Megan, Harry and Imperialist Race Theory
Channel: Abdurraheem Green
File Size: 30.27MB
Episode Transcript ©
Transcripts are auto-generated and thus will be be inaccurate and at times crude. We are considering building a system to allow volunteers to edit transcripts in a controlled system. No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever.
Kareo race theory what is Imperial race theory? Let me start by putting the proposition and defining the terms, right. And everyone, welcome to the big thing. Okay, please join the Club. And, you know, please do follow our speakers as well in sha Allah so you can know about future events. The whole idea of this is to get us thinking, get us thinking deeply beyond the superficial.
And yeah, I guess the whole foundation of this is the use of reason. We believe it. So I believe it's a great tool, I think it's probably the best tool that we've got to try and understand the big problems of life, the universe, and everything, is the best thing to start with any way. I do think we need other things to help us along. But anyway, so this whole thing has been started by Megan and Harry. And obviously, the whole issue of racism has been very, very much on the forefront. With George Floyd and like countless numbers of other things. This is something that is a problem that is plaguing Western society. And I'm going to put the forward that argument or their contention that
this is endemic this, you know, when we talk about systemic racism, when we talk about institutionalized racism, I want to trace this back to what I think and this is my opinion, based upon, I guess, my background, let me tell you a little bit about my background. For those of you who don't know me, my Muslim name is Abdul Rahim green. I was named of birth, Anthony green. Anthony Botswana. Gavin green. My dad was a colonial administrator
in the, you know, in what was then Tanganyika was to I was born myself in Tanzania and dar Salaam in Tanzania. Right. I went to a private school, that political ampleforth college. So you could say that in some way, shape or form? I'm from the ruling elite. Okay. And that my you know, my dad himself was born in Singapore. My grandfather was a governor in Malaya in Malaysia, Malaysia at the time, right. So yeah, we have some deep colonial roots. And so I'm, I'm talking partly from my own experience, and partly from my study of history. And I'm very upfront that I believe that fundamentally, that yes, Western society is institutionally endemically racist. And because that is
built into the actual fundamental, philosophical,
philosophical underpinnings of Western society. Could this change? Is this open to change? What other systems could we have? This is what we're going to hopefully continue the discussion on clubhouse. For those of you who are just listening on YouTube Live, I only have three invites left. That was four fingers, three invites left on clubhouse, the first of you to DM me on YouTube, I will insha Allah give you an invitation, but you have to have an iPhone, sorry, if you don't have an iPhone, you will not be able to join Club House at the moment. Okay, so here's my proposition, guys, my proposition is that, as Great Britain,
they began to develop a massive empire, hand in hand with this growth of the empire of the British Empire, which is arguably the largest empire the world has ever seen. No Empire has
ruled over so much of the Earth's surface as the British Empire, as they said, The sun never set on the British Empire.
It was absolutely massive and encompassed many, many different races, many, many different cultures.
And it imposed its ideas, maybe not imposed, but it's certainly
influenced, and put these ideas
in the nations that it ruled over. So what are these ideas? I think the fundamental idea is actually capitalism. That's the first thing right now, just because I'm gonna make it some, you know, critique of capitalism. It doesn't mean I'm communist, right. Okay, there are alternatives, right? I'm far from that. But the point about capitalism is unrestricted, unrestrained capitalism.
This is the first thing with the idea of capitalism inevitably develops a belief system that is connected to the value and the importance of money and finance. And so I would argue that from a worldview perspective, from what you might call a philosophical perspective, the idea of materialism
Capitalism go hand in hand, because the capitalist ultimately is going to be motivated by making money. And I know I may be reducing this to very simple sound bites, I don't think that's a problem. By the way, it doesn't deep thinking deeply doesn't mean you need to know lots of philosophical terms, right? But it does mean you need to search deep within yourself to come up with some answers. So this is why I would contend that capitalism and materialism, they are ideas that go hand in hand, because ultimately, the purpose and the objective of a capitalist economy a capitalist society is to generate income. And the way that they generate income is by getting people to purchase them to buy
their goods. That's what the interest that's what capitalism is. They want people to buy their product. And they will do that by hook or by crook. And I've argued for years, for years, I've been arguing this, that spiritual truths
are fundamentally going to be diametrically opposed to capitalist ideology. This is why I believe that materialist materialism and capitalism, whether it's in China, or whether it's in the West, really can't tolerate a
thorough adherence to any spiritual tradition, right? It's not just Islamophobia. Its religious phobia, right? Because any type of religious truth, right, even if that truth, in my opinion, may be confused with some other misguidance. But the fundamental ideas are rooted in some fundamental spiritual truths. All of them really seem to share a common theme, or religions seem to share a common theme. And that common theme is, it teaches ultimately Self Mastery, self control, and that happiness is fundamentally not to be found in essentially materialistic things.
And again, I don't think this is opposing the use of reason, I think this is exactly what reason could lead us to write, okay. So
inevitably, there's going to be a conflict between the ideas of capitalism, and it's linked. It's linked beliefs and materialism, and spiritual truths. Okay. So like as so therefore, as the Imperial domain of Britain expanded as the British empire expanded Christianity, although it may ostensibly seem to have played a part, and maybe it did in the expansion of the British Empire, in reality, I believe that Christianity was pretty marginal, pretty marginal. And it's interesting, by the way, if you look at the conflicts that were going on, in terms of polemics in India, between some Muslim scholars and some Christian scholars, right. So, the British Empire was not really interested in
promoting the missionaries, the Christian empire was not really the British Empire was not really interested in that, because it was mainly interested in business and in making money. Right? Okay, so therefore, don't believe that Christianity, although it had a very, very important point, and very important part to play in the formation of the psyche, that allowed the British Empire to be driven forward. The British Empire, like human beings naturally want to rationalize what they do. That's what we want to do. We want to rationalize it, we want to be consistent, does what we want to do. So if we have a capitalist ideology, if we have this ideology of making money, and that's the
path to success, and that's what defines success, we are inevitably going to come up with some type of ideology, some type of theory, some type of rationalization that tries to make sense of that, and tries to justify it. And this is where science comes in. And not only science, but particularly Darwinism, or not necessarily the theory of evolution, but a particular branch of the theory of evolution, Darwinian evolution. So my contention is that Darwinism is essentially racist. It was there. And this is very important to understand the idea that science is somehow free of prejudice is ridiculous, and it just does not face the facts. Right. Maybe as a discipline. idealistically,
that might be true abroad. Abdullah heartbroke. Could you put yourself on mute, bro, could you put yourself on mute? If you don't mind? There's a little microphone button if you could just press that and put yourself on mute. I will
Oh yeah, she's aka La Habra. Thank you. Okay, so and so therefore, it becomes an intellectual rationalization for the idea that ultimately, as I've said it before, that the white middle class Englishmen is the peak of human evolutionary development. So the whole concept of the survival of the fittest, this is extremely capitalistic, even though there is plenty of evidence in the natural world of empathy and symbiosis and of species cooperating with each other, you could come up with a very different theory of evolution. But no, the predominant one is this survival of the fittest. And that that which is the fittest, and therefore the strongest, and the most capable, survived, and who
is the fittest, obviously, the white man is the fittest, the white economies, the white political systems, and then by extension, presumably the white religious systems, and so on and so forth, is the fittest because the white man is the fittest, we are the ultimate end of evolutionary development. This is what I believe, Darwinism, ultimately, why it was embraced by imperialist Britain. And therefore, I think that this idea is so deeply imbibed within the generality of the white population of white people, because that's what we are educated with, specifically, by the way, not just the generality of the people, but certainly most specifically, the ruling elites.
Because this scientific theory is really in reality, more than just a scientific theory. It is an ideological theory. It is a theory of in law, what I call Imperial racism theory. It's the rational attempt to justify imperialism, and I believe it is still going on until today. It doesn't take even deep thinking. And this is called the deep think, right? You don't need to think that deeply. You don't even need to look that deeply. Right? You just need to be a bit brutally honest with yourself. And you can see this all the time in the media. And I just guessed that this little interview with Harry and Megan, with Oprah Winfrey is just another indication and another evidence of the Royal
royal family racist, they probably don't think they're racist? Probably not. They probably don't even realize it. They probably don't even know what racism they probably don't even realize how racist they are. Because it is institutionalized. Anyway, support, I would like to ask you, my brother, right? Of course, anyone can come along and say anything. And I have read plenty of times that people are saying it's absolute nonsense. Darwin was not racist. But I think you may have some evidence to support what I'm saying. So is there any evidence at all that Darwin was racist, and that his theories had this what I call Imperial race theory connected to it? Yeah, that's a very
good question. And I think we need to be quite fair, when we're looking at this from a historical perspective. You see, the usual read about Darwin in this regard, is no one's gonna say that. He at least didn't say things which could sound racist, no one is denying that that's I mean, even I mean, in academia, even in the, I would say public discourse, No one denies he said things which could be interpreted as racist. The usual defense is that Darwin was simply making a descriptive claim about the world, rather than a prescriptive claim. So what I mean by that, is that, so when Darwin said, the civilized races are going to wipe out the savage races. And he actually gave the analogy that
just like dominating tribes would wipe out remote tribes, which were inferior, the Western civilization is going to be is in the next couple of centuries is going to be wiping off the map, the savage races and things like this. So they would say, Well, what he was doing was, he was making a purely descriptive claim about the world. He wasn't saying this is a good thing. It's a bad thing. He was just saying, this is just something that's that's going to happen. That's the way that they try and put it. However, it's important to note that
if you are going to be making claims like that, they will become prescriptive, because the might is right principle, which as you rightly pointed out that there's a link between capitalism and Darwinism is going to be applied and in fact, there's some academic works about the link between British imperialism from 1870 to 90
100 and social Darwinism, the works of Herbert Spencer, and others, which influenced British politics. What's also interesting is in the early 20th century, I mean, people understood Darwin best. I mean, it's kind of like this, the best people who understood Jesus. Other people who are around him are the best person to understand Napoleon, other people around him. The best people to understand Darwin, we could say, are his direct disciples. And they were pretty clear on what his understanding was, in fact, we can, we don't even need to go as far as his,
you know, colleagues, we can even go directly to Leonard Darwin, who said, you know, one of the most difficult this is Darwin son, one of the most difficult questions for the future is what to do with the savage races. So clearly, Leonard Darwin, who was the father of eugenics in this country, of the United Kingdom, he understood very well, what Darwin meant. Likewise, Thomas Huxley understood what Darwin said,
and earns tackle in Germany. He very clearly understood what Darwin said, in fact, and here's what's here's the link, if somebody's very confused, and is trying to make a defense, Ernst Haeckel, was praised by Darwin to the level that Darwin said, after reading Ernst hackles book about race and his racist ideology. Reviewing the book, Charles Darwin said, I wouldn't have published my book, if I if I'd read this first. And he's referring here, not to the Origin of Species, but the Descent of Man. So clearly, he understood, you know, Ernst Haeckel. Well,
would that imply that even Darwin had in his mind,
within his mind when he's writing the Origin of the Species? He has, in his mind as he's writing it, an intellectual justification for why imperialism? Yep, that's the implication of it. Yeah, absolutely. You're absolutely right. And just to add to the point, he didn't, I mean, he didn't just say the white are superior. I mean, that would be a very,
that would be a that would be too vague. For Darwin, Darwin actually said, the most sophisticated and advanced and evolved of the whites are actually the British. And the proof is in the pudding, that they are far more effective in colonization than the Portuguese and the French and the other. So he even had a hierarchy when it came to various Europeans. And just to add another sort of angle to this, someone can turn around and say, Well, why aren't biologists today? Racist? Why aren't Western universities publishing racist journals today? Well, the answer is actually given by the Israeli historian, Yuval Noah Harare, in his book, sapiens. And what he basically says, and
remember, he's an atheist. He's a liberal, he believes in Darwinism as well. However, he said, Well, the reason was because Darwin's ideas were applied by Hitler. And the Best Western universities were publishing papers. And the best scientists were publishing, not scientists with the best
xenios a norm to publish stuff, peer reviewed stuff on on race, which was very racist. And once the implications was seen by everybody in World War Two, it stopped, all of this publication stopped. So he gives the argument in his book that the reason that these papers were no longer published is not due to the scientific evidence was due to the sociological impact of Darwin's teachings. So we have academics talking about this, this is this is not unheard of. Now, the other thing, which you started off on, which I really wanted to just add a point there, you made the link between capitalism and Darwinism. And some people may say, Well, they're not the same thing. Or, you know,
there are differences actually know even the idea of natural selection. Darwin got from a capitalist Thomas Malthus, and he used the principle that populations grow at an exponential rate. And the, the food chain has a huge sort of strain on it. And that leads to mass competition and mass fighting and all the rest. He used that to actually come up with his idea of natural selection. He applied that to population. So you could even say Darwinism is the illegitimate child of capitalism. I mean, it's Yeah. I mean, so it's, it's, it's more than just a tenuous link that, you know, the proposition that I was making of Imperial race theory, is something that very strong and I actually don't think as
someone who pointed out to me earlier in Sharla, you know, for those of you who are on clubhouse,
I will type harradine I hope I don't know where he is I will type is his that
is coming in and out. Hopefully he's going to pick up where we end because he was talking to me earlier.
I don't even know I lost my train of thought
between the British Empire and it's, it's, like you said the intellectual justification for their policies, because one of the other historical aspects I just want to highlight is prior to Darwin, someone can say, well, they were still going on colonizing. Prior to Darwin, the justification was Christianity.
Around the time of Darwin, they needed another new injection of justification.
Because, I mean, obviously, I didn't go into this in detail, but Christianity was no longer able to really hold a firm grip on the intelligencia. I mean, obviously, I mean, even since since the time of Newton, right. And he was a Unitarian, he'd already pretty much rejected Trinitarian, as I mean, makes makes it's very hard for someone to be, you know, to lay claim to a rational path of thinking and then still be a traditional Trinitarian. Christian, right, because he offers too many impossibilities. Right. And I think that in hand with that, obviously, the whole I, my argument would be and to go back to my argument, that actually, you know, any spiritual tradition is going to
be a hindrance to imperialism, it's going to be a hindrance to imperialism, it's going to be a hindrance to capitalism. Because when it comes to guilt complex, right, you know, anyone reading the sayings of Jesus would have a real hard time, you know, imposing imperial rule upon people and treating them with, you know, racist tendencies. I mean, obviously, despite that we know in the Bible Belt, and so on and so forth. People have used the Bible to justify racism, right? But to be honest, I mean, you read those texts, and you read the actual things that Jesus was supposed to have said, right? And, you know, you really, I mean, you know, it's harder for a rich man to enter heaven
than it is for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. Like, how do you how on earth do you reconcile that with a full on capitalist materialistic approach to life where the people who are richest and wealthiest are supposed to be the most, you know, the most respected people in society, right? It's just not compatible. So all in all, they had to drop it, Christianity was just not suitable for them. And another contention that I often make is that people are not often atheists, because it makes any rational sense because I believe atheism makes.
I'll be frank, no rational sense at all. It's it's irrational, right? I think it's more irrational than Christianity, actually. But people often atheists because they don't want to be constrained by particular rules. They don't want to be on a guilt trip. I just, you know, if I put it bluntly, people don't want to be in a guilt trip. And you know, when you have a religious tradition that has some defined parameters of morality, especially how you should treat your fellow human beings, when you don't do that, or when more I would say you're doing exactly the opposite. You're constantly going to feel conflicted within yourself. And anyone that's a human beings, human beings always are
trying to run away from self conflict, it's extremely painful, right? So you're going to either do one of two things, you're going to face up to yourself and admit that you're a hypocrite and then make changes in prove yourself as a human being. Or you're going to come up with something that allows you to rationalize your prejudices and, and yeah, the point that I was going to make, that you are touching upon bro is a wider point about science. And scientists, you know, the likes of Dawkins and Sam Harris, and these people love to go on about, you know, how science is unprejudiced. It's just nonsense. It's pure nonsense. The history of science and Darwin, Darwin's theory is one of
them is littered with prejudice. You know, in the Soviet Union, for example, and I forget the names, there were scientists who had come up with theories that were outright rejected by the Communist Party, because they might lead people to believe in God.
You know, anything that had a whiff of all that. Go on. You're referring here to the Big Bang, they were very resistant to it. Yeah. Yes. Yeah. So again, that the idea that science is free of bias,
you know, yes, I would say that as a discipline in in the ideal way it actually is, right. But what's the reality of the human condition, often known science until today, and I would say that actually, although you're right after Nazi Germany, a lot of this racist rhetoric has been dropped publicly, but
But as I will try was making the point has anyone renounced it openly?
Has anyone renounced it openly has anyone come out? Straight out, you know, well known scientists and renounced openly these racial imperialistic biases, really using it is using the same narrative until today. And we see it in the I would say, You're being too charitable there shake because Francis Crick,
James Watson, they discovered the structure of DNA in Cambridge in the 50s. Right, Francis Crick, obviously passed away. Now, James Watson, and he obviously understands determinism quite well being an atheist, Darwinist. He is. He actually a few years ago, didn't denounce it. But he actually amplified the discussion, hence why he was cancelled. Even in his late age, he came out openly, like old people do, and he didn't care about being woke. And he said, black and white people, of course, are not equal. And we know anybody that has black employees knows this. This is what he said.
And he said, our policies in Africa are based upon the assumption that blacks are equal to us. And we will continue to fail so long as we have this assumption. These are what James Watson that the person who won the Nobel Prize for discovering DNA who is alive right now he's in his 80s, or 90s, this is what he just said a few years ago, so forget denouncing it. They've reiterated it, some of them. Well, bro, like, it's been a fantastic, fascinating introduction to this topic. For Have you joined us on YouTube. Like I said, if you just there's only I have three invites to clubhouse, you have to have an iPhone, unfortunately, at the moment to join, if you leave me, if you message me, I
will send you an invite. I think we would like to continue the discussion on clubhouse. But the thought that I would like to leave everyone with is this. Is there an alternative? Is there? Is there a foundation upon which we could build a society that is not racist? On which we could still build a civilization? Obviously, some of you may know that we are Muslim, and that absolutely we believe that there is there is a basis. And I think that 1400 years ago, the Prophet Muhammad came, and he said some really amazing things. There is no difference between the Arab and non Arab, no difference between the white man and the black weren't man except in piety. This is what the and the
Quran tells us that God has made us into tribes and nations. Interestingly, it uses tribes and nations that you may know one another not that you may despise one another, which is the you know, the understanding of it, interestingly, that it says tribes and nations, because let's give credit where credit is due to Darwin's black box, which is, of course, the unveiling of DNA, the unveiling of the structure of the cell, right? And its complexities. And, and now, the whole examination into DNA has pretty much shown that race has no scientific basis, there is no scientific basis for race whatsoever, because the genetic variation between say two Nigerians right, is probably get greater
that than between you and me, and another Nigeria, right. So if race had some genetic, some real genetic factors, factors, as far as I know, that it has almost I mean, it has no foundation in the understanding of genetics anyway. So that's a whole different topic. I believe that if society is institutionally racist, and definitely racist, that means it is rotten to its core. It's not about individuals. It's not about the royal family. It's not about you know, Prince Philip, it's not about Richard Dawkins or any of the Sam Harris or any of these people, whoever they made. It's about individuals. It's about the underpinning underlying ideological foundations. If we're going to build
a society on ideas of capitalism and materialism, then and the the theory of the survival of the fittest and evolution inevitably, in one way or another, it's going to end up I believe, being in some way shape or form racist. So we need to find another foundation on which to build our societies. So
hopefully now we're going to continue that discussion on clubhouse. We've got brother Fahad tire with us on the and suborder. You've just joined us there. We were hoping that Doc Dr. Abdullah Baker would come up as well and I will tell you the Hydra Dean, I don't know where he's gone. We are really hoping he was going to come in and add to the discussion.
Maybe some good messaging. As for those of us who have joined us on YouTube, may Allah bless you. I hope you're able to join the discussion on clubhouse, and anything else to add support before we go.
Yeah, I just really wanted to highlight that we're not just here to just speak about this issue with Megan and Harry and just just raise, raise up this issue. We're here for solutions. If you think there's something better
than Islam to solve it, let us know. We're open to it. But yeah, like you said, Islam is the solution to racism. And that is evidence that it's not manmade, because it can solve something which man itself has not been able to solve for 1000s of years. Yeah. If, again, on the discussion in clubhouse, if any, if anyone wants to contender, we're gonna have a few more speakers, and then we will be opening up the floor for you to come. Please remember the rules of the big thing, right? You know, try and come up with a solid a cogent thought out, you know, point that you want to make don't just like just brain dump, right.
You know, it may sound like I was brain dumping, but these are issues I've been thinking about for 30 years. So quite deeply. Okay, guys, Soldier Sakala. Here. We'll continue the discussion on clubhouse. I think sulla had the umbrella we could hand over to
brother had to give us some thoughts in Sharla. On that, and for everyone joining us on YouTube. Just before we do that, could you just make somebody in the mode? Because he can't. I don't even know how to do that. Let me just click on his face. And then you make him one.
I think I'm already a moderator. No, he's
just kind of really interesting and insightful. So I know. Ty, is just fixing his car. Unfortunately.
Thank you for that. We're all actually right now on clubhouse. So please look at the link and join the deep think that is the club that we are speaking about this issue to do with race, and how Islam is the solution. So I'm going to jump off the live stream have put out the link a few times. So if anybody wants to join us, you don't have to have an iPhone.
But if you need an invite, please tweet me and as you know, how's it gonna work?
If you're already on clubhouse, just join us I think that I think that's the way to do it. May Allah bless everybody to talk locker a Salam aleikum.