Answers 1-6 and #8 are just the countries in Europe closest to Turkey. They all had territory that was part of the Ottoman Empire. The only reason that Greece isn't on the list is because of the population exchanges that took place after Greek nationalists succeeding in breaking away from the empire.
Answers 7 and 9-11 are here because of immigration. #7 mostly because of large numbers of immigrants from their former empire in North Africa, 9-11 because they are countries with small populations that receive a disproportionate number of Muslim immigrants.
Nah. The population exchange happened after the Greco-Turkish War which was after WW1, 100 years after Greece's independence. The exchange was pretty unfair though. It was like 1.5m Greeks/Christians to 0.5 Turks/Muslims.
Nordic: over 2 years passed since I left that comment. You didn't think that maybe the quiz changed in that time? Oh dear. Also Russia is very close to Turkey and has territory that was formerly the Ottoman Empire look at a bloody map.
I think it is time for you to stop spreading rubbish here and there.
Greeks seeked liberty when they revolted against the Ottomans, they weren't just nationalists as you prefer to call them. When you for example fought a war against the British you didn't attribute it to nationalism. You speak of freedom, liberty etc and all kinds of nice moral stories.
And as someone else commented already the population exchange happened a century later...yet there are still Muslims in Greece but apparently too little to make this list.
Hey, nationalism meant completely different things in the early modern period and in the present day.
Nationalism in the early modern period mostly revolved around gaining independence from colonial powers and establishing a government like in India, Africa, South America Ireland, the Balkans, etc.
Today, however (though you may disagree) nationalism revolves around a certain sect of isolationist, anti-immigration, right to far-right political movements throughout the world.
So, it is correct to call the Greeks nationalists as their primary motive was gaining independence form a colonial overlord and setting up a native government (as per the first defenition)
Almost too barmy for me to reply to, but I'll just say that the birth of the concept of Nationalism is usually traced back to the French Revolution in 1789, which, since I assume you've never opened a history book in your life, I'll helpfully add was 13 years after the American declaration of independence (some historians says the latter inspired the former), but (interestingly and mysteriously for those who don't understand what Nationalism is) this was before the Serbian revolution (1804), Norwegian independence movement of 1814, Greek war of independence (1821), Croatian national revival (1830), Belgian Revolution (1830), Polish and Lithuanian Revolutions (1830), German and Italian unification (both completed in 1871), birth of Zionism (1897), and modern Turkey (1923), etc. Huh. That's weird, isn't it? I wish there was some way to read about this stuff. seems like it may be connected...
Greek Nationalism ... good starting point... even though the tenuous connection this article tries to make between ancient Pan-Hellenism and modern Greek nationalism (even generously ignoring the fact that these things were in no way related) is ridiculous on its face as the concept of Nationalism was not born until the 18th Century at the earliest. Probably written by a Greek. Still... at least they understood what the word meant by the 1800s. and, you are a Greek nationalist btw even if you don't understand what this means. Americans in the 1700s did not think of themselves as a single common people with a shared culture and history and identity. Even if nationalism as a concept had been available to them (it wasn't), the people of the different colonies didn't think of themselves in those terms. That doesn't make their fight for independence better or worse. Sorry to so inflame your ego.
The answers have changed but the quiz is still easy. Now the first seven are all countries that are close to Turkey that have territory that used to be Ottoman-controlled, and the last three are countries that have received a disproportionately high amount of Muslim immigration.
I don't really think Islam in Russia is related to the Ottomans or its geographic closeness to Turkey. It's probably more to do with their closeness to the Caucasus Mountains and Central Asia. For example, the Wikipedia page for "Islam in Russia" seems to imply that the Tatars and related groups converted to Islam pretty early on, and that the growth of Russia's Muslim population really came with their conquests in Siberia. Plus, the Ottomans only controlled a small amount of Russia.
For the rest of southeastern Europe though, it's very true that Islam came with Ottoman influence.
As stated above Tatars converted to Islam in Central Asia as did many other Turkic peoples, prior to migrating west of the Urals. In the Caucasus, both the Ottoman and Persian empires helped spread Islam.
I deleted practically all the comments on this quiz. It's a controversial topic, so if you decide to post please be extra polite. And both sides of the "argument" were equally impolite, so please don't take this as evidence that your "side" is right.
He doesn't delete comments for being controversial. He deletes them for being rude. Usually controversial issues get people fired up, and rudeness ensues.
He either doesn't know or doesn't care how rude he is, because there's comments of his going back almost a decade on here that are unabashedly rude and impolite.
In Russia it varies widely depending on methodology. Some people count simply "traditionally Muslim ethnicities", on the other hand there were some detailed researches asking also about practising a religion and including categories such as spiritual but not religious, religious but not organized (belonging to any church) etc.
Is the 10-17% for Russia in the European part of Russia only, or in Russia as a whole? Funny that Russia, as a transcontinental country counts, but Turkey does not.
Of course, Turkey is partially located in Europe, but to be considered a 'European country' like in the quiz title, it requires to have most of its population within the European continent. Thereby, it's a matter of fact not to include Turkey in any way. Every country belongs to a single continent, so does Turkey.
It is up to the quizmaker to decide, there's no ultimate answer, that's why it has to be noted in caveats. All I said is that there's a valid argument for such a decision, but it could be also different.
I'm also surprised that Austria made it above Germany. I know that in terms of sheer numbers Germany must have more Muslims, but it's still somewhat surprise given that I hear all the time about Germany's huge Turkish population and their acceptance of refugees while I hear nothing about Austria's Muslim population.
Austria and Sweden surprised me. Is it because they're "safer" countries with a lower crime rate for migrants? Surprised UK didn't make the list - Probably because our population is already high
Yeah, large communities in London. But also here in Northern England, towns like Bolton, Blackburn, Oldham, Preston, Bradford, Leeds.. And then big cities like Manchester and Birmingham have many Muslim communities, so thought that rate might have been higher, but I guess as it is a percentage it could be as there's so many people in the UK to start with.
That's absolutely wrong. The State and public officials cannot ask about religious affiliation, but if you're a private person or entity, you can ask all you want.
It's not illegal. Racial surveys and polls are illegal, but it's not when it comes to religion. For instance, one of the last polls of Ifop was about the Laïcité in high school. There were stats about Muslims' feelings about Laïcité.
The Balkans, except some country (for example Serbia), are correct answers. It isn't a big surprise, if you know that, these countries were part of the Ottoman Empire. The other muslim countries are well-know imigration countries. Russia is interesting. The chechens and tatars are muslims, maybe because the islamic world has big impact on these territories. I'm curious about your opinion in this topic.
The parts of Russia that are majority-Muslim were also part of the Ottoman Empire, or else inhabited by other Muslim Turkic or central Asian people. Look at a map. You'll see Russia is closer to Turkey than Bosnia is.
If France was so worried about this they might have wanted to consider it before colonizing much of North Africa. Austria and Sweden are nice places to live with relatively low populations that receive a disproportionately high number of immigrants. In each of these three cases the present number of Muslims in the country I think points toward some success the country enjoyed in the present or recent past. Each new generation faces new challenges. If these societies are strong they will continue to thrive in the future.
People from Islamic countries do not share the values the majority of Europeans share. In my opinion, all religions are a barrier to progress, and Islam is currently the largest barrier to progress. I cannot see continued levels of Islamic immigration to Europe ending well.
Part of the problem I think is that Muslims tend to stick together in their host country, they stick to their culture and this is definitely a problem.
@purplememes "ancestors", like colonization was 1000 years ago. 80 years ago almost all Asia and Africa still belonged to Europe. This is the beautiful world Europeans created, immigration is part of it. Enjoy.
So what if they did? Was France there to punish Muslims for their imperial past? Or to set up an empire of its own? If the latter (and it obviously was the latter), well there are consequences for doing that. And no, it's not a punishment. It's just observing the fact of cause and effect.
In fact the opposite is true, up until the 20th century the vast majority of science and technology in Europe and the Middle east was create by religious sponsered organisations and individuals.
It was churches and mosques that promoted studies of medicine, astronomy, physiology and arcitecture through out the middle ages and early modern period.
Even the very concept of human rights and movements like abolisionism was created by christian sects like the quakers.
Just look at how many charitable organisations are christian or mulsim, the red cross, red crescent, save the children, city mission to name a few.
Even ethical consent is religious in origin.
Read a history book or two before making bland infactual statements.
@Bdubz - I can't recall saying people shouldn't be allowed to keep their culture?
It is not authoritarian to dislike cultures that are overwhelmingly homophobic and sexist and it is perfectly acceptable to wish that anyone who wants to immigrate to the West, will adopt the culture of their host country.
If you disagree with progressive values then I don't want you in my country.
@mizu - Very surprising that religious institutions promoted learning in Europe. It's almost as if the vast majority of people were religious and such institutions had all the wealth...
Yeah, mizu, that's so off... Just because the Church controlled literally everything in Europe for so long doesn't mean that religion generally is not an impediment to scientific progress. Same goes for Islam in the Muslim world. This is like saying the United States and Soviet Union were chiefly responsible for keeping the number of nuclear warheads in the world low because in the 1990s they each agreed to destroy thousands of them while those war mongers in Switzerland didn't get rid of any.
Religion and Science until the 20th century always went hand in hand. People constantly talk about how religion has always worked against science which as pointed out is simply not true.
Yes religion has been used to impede scientific process but to no where near the level that it has supported it and certainly not to the level many often claim.
The idea that religion is bad for society and is responsible for all the evils of the world is wrong and not based on any reality.
They are a country according to the US and many other countries that believe in national autonomy. If you don't agree with that, well then they probably should be allowed to be a country so they can protect themselves and their culture.
The definition of a country is so broad that no one can tell defiantly if an area is actually a country and not an autonomous area/semi-autonomous area. If your definition is an area where all other "countries" accept it, then China and the Korean Peninsula just don't belong to anyone. If your definition is any autonomous area, then there are over 250 countries.
Cyprus is a European country because it's culturally closer to Europe, and has been for thousands of years. Its also on the Eur(asian) tectonic plate, and so must be European.
Back in Amsterdam for the first time in about 18 years. I knew that the number of Muslim immigrants had increased dramatically here in the interim, but actually seeing it it's almost shocking that The Netherlands doesn't show up on the quiz. The neighborhood I'm in in Western Amsterdam is quite large and has to be 90-98% Muslim - mostly Turks and Algerians. I was just in Austria about a week ago and didn't see nearly as many. Maybe other cities are different.
Answers 7 and 9-11 are here because of immigration. #7 mostly because of large numbers of immigrants from their former empire in North Africa, 9-11 because they are countries with small populations that receive a disproportionate number of Muslim immigrants.
The 6th one was Russia, and it wasn’t a part of the Ottomans. Also France as an Ottoman area? Oh dear.
And the fact that there’s not an 11th place
Greeks seeked liberty when they revolted against the Ottomans, they weren't just nationalists as you prefer to call them. When you for example fought a war against the British you didn't attribute it to nationalism. You speak of freedom, liberty etc and all kinds of nice moral stories.
And as someone else commented already the population exchange happened a century later...yet there are still Muslims in Greece but apparently too little to make this list.
Nationalism in the early modern period mostly revolved around gaining independence from colonial powers and establishing a government like in India, Africa, South America Ireland, the Balkans, etc.
Today, however (though you may disagree) nationalism revolves around a certain sect of isolationist, anti-immigration, right to far-right political movements throughout the world.
So, it is correct to call the Greeks nationalists as their primary motive was gaining independence form a colonial overlord and setting up a native government (as per the first defenition)
For the rest of southeastern Europe though, it's very true that Islam came with Ottoman influence.
Population density map of Russia
edit
generally true throughout history.
Otherwise, great quiz! The easiest was obviously Albania, due to the thumbnail...
Do you have quizzes like "Most Islamic Asian/African/American Countries"? That would be cool to know. :-)
Part of the problem I think is that Muslims tend to stick together in their host country, they stick to their culture and this is definitely a problem.
This is such a silly uneducated statement.
In fact the opposite is true, up until the 20th century the vast majority of science and technology in Europe and the Middle east was create by religious sponsered organisations and individuals.
It was churches and mosques that promoted studies of medicine, astronomy, physiology and arcitecture through out the middle ages and early modern period.
Even the very concept of human rights and movements like abolisionism was created by christian sects like the quakers.
Just look at how many charitable organisations are christian or mulsim, the red cross, red crescent, save the children, city mission to name a few.
Even ethical consent is religious in origin.
Read a history book or two before making bland infactual statements.
It is not authoritarian to dislike cultures that are overwhelmingly homophobic and sexist and it is perfectly acceptable to wish that anyone who wants to immigrate to the West, will adopt the culture of their host country.
If you disagree with progressive values then I don't want you in my country.
Yes religion has been used to impede scientific process but to no where near the level that it has supported it and certainly not to the level many often claim.
The idea that religion is bad for society and is responsible for all the evils of the world is wrong and not based on any reality.
.
Cyprus is a European country because it's culturally closer to Europe, and has been for thousands of years. Its also on the Eur(asian) tectonic plate, and so must be European.