Armenia for Armenians

[jgk3]

Re: Armenia for Armenians

Since the idea of family/tribes/culture is outdated, the only thing people can attribute themselves to is the state/province/nation/country they belong to. So in essence, the state is your family... a family that works you like a slave, taxes you and tosses you on the streets or in jail if you don't obey.

jgk3 likes this

[KanadaHye]

Re: Armenia for Armenians

Since the idea of family/tribes/culture is outdated, the only thing people can attribute themselves to is the state/province/nation/country they belong to. So in essence, the state is your family... a family that works you like a slave, taxes you and tosses you on the streets or in jail if you don't obey.

[Odar]

Re: Armenia for Armenians

Nationalism as an ideology has usually little to do with historical, and common sense.

[KanadaHye]

Re: Armenia for Armenians

Isn't the Khazar hypothesis the same upheld by Shlomo Sand in "The Invention Of The xxxish People"? I haven't read that book, however I agree with him on one point, that Zionism, like most nationalisms, is a 19th century's Europe product.

The tragically funny thing is that now whoever can claim 1/4 xxxish blood is allowed to "return" to Israel (unless they converted to another religion!)) and to enjoy full citizenship and stuff, while so many Palestinians, who are probably the descendants of those xxxs who never left the country, are not.

The Zionist movement was more about population and land transfer than historical sense. Hurry up, leave everything that you've worked for and come to the promised land where you'll be greeted by angry neighbours.

[Odar]

Re: Armenia for Armenians

@ jgk3: I'm well aware of that - what I mean is that the process, through which in Europe (and yes, not in the whole continent) it became possible to question even the basic tenets of Christian religion and culture, and therefore to lay the grounds for the separation between church and state, didn't occur in the Muslim world. Or better, it started developing way too late and mainly due to foreign influences, and that's why the radical Islamists can now claim that those ideas are spurious and non-Islamic. There are many reasons why that happened, and some have to do with culture itself. The same applies with Christianity, too - generally speaking, why were the countries with a strong Protestant presence the most advanced ones, whilst for example the Catholic and Orthodox countries remained scientifically and culturally backward?

Isn't the Khazar hypothesis the same upheld by Shlomo Sand in "The Invention Of The xxxish People"? I haven't read that book, however I agree with him on one point, that Zionism, like most nationalisms, is a 19th century's Europe product.

The tragically funny thing is that now whoever can claim 1/4 xxxish blood is allowed to "return" to Israel (unless they converted to another religion!)) and to enjoy full citizenship and stuff, while so many Palestinians, who are probably the descendants of those xxxs who never left the country, are not.

[jgk3]

Re: Armenia for Armenians

For what it's worth, taken from the "XXX"ish Encyclopedia:


CHAZARS
A people of Turkish origin whose life and history are interwoven with the very beginnings of the history of the xxxs of Russia. The kingdom of the Chazars was firmly established in most of South Russia long before the foundation of the Russian monarchy by the Varangians (855). xxxs have lived on the shores of the Black and Caspian seas since the first centuries of the common era. Historical evidence points to the region of the Ural as the home of the Chazars. Among the classical writers of the Middle Ages they were known as the "Chozars," "Khazirs," "Akatzirs," and "Akatirs," and in the Russian chronicles as "Khwalisses" and "Ugry Byelyye."

when I saw "Ugry Byelyye" I initially read it as "Ugly Byelyye", Ugly whites!

Well, when the encyclopedia says interwoven, I guess they don't specify "how much", or "how long". The Khazar kingdom was home to Christians, Muslims, Jews and pagans alike.

Early History.

The Armenian writers of the fifth and following centuries furnish ample information concerning this people. Moses of Chorene refers to the invasion by the "Khazirs" of Armenia and Iberia at the beginning of the third century: "The chaghan was the king of the North, the ruler of the Khazirs, and the queen was the chatoun" ("History of Armenia," ii. 357). The Chazars first came to Armenia with the Basileans in 198. Though at first repulsed, they subsequently became important factors in Armenian history for a period of 800 years. Driven onward by the nomadic tribes of the steppes and by their own desire for plunder and revenge, they made frequent invasions into Armenia. The latter country was made the battle-ground in the long struggle between the Romans and the Persians. This struggle, which finally resulted in the loss by Armenia of her independence, paved the way for the political importance of the Chazars. The conquest of eastern Armenia by the Persians in the fourth century rendered the latter dangerous to the Chazars, who, for their own protection, formed an alliance with the Byzantines. This alliance was renewed from time to time until the final conquest of the Chazars by the Russians. Their first aid was rendered to the Byzantine emperor Julian, in 363. About 434 they were for a time tributary to Attila—Sidonius Apollinaris relates that the Chazars followed the banners of Attila—and in 452 fought on the Catalanian fields in company with the Black Huns and Alans. The Persian king Kobad (488-531) undertook the construction of a line of forts through the pass between Derbent and the Caucasus, in order to guard against the invasion of the Chazars, Turks, and other warlike tribes. His son Chosroes Anoshirvan (531-579) built the wall of Derbent, repeatedly mentioned by the Oriental geographers and historians as Bab al-Abwab (Justi, "Gesch. des Alton Persiens," p. 208).

That's good to know, thanks

[KanadaHye]

Re: Armenia for Armenians

For what it's worth, taken from the "XXX"ish Encyclopedia:


CHAZARS
A people of Turkish origin whose life and history are interwoven with the very beginnings of the history of the xxxs of Russia. The kingdom of the Chazars was firmly established in most of South Russia long before the foundation of the Russian monarchy by the Varangians (855). xxxs have lived on the shores of the Black and Caspian seas since the first centuries of the common era. Historical evidence points to the region of the Ural as the home of the Chazars. Among the classical writers of the Middle Ages they were known as the "Chozars," "Khazirs," "Akatzirs," and "Akatirs," and in the Russian chronicles as "Khwalisses" and "Ugry Byelyye."

Early History.

The Armenian writers of the fifth and following centuries furnish ample information concerning this people. Moses of Chorene refers to the invasion by the "Khazirs" of Armenia and Iberia at the beginning of the third century: "The chaghan was the king of the North, the ruler of the Khazirs, and the queen was the chatoun" ("History of Armenia," ii. 357). The Chazars first came to Armenia with the Basileans in 198. Though at first repulsed, they subsequently became important factors in Armenian history for a period of 800 years. Driven onward by the nomadic tribes of the steppes and by their own desire for plunder and revenge, they made frequent invasions into Armenia. The latter country was made the battle-ground in the long struggle between the Romans and the Persians. This struggle, which finally resulted in the loss by Armenia of her independence, paved the way for the political importance of the Chazars. The conquest of eastern Armenia by the Persians in the fourth century rendered the latter dangerous to the Chazars, who, for their own protection, formed an alliance with the Byzantines. This alliance was renewed from time to time until the final conquest of the Chazars by the Russians. Their first aid was rendered to the Byzantine emperor Julian, in 363. About 434 they were for a time tributary to Attila—Sidonius Apollinaris relates that the Chazars followed the banners of Attila—and in 452 fought on the Catalanian fields in company with the Black Huns and Alans. The Persian king Kobad (488-531) undertook the construction of a line of forts through the pass between Derbent and the Caucasus, in order to guard against the invasion of the Chazars, Turks, and other warlike tribes. His son Chosroes Anoshirvan (531-579) built the wall of Derbent, repeatedly mentioned by the Oriental geographers and historians as Bab al-Abwab (Justi, "Gesch. des Alton Persiens," p. 208).

[jgk3]

Re: Armenia for Armenians

Like to add this: 90% of European J3ws are j3wish by religion they are Caucasians (Khazaers) they have nothing to do with being Semites or Palestine.

Jews aren't really descended from Khazars. That was just one hypothesis thrown out by some Israeli academic paper in the 70s and spread like wildfire.

The Khazar kingdom adopted Judaism as a state religion, and its not well known to what extent the actual population followed suit, or what happened to them after their decline. What would help to give weight to this idea that the Ashkhenazim is of Khazar origin, is some traces of Turkic, such as if it appeared in the lexicon more often in Yiddish than it does in other German dialects. And it doesn't.

[jgk3]

Re: Armenia for Armenians

The problem is, first, there's no "Love Thy Enemy" commandment in the Koran (correct me if I'm wrong), and second, Islam never had anything like Reform, Enlightenment, philosophy. Its more rationalistic and tolerant representatives have all been silenced and long forgotten, therefore those among them who are not fanatic bigots can only count on their own brains and hearts and not on the words of their scriptures. Which doesn't really help when your adversary is either ready to slash your throat or is a corrupt satrap backed by greedy foreign governments.

The "Islam" you are eluding to is actually a political system true of every theocratic state. Islam as a whole is rather hard to label one way or another, it is a culture that basically finds its identity in using the Koran as its scripture. That's it. What groups and individuals did with that varies. The Arabs championed advances in agriculture, architecture, medicine, urban planning, mathematics, weaponry, and just about any technology (which is not only the knowledge of, but more importantly its implementation) that the Europeans looked upon with awe during the Middle Ages.

The Muslim literate class was often drawn towards the classics of antiquity whenever the political leadership did not make barriers for its study. When it did ban such study, it also tended to persecute the spiritually divergent Sufis who did not wish to practice Islam the way the state wanted.

[Yedtarts]

Re: Armenia for Armenians

The J3ws willingly left their homeland (which is still in dispute) in search of fortune. Armenians have historically been on the same plot of land (albeit a little smaller nowadays) for as far back as history books go. Also, the J3ws of the Ottoman Empire were protected during its collapse while the Armenians got exterminated. The only Armenians that didn't feel the wrath of the Young Turks were the ones in Constantinople only because of the large groups of Europeans that were in the city.

Like to add this: 90% of European J3ws are j3wish by religion they are Caucasians (Khazaers) they have nothing to do with being Semites or Palestine.
In j3wish logic if every j3w can claim Palestine as their homeland then every Christian can claim Anatolia as their homeland too.
All Armenians belong to our homeland because we all are from there. That’s not the case for all j3ws .