He is the definition of fun police. Also the murder, starvation and general oppression of indigenous populations.

And then we discovered science and clinical trials and became one of the least religious countries.

Sadly the Islamic world turned their backs on the mathematics they discovered and stuck with medieval theology.

The UK did not "discover" science and the Islamic world didn't "turn their backs" on their scientific methods out of an ideological disposition as you seem to be implying. The decline of material studies (golden age specifically) in that region coincide with the increase of social inequality and resulting concentration of political and economic power in the hands of a small elite who had little interest in funding these pursuits on account that they were not strictly/directly "productive". This, followed by the decimation of scientific institutions, records, and the regional economy generally at the hands of Mongol invasion made this trend effectively irreversible.

Under the Ottoman empire there was a relative resurgence in scientific studies as was necessitated by industry and military parity which, again, declined as the empire declined. The dissolution of the Ottoman empire after WW1 and subsequent consumption of its parts for the satisfaction of British and French imperial desires once again cemented this decline. The colonizer has no need for domestic scientific inquiry, they need resources and labor.

The various cultures of West Asia and North Africa did not "abandon" abstract scientific inquiry because islam made them irrational and backwards. Oppressed people simply have more direct concerns preoccupying them. Should we leave them the fuck alone they would have the time and money to invest in such things.

I would also like to note that the U.K. and other European nations developed the scientific method as a result of their advancing economic needs in regards to industrialization (of course only made possible by plundering the world) not because they just decided to be "rational people"

Your knee-jerk reaction to my insult of Cromwell, and following denigration of the modern people of West Asia betrays your racist idealist conception of the world and its people's histories.

Baconian method. And invented clinical trials, which is a fundamental part of science.

The Ottomans restricted the printing press due to religion and the madrasa system focused on religion, not science. Still does.

Pointing to specific instances of scientific development and religious interference with scientific development does not create an argument. You have to add analysis that places these examples within their respective historical, political, economic, and cultural contexts. Then use that to support a defensible claim.

Regardless, none of your examples address the core of my argument which was, to clarify, that investment in abstract sciences originates from specific economic necessities rooted in the dominant mode of production rather than ideological dispositions. The existing ideological perspectives surrounding scientific development form as political and social justification for the meeting of those material economic needs. Not the other way around.

This is kinda cheating. He may have done whatever "declare the leader is a Taghut" means ("call the king a devil", or something like that?), but he certainly did not use that word.

Do you have a more in-depth source on his deeds? His Wikipedia article seems to refuse to engage with this aspect.

A Taghut is someone who worships a deity other than the Abrahamic god. Christians would use the term idolater. It IS a stretch but Cromwell considered High Anglicanism (as advocated by Charles I) to be too close to catholicism which protestants considered idolatry. This was made worse by Charles I marrying a catholic. I can't find a source where Cromwell specifically calls Charles I an idolator but he headed a socio-political movement that did.

I'll get back to you with better sourcss later if I can especially regarding the other details. My partner was not appreciating my casual historical research during our movie lol

Thanks!

My websearches also indicate that many of the deeds ascribed to Cromwell weren't necesarily his personal doing, e.g. christmas and theater were already banned when he came into power. Puritans really didn't like fun, like in general. Kind of annoying that no

PETERS, JULIE STONE. “Staging the Last Judgment in the Trial of Charles I.” Representations, no. 143 (2018): 1–35. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26504449.

This is the best I can find in regard to perspectives of King Charles I as an idolator. If there is an account of Cromwell directly accusing Charles I of Idolatry I couldn't find it easily.

As for the rest I found this

His destruction of idols and statues largely happened in Ireland but also occurred in England source

As for closing bars, his administration did this but not all bars, just ones that were "unlicensed and disorderly" source

It's just a fact of history. The Islamic golden age was from the 8th to 14th century.

Your criticism of Cromwell uses presentism. Which is pretty stupid. Especially when you consider the fact that these medieval theology nutters are still preaching it now lol

Handwaving all of Islam, painting Arabic people as anti scientific, and claiming Brits invented science is some of the most bigoted, ahistorical, chauvinistic horse shit I've ever read. You are a bog standard reactionary clown.

The person you're replying to is smarter than you btw.

Successfully overthrows the monarchy, installs his nepo baby son as successor.

Come on guy, you could have gotten that one thing right...

If only you could understand irony.

The post is about religion and societies based on religious purity.

We fucked all our religious nutters off to America.