Oh, the majority of it isn't? Go live in Iran then, and see how it is. Or better yet Syria...or maybe Saudi?
Are you not familiar with the indigenous secular movements in these "backward" states? Former Prime Minister Mossadegh of Iran attempted to nationalize the Iranian oil industry and develop democratic and secular institutions. In other words, a sustainable community. However Iran was overthrown by UK and US who felt that was within their interest to support a despotic Pahlavi regime.
The same applies to Africa where the secular leader, Patrice Lumumba of the Republic of Congo who was assasinated by Western governments (Belgian, UK, and US). This led to the war that's hit Southern Africa killing millions. Similarly colonialism has left scars on the continent that has yet to disappear.
Back to the totalitarian regimes in the oil-rich Middle East. Nations such as Saudi Arabia, UAE, and what not have been backed by the West since the beginning of the cold war. In fact, without the Western powers, these nations would literally collapse. Intelligence and weaponry not to mention capital (through oil imports) provided effectively destroyed secular movements in the Middle East.
What about Syria, Yemen and other nations not directly aided by the West? Well, Saudi Arabia et al often backed anti-democratic religious elements within these nations. In fact thanks to Israel, UK and US, they used Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to arm religious fanatics in Afghanistan. Now we see fanatical movements running around Central Asia, Middle East and sometimes even our side.
Racist foundation? What RACE would that be? You people are fucking morons...just throwing around words (racism!) without even understanding the meaning behind them. There are numerous RACES inhabiting the region, you twat.
The term race isn't scientific, but rather a socio-cultural construct. No point in demanding others to define races. It's pointless. Instead we should understand the concept of racism which is actually a race-based hierarchy.
In this hierarchal system, the white race is the dominant while "others" are subordinate. I see no need to define "others", because white race represents a narrow Judeo-Christian, Western European archetype which the former is not a part of. Note that the so called "Caucasian" race isn't technical. No one in the Middle East actually views themselves as "Caucasian". In fact culturally (Afro-Asiatic, Turkic tongue, Islam, etc) and genetically (E3b, J, etc) cluster with Africans (Blacks included) and South/ West Asians.
The peoples in this region don't fall under the "white" archetype unless we're referring to Mesopotamians. In that case, this group of people would be "white" under the erroneous racist system. See the bullshit in the hierarchy? If we refer to history, we'd see that Western Europeans saw civilization very recently, and its parent in Southern Europe is the offspring of the African and West Asian civilizations.
In fact, the "civilization-based" or technological hierarchy often changes. It certainly isn't static.
Whether or not you consider me "racist" or not, I don't give a shit...cultural equality is absolutely false. And I'm not even arguing for my own background or culture at the moment...just in general.
It's true that cultural equality may not be true, but we need to look at WHY these disparities exist. None are natural, AAA says it well:
The tragedy in the United States has been that the policies and practices stemming from this worldview succeeded all too well in constructing unequal populations among Europeans, Native Americans, and peoples of African descent. Given what we know about the capacity of normal humans to achieve and function within any culture, we conclude that present-day inequalities between so-called "racial" groups are not consequences of their biological inheritance but
products of historical and contemporary social, economic, educational, and political circumstances.
Link
That said, Muslims in the West AFAIK are largely peaceful people. It's obvious that a number may frown at the West's hypocritical foreign policy and its history of sponsoring terrorism. I don't see anything wrong with that. And sure we may see honour killings on our side, but honestly, if foreign elements didn't destroy the secular movements, these traditions may have been no more.
Is the culture of the native people of South America equivalent to that of the Japanese? You would argue "yes", because otherwise you'd be called a racist, god forbid. Well, that and you're dumb. But they're clearly not. Why? Well...one is responsible for Japan, and the others are living in a jungle. See? It's pretty simple. That's not to say that one is all bad and the other is all good...but overall.
Huh? The Incan culture was quite sophisticated as well. It's rather unfortunate that the indigenous peoples didn't kill the Europeans vs. sheltering them. Like what my Korean roommate says, that too is a sign of a weakness.