What do you think about this thread?

[The alchemist]

Absolute 3rd worldist brainrot. The outside world doesn’t care about your inner worth the only one who do are those that are charitable or god.

There is reason people all over the world try to learn English and not Peruvian because people recognise the worth that the anglosphere has created the technological and cultural dominance they hold and enamoured with it.

Materialism matters because we are in a material world.


It’s telling when your example is the Quran which is full of stories with divine intervention. You live in a fantasy land.



Yea they are. A rich Muslim can contribute so much more than a poor one could.

Again you always bring back to personal things like “strength in devotion”. Your strength in devotion isn’t going to build you a nuke is it? Actions will and with that you need industry and economics not muh “strength in devotion”.



It seems to the average person 99% of Islamic discussion is just rehashing the same debates.

The Muslim world is Economically, Technologically and Militarily inferior to the west. Their culture is loved ours is forgotten. Everyone flocks to their nations and the only Muslim nation that gets any sort of immigration is the gulf states.

Recognising that is the first step. In all the things that are objectively material they are superior.

Idk how you cope but it’s the truth.

I don't mean to disrespect you, but man, you're a fool. I hope you build your character up with good values. I don't hate you at all, because I can see you're a guy with an inferiority issue but I hope you can think a bit harder and educate yourself properly. Take some time off, stop consuming stupid dweeb meme culture, and don't mimic cadaan fascist posts and stop internalizing their worldview.

Read through and reflect on what I wrote to Midas. I don't have all day to write you guys texts, but reflect on that since you seem to assume a lot about my position, and you have a warped mind about things.

 

[Soul Kaizer]

I don't mean to disrespect you, but man, you're a fool. I hope you build your character up with good values. I don't hate you at all, because I can see you're a guy with an inferiority issue but I hope you can think a bit harder and educate yourself properly. Take some time off, stop consuming stupid dweeb meme culture, and don't mimic cadaan fascist posts and stop internalizing their worldview.

Read through and reflect on what I wrote to Midas. I don't have all day to write you guys texts, but reflect on that since you seem to assume a lot about my position, and you have a warped mind about things.

I don’t have anything against you. I can tell you are above average intelligence which in this case comes to your detriment as you are digging your self into a hole with seemingly sound logic but overall it takes you to absurd locations. You are intellectualising something which is an obvious major flaw as a minor issue.

Muslims have failed at keeping up with the west in these pursuits and instead of getting out of their humiliation like china we have regressed into our fortress of spirituality to sedate ou hurt egos.

If I had an inferiority complex I would’ve not said we can compete but rather accept the situation. Recognising the are superior in some things doesn’t mean I believe they are inherently superior overall. Simple distinction.

 

[Abdirazaq]

(41:15) Surah Fussilat

فَأَمَّا عَادٌۭ فَٱسْتَكْبَرُوا۟ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ بِغَيْرِ ٱلْحَقِّ وَقَالُوا۟ مَنْ أَشَدُّ مِنَّا قُوَّةً ۖ أَوَلَمْ يَرَوْا۟ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ ٱلَّذِى خَلَقَهُمْ هُوَ أَشَدُّ مِنْهُمْ قُوَّةًۭ ۖ وَكَانُوا۟ بِـَٔايَـٰتِنَا يَجْحَدُونَ ١٥

As for ’Ȃd, they acted arrogantly throughout the land with no right, boasting, “Who is superior to us in might?” Did they not see that Allah ˹Himself˺, Who created them, was far superior to them in might? Still they persisted in denying Our signs.
— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, The Clear Quran

(41:16)

فَأَرْسَلْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ رِيحًۭا صَرْصَرًۭا فِىٓ أَيَّامٍۢ نَّحِسَاتٍۢ لِّنُذِيقَهُمْ عَذَابَ ٱلْخِزْىِ فِى ٱلْحَيَوٰةِ ٱلدُّنْيَا ۖ وَلَعَذَابُ ٱلْـَٔاخِرَةِ أَخْزَىٰ ۖ وَهُمْ لَا يُنصَرُونَ ١٦

So We sent against them a furious wind, for ˹several˺ miserable days, to make them taste a humiliating punishment in this worldly life. But far more humiliating will be the punishment of the Hereafter. And they will not be helped.
— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, The Clear Quran




Surah Az-Zukhruf
(43:8)

فَأَهْلَكْنَآ أَشَدَّ مِنْهُم بَطْشًۭا وَمَضَىٰ مَثَلُ ٱلْأَوَّلِينَ ٨

So We destroyed those who were far mightier than these ˹Meccans˺. The examples of ˹their˺ predecessors have ˹already˺ been related.

(43:32)

أَهُمْ يَقْسِمُونَ رَحْمَتَ رَبِّكَ ۚ نَحْنُ قَسَمْنَا بَيْنَهُم مَّعِيشَتَهُمْ فِى ٱلْحَيَوٰةِ ٱلدُّنْيَا ۚ وَرَفَعْنَا بَعْضَهُمْ فَوْقَ بَعْضٍۢ دَرَجَـٰتٍۢ لِّيَتَّخِذَ بَعْضُهُم بَعْضًۭا سُخْرِيًّۭا ۗ وَرَحْمَتُ رَبِّكَ خَيْرٌۭ مِّمَّا يَجْمَعُونَ ٣٢

Is it they who distribute your Lord’s mercy? We ˹alone˺ have distributed their ˹very˺ livelihood among them in this worldly life and raised some of them in rank above others so that some may employ others in service. ˹But˺ your Lord’s mercy is far better than whatever ˹wealth˺ they amass.
— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, The Clear Quran

(43:33)

وَلَوْلَآ أَن يَكُونَ ٱلنَّاسُ أُمَّةًۭ وَٰحِدَةًۭ لَّجَعَلْنَا لِمَن يَكْفُرُ بِٱلرَّحْمَـٰنِ لِبُيُوتِهِمْ سُقُفًۭا مِّن فِضَّةٍۢ وَمَعَارِجَ عَلَيْهَا يَظْهَرُونَ ٣٣

Were it not that people might ˹be tempted to˺ become one community ˹of disbelievers˺, We would have supplied the homes of ˹only˺ those who disbelieve in the Most Compassionate with silver roofs and ˹silver˺ stairways to ascend,
— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, The Clear Quran

(43:34)

وَلِبُيُوتِهِمْ أَبْوَٰبًۭا وَسُرُرًا عَلَيْهَا يَتَّكِـُٔونَ ٣٤

as well as ˹silver˺ gates and thrones to recline on,
— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, The Clear Quran

(43:35)

وَزُخْرُفًۭا ۚ وَإِن كُلُّ ذَٰلِكَ لَمَّا مَتَـٰعُ ٱلْحَيَوٰةِ ٱلدُّنْيَا ۚ وَٱلْـَٔاخِرَةُ عِندَ رَبِّكَ لِلْمُتَّقِينَ ٣٥

and ornaments ˹of gold˺. Yet all this is no more than a ˹fleeting˺ enjoyment in this worldly life. ˹But˺ the Hereafter with your Lord is ˹only˺ for those mindful ˹of Him˺.
— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, The Clear Quran

(43:36)

وَمَن يَعْشُ عَن ذِكْرِ ٱلرَّحْمَـٰنِ نُقَيِّضْ لَهُۥ شَيْطَـٰنًۭا فَهُوَ لَهُۥ قَرِينٌۭ ٣٦

And whoever turns a blind eye to the Reminder of the Most Compassionate, We place at the disposal of each a devilish one as their close associate,
— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, The Clear Quran

(43:37)

وَإِنَّهُمْ لَيَصُدُّونَهُمْ عَنِ ٱلسَّبِيلِ وَيَحْسَبُونَ أَنَّهُم مُّهْتَدُونَ ٣٧

who will certainly hinder them from the ˹Right˺ Way while they think they are ˹rightly˺ guided.
— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, The Clear Quran



• These ayat are kinda hard to understand so ill give my understanding from the tafseer I listened to. Essentially had Allah SWT willed every one (who is a disbeliever) on earth could've been rich and lived an extremely materialistic and comfortable life with no issues however through the mercy of Allah we toil in this life and live through hardship and tests as not to forget Allah SWT as such luxuries could easily make us become disbelievers too and make us belive that were self-sufficient, this ease could easily trick us into thinking were not in need of Allah.




(40:4) Surah Ghafir

مَا يُجَـٰدِلُ فِىٓ ءَايَـٰتِ ٱللَّهِ إِلَّا ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ فَلَا يَغْرُرْكَ تَقَلُّبُهُمْ فِى ٱلْبِلَـٰدِ ٤

None disputes the signs of Allah except the disbelievers, so do not be deceived by their prosperity throughout the land.
— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, The Clear Quran

(40:21)

۞ أَوَلَمْ يَسِيرُوا۟ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ فَيَنظُرُوا۟ كَيْفَ كَانَ عَـٰقِبَةُ ٱلَّذِينَ كَانُوا۟ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ ۚ كَانُوا۟ هُمْ أَشَدَّ مِنْهُمْ قُوَّةًۭ وَءَاثَارًۭا فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ فَأَخَذَهُمُ ٱللَّهُ بِذُنُوبِهِمْ وَمَا كَانَ لَهُم مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ مِن وَاقٍۢ ٢١

Have they not travelled throughout the land to see what was the end of those ˹destroyed˺ before them? They were far superior in might and ˹richer in˺ monuments throughout the land. But Allah seized them for their sins, and they had no protector from Allah.
— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, The Clear Quran

(40:82)

أَفَلَمْ يَسِيرُوا۟ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ فَيَنظُرُوا۟ كَيْفَ كَانَ عَـٰقِبَةُ ٱلَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ ۚ كَانُوٓا۟ أَكْثَرَ مِنْهُمْ وَأَشَدَّ قُوَّةًۭ وَءَاثَارًۭا فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ فَمَآ أَغْنَىٰ عَنْهُم مَّا كَانُوا۟ يَكْسِبُونَ ٨٢

Have they not travelled throughout the land to see what was the end of those who were ˹destroyed˺ before them? They were far superior in number and might and ˹richer in˺ monuments throughout the land, but their ˹worldly˺ gains were of no benefit to them.
— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, The Clear Quran

(40:83)

فَلَمَّا جَآءَتْهُمْ رُسُلُهُم بِٱلْبَيِّنَـٰتِ فَرِحُوا۟ بِمَا عِندَهُم مِّنَ ٱلْعِلْمِ وَحَاقَ بِهِم مَّا كَانُوا۟ بِهِۦ يَسْتَهْزِءُونَ ٨٣

When their messengers came to them with clear proofs, they were prideful in whatever ˹worldly˺ knowledge they had, and were ˹ultimately˺ overwhelmed by what they used to ridicule.
— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, The Clear Quran

 

[Midas]

No offense to the ummatics group im familiar with their work and its a noble goal. But right away you can just tell by reading this excerpt below just how much even muslim intellectuals working at the cutting edge of islamic thought are infected by post-colonial thinking. Imagine taking this utopian vision of reality seriously. As if the brutality of war is something unique to European modernity. Or that Muslims states like the Ottomans,mughals, and safavids didnt have "a monopoly on violence " also they dont even seem to acknowledge the massive success of east asian nation-states like china ,Japan and south korea.

One of the problems with wael Hallaq ( who is a very innovative and important thinker) is that his understanding of premodern Islamic governance is incredibly idealistic and utopian and academics have in recent years launched critiques on his work based on that.


This post is a good summary of that

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Three core disagreements between Abdullahi an-Naim and Wael Hallaq. First an-Naim rejects Hallaq&#39;s binary of &quot;authentic classical Vs corrupt modern&quot; by pointing to historical flexibility. Second, he sees secularism not as anti islamic but as enabling religious freedom. <a href="https://t.co/6C4UlLTsyb">https://t.co/6C4UlLTsyb</a></p>&mdash; Ziryab Jamal (@ZiryabJ) <a href="">August 15, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>






Also again no offense to the ummatics guys but words and terminology like "the act of remembering" need to be purged from our discourse compelelty. Its this intense naval gazing disocurse theory stuff that is actually the ultimate weapon of the west .

 

[The alchemist]

I don’t have anything against you. I can tell you are above average intelligence which in this case comes to your detriment as you are digging your self into a hole with seemingly sound logic but overall it takes you to absurd locations. You are intellectualising something which is an obvious major flaw as a minor issue.

Muslims have failed at keeping up with the west in these pursuits and instead of getting out of their humiliation like china we have regressed into our fortress of spirituality to sedate ou hurt egos.

If I had an inferiority complex I would’ve not said we can compete but rather accept the situation. Recognising the are superior in some things doesn’t mean I believe they are inherently superior overall. Simple distinction.

I won’t circle on this. I’ll end here. What I’ve said is reasonable, sound, and grounded in knowledge -- not just deduction, premise reductionism, or abstraction.

 

[The alchemist]

No offense to the ummatics group im familiar with their work and its a noble goal. But right away you can just tell by reading this excerpt below just how much even muslim intellectuals working at the cutting edge of islamic thought are infected by post-colonial thinking. Imagine taking this utopian vision of reality seriously. As if the brutality of war is something unique to European modernity. Or that Muslims states like the Ottomans,mughals, and safavids didnt have "a monopoly on violence " also they dont even seem to acknowledge the massive success of east asian nation-states like china ,Japan and south korea.

View attachment 372075


One of the problems with wael Hallaq ( who is a very innovative and important thinker) is that his understanding of premodern Islamic governance is incredibly idealistic and utopian and academics have in recent years launched critiques on his work based on that.


This post is a good summary of that

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Three core disagreements between Abdullahi an-Naim and Wael Hallaq. First an-Naim rejects Hallaq&#39;s binary of &quot;authentic classical Vs corrupt modern&quot; by pointing to historical flexibility. Second, he sees secularism not as anti islamic but as enabling religious freedom. <a href="https://t.co/6C4UlLTsyb">https://t.co/6C4UlLTsyb</a></p>&mdash; Ziryab Jamal (@ZiryabJ) <a href="">August 15, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>






Also again no offense to the ummatics guys but words and terminology like "the act of remembering" need to be purged from our discourse compelelty. Its this intense naval gazing disocurse theory stuff that is actually the ultimate weapon of the west .



View attachment 372076

This is going into several diverging directions that either misrepresent contexts within language used, then setting off diversions, missing the central premise or straight up being off the mark on the the central point of the writing that needs a strong, focused read. Nothing about this utopian at all. It is an analysis of the historic development of what got us here and how even the imagination of other "possibilities" within the Islamic collective ecosystem is reduced by the current paradigm that does not want itself get challenged. What you call "post-colonial" in the sense of pejorative is the current regional set-up, simply put. The politicians are Western puppets; if the people choose good leaders who want to change, they get sent out violently by the manipulation of outside actors. What is with you guys and pretending Western domination is not a real thing? When was the last time you read about the current state of affairs, going back decades?

By the way, keep to the article I sent alone, since I don't endorse movements or people I have no knowledge about, so that would be a critique out of this discussion. There is no reason to mention East Asians in this very topic since they are not the ones who shaped the current paradigm in the Islamic world. Do you understand? Context matters. This is historic geopolitics 1:1; it's material you learn in Western universities if you want to seek depth about relational development and conflict, the very regions discussed. The rest is the analysis of why Islamic collective development has been systematically destroyed.

You can't do anything unless people have a sense of thoughts of lineage. These westerners draw selectively upon the history they deem useful, as they see fit. "Rememberance" is not used literally in the fireplace, sitting grilling marshmallows, singing hymns on some hippie nonsense. It's the open discourse in the collective that channels and activates flurishments from an endemic Islamic ground. The point is, nothing is allowed to be cultivated at all.

If you go to China, they essentially did that with their ancient cultures. The aspect of "monopoly of violence" is to undergird a principal knowledge-based rational building of argument, a theoretical underpinning to set an argumentative strength through competence. This is a common topic in political history lectures. She quoted an aspect from that author, not his whole thinking. You're going into the weeds instead of arguing against the substance, which is undeniable.

Sometimes people need to be honest and listen instead of pushing their willful ideologies. Just because you don't like how it sounds does not make it not true. There is not a scholar worth their salt who would argue with what she wrote.

This is where I leave it. I've presented enough strong, coherent arguments throughout this thread that are sufficient.