montelatici
Gold Member
- Feb 5, 2014
- 18,686
- 2,133
- 280
It's a requirement that indigenous people have a culture of the place, not the culture of the colonizers. By definition.
This needs to be emphasized.
That is ridiculous and would not apply to the European Jews anyway, who were culturally European.
A Native American in the U.S. that is a Christian, speaks English, eats at MacDonalds and runs a casino dressed in an Italian suit, is still indigenous to the Americas.
You simply don't know what 'indigenous' means. Colonizers don't become indigenous, especially when after centuries of residence they don't show any properties of indigenousness.
You are simply making things up. The Muslims and Christians of Palestine were Christians, indigenous to Palestine, when they were conquered by the Arabs. The Arab armies conquered, left Muslim administrators and went on and conquered other lands. They had no people to do the settler colonization thing. Try to read something other than bullshit propaganda. Maybe something from Oxford.
"Muslim commanders left the social structure of the conquered territories almost intact by appointing local Muslim governors and relying on local administrative and financial systems. The populations were not converted en masse but in time the frequency of conversions increased. The reasons for embracing Islam ranged from a desire to come closer to the new masters and share their privileges, to an acknowledgment of, or belief in, the tolerant and syncretistic nature of the new faith. Tolerance, however, could only be granted to the Ahl al Kitab (‘the people of the Book’) that is, those people whom the Qur'an cites as having received revealed scripture: Jews, Christians and the ‘Sabians’. These could not, in principle, be forcibly converted (as could polytheists and disbelievers), and were guaranteed protection and religious autonomy against the payment of a special tax."
Spread of Islam, The - Oxford Islamic Studies Online