Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)
by michaelt on Friday October 09, 2020 @01:35PM
(#24732324)
The theory rsynnott is referring to is what you'll find if you google "colonial borders"
For example, some people have pointed out when European colonialists set borders, they were more concerned with natural resources and the opinions of competing colonial powers than with what the locals thought of the borders.
Some people go further, thinking in at least some instances colonial governments intentionally created the situations for internal strife, as doing so could make regions easier to control. Set the borders so that area is 75% Religion A, 25% Religion B then you can appoint powerful local deputies from Religion B. Your powerful deputies will never support a popular revolution, as it'd make them lose all their power.
Later the colonial power leaves, but the borders stay in the same place - along with a generous helping of resentment and fear between the groups - and the stage is set for internal strife, political blocs formed along ethnic lines, and so on.
And if European colonists produced messed up borders, why couldn't Ottoman colonists have caused the same effects?
That doesn't mean ethnic diversity causes the problem - but there are several elements that set the scene for problems, and ethnic voting blocs are an easily measured component, though not sufficient on their own.
Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011)
by rsynnott on Friday October 09, 2020 @02:13PM
(#24732721)
The Ottoman situation was arguably even messier, because the Ottomans had one set of provinces, and then the Mandatory authorities had a somewhat different one.
For example, some people have pointed out when European colonialists set borders, they were more concerned with natural resources and the opinions of competing colonial powers than with what the locals thought of the borders.
Some people go further, thinking in at least some instances colonial governments intentionally created the situations for internal strife, as doing so could make regions easier to control. Set the borders so that area is 75% Religion A, 25% Religion B then you can appoint powerful local deputies from Religion B. Your powerful deputies will never support a popular revolution, as it'd make them lose all their power.
Later the colonial power leaves, but the borders stay in the same place - along with a generous helping of resentment and fear between the groups - and the stage is set for internal strife, political blocs formed along ethnic lines, and so on.
And if European colonists produced messed up borders, why couldn't Ottoman colonists have caused the same effects?
That doesn't mean ethnic diversity causes the problem - but there are several elements that set the scene for problems, and ethnic voting blocs are an easily measured component, though not sufficient on their own.