Safferz;942528 wrote: No. Does anyone like hipsters? Apparently even hipsters don't like hipsters.

underdog;942520 wrote: you do? Hell no!!

Safferz;942515 wrote: lmao the Jimmy Kimmel clip didn't appear when I first commented, just watched it now. I've always wanted to go to Coachella for the bands but the dumb hipster crowds are a major turn off. Still, maybe next year... U don't like hipsters?

Apophis;942489 wrote: Nice try at shifting your intellectual inferiority this way, try again. And please, don't flatter yourself with this “ I'm in academia" nonsense. We know how the term has little to no meaning in North America. The evidence being the woeful intellect of exchange students who come to these shores. Highly embarrassing. Adna inanta ka xishoo. What was ur major horta? International Relations?

Safferz;942477 wrote: I'm not getting into this debate, but I think it's fair to say I've gotten a much better education than you have as a gender studies major, judging by the quality of your posts and depth of your thinking. If it had no academic value, I wouldn't be in academia now. Lmao. Soodiga inaadeerkaa meesha ku baabiiyay. Oo illeen naxariis days baad tahay.

Wow, that book is written in amazing Somali. I will definitely read it insha'Allah, if only to improve my vocabulary. But I can't commit to it now as im currently tackling a few other works.

Chimera;942059 wrote: Niyow, I thought I was flirting. Goormaad market-ka ku soo noqotay. Adeer cidhiidhiga naga daa aanu kaa kalluumaysanee.

Xaaji Xunjuf;941997 wrote: Wadani dont get worked up adeer you have play it smart with the defeated lot , you actually named the name of a clan you should not do that because its against the rules. APO did not name the clan if he does that it would have been deleted to. Insulting clans is allowed as long as you do it indirectly. Dont be direct wadani with the defeated lot. But usually they just blot out the clan names and don't delete the whole thing. I thin it was the history they had a problem with and not the clan names. Anyway, I'll write it again when I get the chance without the clan names and ill see what happens.

Tallaabo;941988 wrote: Don't be so explicit with the words dee. Waar ereyada dhar u xidh:D But I didn't talk bad about any clan. I was just giving a history lesson. It's Apo who is insulting a specific clan here and his posts are still up. This forum is bull****, the admin can delete me if they want I don't even care, way cadaysteen qabyaaladdoda.

Wat's wrong with the admin on this site? Y did u guys delete what i wrote?

SomaliPhilosopher;941933 wrote: Is the revolt related the poem Wadani? I'm not sure. I'll try to find out.

Apophis;941906 wrote: Don't pretend ignorance sxb. Read your history. You can't expect me to do all the research for you. If my ignorance is feigned as u claim, y would I need to read my history. Anyway, the usual claim of the snm being collaborators with the British and the D-block being patriots is complete nonsense. History is never that simplistic. For example, the British general 'Koofil', whose is the subject of the Sayids famous poem, was killed by daraawiish from the HY as he attempted to return looted camels to the Khaatumo clan. He was accompanied by 300 Khaatumo men on that infamous day. The daraawiish movement itself was created in Burco, and 4 of the 5 original leaders of the movement were from the SNM clan. Also, entire sublcans of the Khaatumo (eg MAxamuud Garaad) and the Cagdheer clan (eg Maxamad Zubayr) sided with the British and the Abyssinians against the Sayyid, and even plotted to assassinate him numerous times. Raage Ugaas the famous Cagdheer poet composed a piece praising the British for freeing them from the yolk of tyranny cast upon them by the dervishes. In the end, there was no clan that was entirely pro daraawiish or pro colonialists, and besides being anti-daraawiish didn't neccessarily mean one was pro-colonialists. My point in all of this being, history is never as simple as the neat and linear narratives we are constantly exposed to.

Apophis;941744 wrote: Dig dipper into your history sxb and you'll find out why (even the HAG) find you the Fredo of the family. What collabo with the whiteman? Wat r u talking about bro? I hope it's not that revisionist neo-claptrap again.

Safferz;941692 wrote: I could be mistaken, but didn't someone close to him start a rebellion against him? I believe the full brothers/half brother thing is a metaphor for clan. Yes, the 'Tree of bad counsel' revolt in 1909, known as 'Geedkii Canjeel Tolwaa' in Somali.

Safferz;941693 wrote: I completely agree. The civil war meant the destruction of both the state *and* the philosophical faith Somalis had in being a subject and citizen, which in turn led to Somalis turning to the most base political unit they could trust for their collective welfare and security, the clan. It will take a lot of work, but I am not a pessimist who believes it is impossible for Somalis to imagine new political possibilities and think outside of the clan framework. I sincerely hope ur right Safferz, our collective futures depend on it.

Safferz;941689 wrote: I had such thoughtful response to this but then my browser crashed and I lost it So an abridged version lol: I don't completely agree with that. Everything I've seen or read from the precolonial period suggests a recognition and understanding of some sort of shared Somali (and Muslim) identity -- for instance in Sayyid Mohamed's case , it was one that could be invoked and harnessed in opposition to foreign power. We had a kinship system (qabiil) that operated as a form of social organization, at times used in conflicts with other groups over resources but other times used to mediate and forge political and social alliances between tribes (marriage was one important institution of exchange and alliance building between tribes, since Somalis traditionally practiced something anthropologists call exogamy - marriage outside of your kinship group - for this reason). We did not have a nation-state until 1960, but we certainly had a nation. The question is when and how did qabiil transform into the primary form of political identification we see today, to the extent that shared Somali identity is almost impossible for us to imagine politically in the ways they did so easily just decades ago. The answer to ur question in a nutshell I believe is when the deepseated mistrust took root among the clans post civil war. There can be no restoration of trust until there is wholesale restitution of rights, first and foremost among these being the right of all victim groups to a sincere apology and acceptance of guilt by those responsible. Somalis will remain insular and continue to seek refuge and solace in their clans until a legitimate national reconciliation takes place. If that happens waa la bogson doonaa dawladna waa loo bislaaan. It sounds simplistic but I think its our only hope.

lol, laziness bro. It's a disease.

SomaliPhilosopher;941682 wrote: ^^Well the argument being made by these african academics such as mandami is that these figureheads were transformed into something greater though colonial policies That's y conceded lol. I was only objecting to her assumption that some clans had no figureheads to begin with.

SomaliPhilosopher;941679 wrote: Safferz, similar to how this "clan" structure we have today is more or less an imported system, the idea of a national identity is imported as well The latter being much much more alien to us than the former loool.

Safferz;941677 wrote: That's precisely the point of indirect rule -- rule through already existing indigenous political structures, which had the effect of entrenching and intensifying tribe for political power and rule. Where there was no recognizable political hierarchy, they created one and appointed "warrant chiefs." The traditional Somali political structure - the segmentary lineage system - is a more horizontal form of social organization than many African societies, so I would not be surprised at all to find that some of the clans that currently have a boqor/ugaas/suldaan/garaad did not have one prior to the 19th century. I know the British certainly appointed native courts and judges (qadi) in British Somaliland, but I haven't done much digging in the archives on this topic yet. That said, I am not saying colonialism is the origin of qabyalad or the reason for our current issues, but it is certainly an important part and it is a legacy of rule that our leaders inherited and intensified in the postcolony. I just think it's important to place everything in its historical context. Even though the Somali political structure was much more horizontol and diffuse in nature compared to many other African societies, being describe as a 'Pastoral Democracy' long ago by I.M . Lewis, I do believe almost all of the clans had a figurhead, even if only symbolic in nature. As for everything else u wrote, I concede lool.

SomaliPhilosopher;941675 wrote: I am inclined to agree with Wadani. If you read into Sayyid and poems from the dervish era, there is a lot of evidence of this "qabilism" Yes, i'm basing much of my opinion on my scant knowledge of the poetry of that era. The epic poetic battles (many of which incited actual physical ones) between the best bards of various northern clans in the collection known as 'Silsiladda Guba' is a good example.

Though Mahmouds work on the politicising of Tribes and native identities by the British for British aims is a valuable contribution to works on colonialism, I do have concerns about its generalizability. Yes, no doubt Britain engaged the various Somali clans as independent political bodies, signing treaties with all 4 coastal northern clans seperately in 1884. But I don't believe it would be accurate to extrapolate from this that Britain had a hand in solidifying, making static and giving political agency to Somali clans that were hithero fluid kinship/social systems as u have described them above. Before any white man had ever dreamt of stepping foot in the horn the Somalis were already organized in independent socio-economic and political groupings segmented along clan lines, with a legitimate boqor, ugaas, suldaan, or garaad at the helm of each. In our case, the British just took advantage of age-old divisions, feuds, and bad-blood between the various clans, but had little to do with creating such conditions in the first place.

My hat goes off to both Mintid and Oodweyne for their shrewd anaylsis. You guys would make great political pundits.

Xaaji Xunjuf;941540 wrote: Wadani remember when you first joined and you were singing Somaliyey tooso An eye opener Never forget udubkaa cidhiidhiga u degey ma cidkalaad mooday so cududa reer sheikh iyo ciidankooda maha. Xaajiyow waanigaa hadda saaxiga keenay. Allaylahee Xasan Tarabbi been ma sheegin.

Apophis;941536 wrote: Has it ever occurred to you that it was you (in the general sense) who started this hate against us because, frankly put, we had the b!tches and the camels and you not so much? Hence your collabo with the whiteman to gain leverage against your better gabbed bros :D You went outside the family sxb, you guys are the descendent of Fredo What collabo with the whiteman? Wat r u talking about bro? I hope it's not that revisionist neo-claptrap again.