia hinduism is one of the recognized religion, a lot of their myths are literally based of indian myths.
And of course, you don't say that about Europeans in Africa.
Modern Hindu nationalism doesn't have anything to do with Brahmanism, and it's hated by leftists for the same reason they hate Catholicism and Confucianism. Because there are the only religions that provide for the principle of subsidiarity to decentralize political power, instead of worshiping central authorities and centralization.
If you've actually read Hayek, you would understand the importance of that. I'm sure he would have approved Hindutva and the RSS.
>And of course, you don't say that about Europeans in Africa.
It would be better if they were still under European rule. At least the Chinese are going in there now and trying their hand, and good luck to them.
modern hindu nationalism is a fucking meme. Its literally following the path of 19th century reformers who were acting against christian and proselytizing muslim shits and trying to create a cult of cow worship, which is fucking retarded.
it certainly seems to because everyone wants to get the good stuff its part of the reason Europe want on to colonize the world perhaps the main motivating factor its was invaded by muslims for a long ass time. I think even alexander the great wanted to go for if his troops were willing. and its one of the oldest civilizations in the world
>its part of the reason Europe want on to colonize the world
No, that was trade with Indonesia and a desire to cut out Muslims from the spice trade. India didn't matter at all.
>its one of the oldest civilizations in the world
Not really, it only began around 600 BC.
>If you've actually read Hayek, you would understand the importance of that. I'm sure he would have approved Hindutva and the RSS.
I doubt very much that he would support a program that wants to create a ethnocracy a country of dozens of religions and hundreds of languages and peoples.
It is, indeed, an absolute idiotic and incoherent program - and the only common ground is the cultural and religious Hindu heritage - from where comes the eternal butthurt of Indian conservatives with foreign domination (or even local, as long as non-Hindu), particularly the Muslims and the British, against which they have an irrational hatred, and against which they often invent absurd statistics, while feeding the weirdest national mythology.
no western imperialism 2 electric Bogaloo when
>No, that was trade with Indonesia and a desire to cut out Muslims from the spice trade. India didn't matter at all.
Then why did the Europeans focus on India and not Indonesia
>Not really, it only began around 600 BC.
I think mixed it up with the indus valley civilization
Which is exactly why the Portuguese established a trade agreement with the vijaynagara empire and supplied them with cannons. Because Indonesia.
he is just shitposting.
I mean the IVC left a large impact on the later indian civilizations in terms of city design, weights and measurements, and even some religious shit.
>I doubt very much that he would support a program that wants to create a ethnocracy a country of dozens of religions and hundreds of languages and peoples.
They don't, though, that's just leftist slander.
The purpose of Hindutva is to empower Hindus not by asking handouts from a central state, like Blacks do in the U.S., or Muslims in Europe, but by engaging in self-organization, the building of voluntary societies and the defense of civil society.
That's why commies fear Hindu nationalism so much. A lot of the power of the international communist movement is derived from their stranglehold over the intellectual realm, which them influences organizations of civil society. Most NGOs are, if not communist themselves, intellectually influenced by the methods and ideas of the communist movement, which trickles down from the own education of their leaders at Marxist universities.
It's not like that in India, where the RSS, inspired by Hindu nationalism creates a "counter-civil society" that weakens the attempts of communists to mobilize society for their own purposes.
I'm not Indian, actually, I'm Brazilian, so a lot of the sentiments of Hindu nationalists seem strange to me, like their rejection of Indo-European migration models for nationalist purposes, but I can forgive that if the trade-off is the largest, and might I say, only, popular, mass-based right-wing political movement in the world today.
There is a reason that Europe went to the Indian Ocean and not the other way around. It's not because there was a thriving trade in the North Atlantic that they wanted to expand, it's because there was a thriving trade in the Indian Ocean that they wanted to take over.
They got rekt a lot. But they won in the end.
>Then why did the Europeans focus on India and not Indonesia
They did focused on securing the entire Indian ocean, including East Africa, India, and Indonesia. The reason they wanted to control this Ocean was so they could control the spice trade coming from Indonesia. This is very, very basic history.
>I think mixed it up with the indus valley civilization
The Indus Valley civilization had next to nothing to do with later Indian civilization.
The Mahajanapadas in the Gangetic Valley, which saw the first urbanisation of India since the IVC.
>Which is exactly why the Portuguese established a trade agreement with the vijaynagara empire and supplied them with cannons. Because Indonesia.
Yes, because they wanted to control the Indian Ocean spice trade coming out of Indonesia.
In fact, this whole thread seems to be originally directed to the absurd statistics that the BJP loves to repeat like a mantra?
>Muh 90 million deaths
My dear, I'm also Brazilian, and Indian nationalism model looks horrendous. It is a grotesque artificiality (which strongly resembles Kemalism in this respect) trying to invent an identity where there is none. In the absence of another element for this purpose, seeks Hinduism, and creates a Manichean system ("us against them") around a purely fictitious ethnic identity. In the process, alienates much of the Indian population, which happens to become the enemy within (non-Hindu).
Bordering on schizophrenia: Want the unification of the subcontinent, while excludes from its patriotic delusion good part of it. Preaches the unity of the nation, and at the same time tries to tear it in half.
Did you read my post at all? They were trying to secure the entire Indian ocean, because the Indian ocean hosted the spice trade. Those spices came from Indonesia. Trade with India was obviously valuable too, just like trade with China, Japan, Persia, etc, but it was the Indonesian spices that were the main motivating factor.
The comparison with Kemalism doesn't work. Kemalism is secular, left-wing and centralizing political movement, while Hindutva is religious, right-wing and decentralizing. The Turkish equivalent to Hindutva is the Gulen movement, another mass-based right-wing movement I admire from afar.
The only similarity between Hindutva and Kemalism is the silly mythology, but that's not what is important. Hindu nationalism can't "divide" India because it's not a revolutionary ideology that seeks to seize power to enact social change by decree, like Kemalism.
I wish there was something like that in Brazil to counter the whole hegemony of the left. There are only the evangelical churches but they have been hypnotized by parliamentary politics and so they don't care about self-organizing their bases and educating their children.
i took an AP history course in highschool.
i learned that hinudism involves moving up in the caste system by being the best at what you do in your caste so that when you die and get reincarnated you end up in a higher position until you eventually reach a point when you leave the cycle of reincarnation to enter a spiritual realm or nirvana type place i can quite remember what its called
I know, but /pol/ (and by extension /his/) has this irrational fixation with Islam as if it's literally worse than Hitler.
>muh library of Alexandria
Fuck off with that shit
They preserved about as much (or less) than the Muslims. When it comes to destroying and erasing cultures, Christianity surpasses even the Mongols. Pic related.
Really though, if you want to stop rejecting history, all of this info is readily available online or at your local library (which I remind you is free to use).
The only difference is the support for the common identity. In Turkey, secularism was used to erase the internationalist model Islam - use of religion would be a shot in the foot. In India, where there are hundreds of different ethnic groups in the same space, religion is the only common link - but not universal in its limits.
As the one being right and the other on the left, these labels are difficult to apply in this case. Both support a massive role of the state in economic management. Both support a present state - not socialist, but a conduit of social change, and a mean of maintaining national identity.
The BJP's economic practices leave much to be desired, and represent a meager and insignificant improvement over the INC's. In the rule of law, everything that we saw were continuing efforts to modify the civil code and adapt it to understand that his concept of Hindu identity, effectively eliminating the legal protection of other groups.
That is, yes, although preach to organic and social base, once in power, make the state its main instrument.
As the comparison on the Gulen Movement, this seems quite inadequate. Both in relation to practices, as posture. Unlike Indian nationalism, is not hostile to the different or "anti-colonial". Attempts to integrate, rather than to antagonize. And it has mainly organics bases.
Literally everything does damage by necessity. Christianity has a longer and larger level of damage than Islam but /pol/ doesn't care to talk about it, because it's not the "damage" that matters, it's their garbage ideology.
And there were also several dynasties of Muslim Iranian Empires.
>Eastern roman empire
Destroyed mostly by Catholics, Muslims just happened to deal the final blow.
>Countless indian empires
And there were also countless dynasties of Muslim Indian empires
May as well be the same thing, they were both just temporary results of the power vacuum resulting from the Byzantines' fade from glory. They wouldn't have lasted long anyways.
>>Various kingdoms (Albania, Sicily, Croatia etc.)
What? If you're talking about the Muslim invasion of Iberia there was no such thing as "Spain" at the time, the two entities on the Iberian peninsula were the Visigoths and Suevis, neither of which were empires (by their own terms at least).
Meanwhile, how many empires in the Americas, Africa, and Asia have Christians destroyed?
>Countless African empires
>Countless Indian empires
And that's only the states that actually called themselves empires. If you want to bend the rules a bit you could include even more. (Hawaii, the Philippines, Thailand, Sibir, Crimea, countless other tribal groups and kingdoms in the Americas, Africa, and Asia)
>hurr durr a state with a Christian majority did it so we should blame Christianity!!!
The Bahmanids were much cooler than Vijayanagara imho
I have to mention here that I dislike how every Shia dynasty aside from the well know ones have their religion on the wiki as "Islam" while the sunni ones say "Sunni Islam"
Bidar was cool as fuck, according to foreigners.
They rejected communism. They are right now trying to heal from the scars of communism and trying to restore their culture. I applaud them for their effort, but its a hard road ahead. Scars of communism run deep