Raamsade;883576 wrote: Agreed. Then perhaps we should hold-off all the accolades for Xamar UNTIL Xamar reaches the developmental stage of those cities, don't you agree with me? I agree Xamar has the potential to be special city, a great city, one that can rival other world capitals but it is not there yet. And it won't get there for the next 50 or so years at the very least. In the meantime we should refrain from hyperbole and concentrate on how we can rebuild this city into something greater than it ever was. But the city was an architectural gem, with a beautiful location, serene beaches, cheap living, excellent night-life, lively fashion scene and hosted numerous film festivals, sporting events and political conventions. Most importantly it was clean and SAFE. Every city needs 'hype', because it creates a certain pride within the people of the city. New York calls itself the 'greatest city in the world', same with London, same with Tokyo. Mogadishu was basically called the greatest city of the Indian Ocean, in terms of beauty, antiquity, culture and political clout, and nobody raised an eyebrow. At least then Somalis were comparing themselves with the rest of the world instead of the tuulo vs tuulo crap we have to endure today. Mogadishu had the potential to be far greater than it was, much greater, but I see no reason why individuals who lived there in its heydey cannot look back at that time with fond memories. Personally, Mogadishu in my opinion should be the pre-eminent city in that part of Africa connecting several continents, but currently we lack the foresight, pride and confidence to exert ourselves in such a way. I'm not sure whether that sort of 'pride' will return or is lost forever. My memories of Somalia/Xamar date back to only mid-to-late 1980s as I was too young to remember anything before that. I succinctly remember more nights without any lighting than nights with lighting. If power supply was that bad in the late 1980s, I don't know how you can say it was improving. And 105 MW is paltry sum for a national capital with more than a million people, assuming the infrastructure was ever developed to get the power from Baardheere all the way to Xamar. I know there were many extenuating circumstances such as development of the city outpacing the capacity of the government to provide services but at the very least I expect more for the claims being made. Absolutely, but you have to keep a certain persepective. If a country starts at 5% or lower, it will take time and investment before it reaches 80% and above. Mogadishu suffered power outtages, because the new factories, plants and shops consumed a lot of energy, I think 75% of enterprises had electricity. That is almost a full electrification rate for businesses, rare for an African country at the time. The last twenty years were wasted on nothing, the electrification rate was on a upwards trend. You and I, as well as the generation below would be the main benefactors of the infrastructural projects initiated in the 1980s, The Bardera Dam could have been the start of many energy projects. Are you talking about improvised cranes that you find in small ports or traditional cranes specifically designed to off-load cargo containers? If the latter, have any pictures? Heavy-lift cranes, and HMK 90 cranes, those aren't 'improvised' cranes but at the time used by all major ports. If you were referring to 'floating cranes', then no it didn't have that kind of expensive equipment yet. I want Xamar with decent sewage system, storm drain system so that streets and neighborhoods aren't flooded after heavy rains, sewage and water treatment plants, garbage collection and disposal system, well lit streets with names and numbered houses/buildings so that when I want to visit my grandma Ceebla' Goodir I can input her address into GPS system, I want reliable and steady supply of electricity and water, I want parks, museums, art galleries and other cultural attractions, I want to see an actual plan for Xamar's development rather than allowing everyone to build where they like... these expectations are reasonable with not a whiff of entitlement. If we settle for mediocrity that is what we'll get. You would have had all that, if the war never happened, Just look at the prewar sewerage and drainage projects, the water-supply projects, the careful urban planning, the maintainance and cleanliness culture steadily ingrained into the people. More parks would have been build, the promenades would have been upgraded, the big museum would be expanded once again, the film festivals would be celebrating their 30th and 50th anniversaries. The beaches would be top tourist destinations, etc. At least then we were going somewhere, now we start at zero. Your concerns are all valid, but what you did in the first post is tantamount to dismissing 1980s Kuala Lumpur because of the power-outtages and the lack of services back then that the city currently enjoys in our time. They got their through peace, city-pride and foresight.

Raamsade;883371 wrote: Cities have been built, destroyed and rebuilt again since time immemorial, Mogadishu is no different. But please spare us the hyperbole about glorious Mogadishu. Event in its heyday Xamar was a shidhole of city despite its natural beauty. You don't get a reputation as one of the cleanest and safest cities in the world by being a shidhole. Mogadishu was a beautiful piece of work for its time, and we could have bloomed it into something greater had we not retarded its progress. It was no different from celebrated cities like Casablanca, and Alexandria. Pearl of the Indian Ocean! I actually lived there unlike many of you and let me tell that much of what we take for granted in the typical city in Europe, N. America, Australia, et al wasn't available in Xamar. Those typical cities had several centuries of uninterrupted development, not to mention access to immense wealth be it through colonialism or financial capital. Majority of our heavy infrastructural projects commenced post-independence, and majority of it through loans. We were just getting started. Power was intermittent at best so generators were common place. Ditto with water, most people relied on water delivered on donkey carts or trucks. You sound too entitled, your grand-parents and parents had even less than that growing up! There were no power plants at independence, the eighty Somali power-plants such as the Mogadishu Central Power station, and the Jasira Power Station, were all constructed post independence. Somalis went from candles and laterns in their houses at independence to slowly benefiting from a modern distribution system covering all the major cities of Somalia. In terms of electrification. there was a positive trend as the figure doubled between 1980 and 1985. A good system was in place, only more power was needed for the national grid. Here is where the multiple planned 15MW/30MW steam and thermal power plants would have shown their worth. More importantly, a bigger project was greenlit in the form of the 105MW Bardera dam. This would have secured our energy needs well into the late 1990s, before more sizable projects would be connected to the grid. As for water distribution, here too we inherited nothing of significance at independence. Several multi-million dollar water-projects were ongoing in their first phases. Telephone and postal system were virtually non-existent. This is where the government slipped. Those sectors should have been privatised, as we can see from the current success of the Telecommunication industry, the less governmental involvement the better. However, in terms of money spend and priorities, I believe the government allocated it the right way. What is more important, an undisturbed phone line between Mogadishu and Hargeisa or a massive 1000km highway connecting the 1st and 2nd cities? The Telephone and postal systems were adequate for their time, considering there was no significant diaspora to speak off, nor did every Somali have the need or capital to buy a phone compared to our time. The seaport had no cranes for unloading cargo containers and no handling and storage capacity of those containers. BS, there were 3 heavy-lift cranes weighing between 30 to 90 ton. Not to forget in 1990 three state-of-the-art HMK 90 cranes were ordered to be used by the Somali Port Authority. The airport had only 1 runway LMAO, only the largest runway in Africa at the time. with no taxiway whatsoever More BS, I can't believe the more seasoned Mogadishans like MMA and Che let you get away with that nonsense. There was a taxiway, constructed by the Americans, and well-established uniform taxi-system of Red & Yellow cabs serviced the entire city. no jet bridges and of course the actually airport building looked like some kind of Mausoleum. More entitlement, how dare they make you walk a hundred meters to the entrance lol. There were no jet bridges, because the airport wasn't even equipped to handle that yet. The typical airport with such a feature is a multi-storeyed one. Considering Mogadishu's growth and relative popularity with expats and tourists, a new airport would have most likely been greenlit in the 90s or early 00s had the war not destroyed the state and the city. However Mogadishu was a glorious cosmopolitan city, culturally, and architecturally. If we had not retarded the water-projects, the upwards electrification drive, and instead maintained the cleanliness and stability of the city, it would be on par with other similar cities like Algiers, Casablance and Alexandria today and I most likely would be dissecting a whole different entitled post of yours, only one about 'Mogadishu being a shidhole' because the city is only building 30 floors-highrises instead of 70 floors-skyscrapers. Man, this was one sexy city!

Men prefer to see women in a perfect angelic light, the whole concept of a beautiful woman farting is tantamount to an EMP being detonated in Sillicon Valley. Nothing functions, all systems are down! Women can deprogram their minds in a similar manner by countering all the 'perfect man' pictures flying through their minds as a result of lust and hormones, and instead fill it with unflattering images of the guy in question.

^Mogadishu will be one of the most spectacular cities in the world once again, the old planned layout is very much the same, The hideous additions here and there can be rectified in a short space of time during an era of long-term stability.

If she does, it must be the scent of a thousand roses.

labellavida;882134 wrote: What would be your advice to a woman who is seeing a married man? The man keeps telling her he will leave his wife but nothing happens. In addition, the woman happens to be deeply in love with him. My friend is so sad. This is not being 'deeply in love', this pure lust. Since you confessed its about you, my advice is to detach! There are several ways to do this. From now on picture him in unromantic situations, picture him taking a dump, picture him projectile vomiting, picture him perpetually farting. Tell yourself the guy is a pedophile, tell yourself he is a grandma-beater. All of those thoughts are lies, but something inside you will switch lol, the lust will dampen, until its gone. This is how I stay loyal and remain detached from all the other beautiful fish in the sea, I just picture them perpetually farting, and its all systems abort.

^Ai Caramba

puntnomads;882911 wrote: Chimera you are forgetting the most important fact. That the rise of clannism is because of the failure of the post 1969 government. Government in tribal societies like Somalia, Libya and Saudi Arabia use clannism when the going gets tough. Historic revisionism! Clannism was already in full force in the 1960s, hundreds of political parties were formed along clan-lines that were beginning to dismantle and discredit the multi-clan parties such as SYL, SNL and the SNC. If clan had not been a factor, these parties could have been for Somalia what the Republican-Democrat-Independent axis is for America. Three major parties spanning the entire country. Instead, in a diva-like fashion, Somali clan-chieftains felt their powers waning, and cooked up those silly defunct parties that individually would never have the power or popularity to usher in serious progress, they were obstacles resulting in mass corruption. The Military was a multi-clan institution and intervened accordingly. after the 1977 debacle the government used divide and rule tactics on different clans. If the Somalia government acted with no discrimination and was an equal opportunities employer between 1960 and now, clannism would be dead. Bringing down a dictatorship was the right thing to do, the Somalis showed they weren't docile, and would fight for their rights. However they humiliated themselves around the world when they dismantled their own country in the name of clan. One administration or president does not equal a country. But if the government is supporting certain clans, then I as a unbiased person will be forced to rely on my clan for support to remedy my injustice due solely to the government injustice. As a matter of fact show me a Somali government that can act justly and fairly for 30 years and I will guarantee the dead of clannish ideology. One must demand justice and compensation through demonstrations or through force, but one has to also have a plan for the aftermath. Your stand on the matter is not sustainable, because clans disintergrate into subclans and they disintergrate into more subclans. Its a cobweb of instability and recipe for prolonged violence. What you don't realize about past Scottish, German and Japanese states is that they never discriminated against people based on blood and they had a concept of citizenship, meaning that anyone that lived in their state was an equal citizen and they discriminated between individuals on how much they have done for the state. LMAO! You obviously have no idea how Scotland lost its clans, how Prussia vanguished entire kingdoms and cities to unite the Germans and through what methods the Japanese clans and their shogunates perished. What happened in Somalia, happened there, only in their situation their dictators, emperors and presidents subdued rebellions and permanently destroyed their rivals. In their case, the 'evil' administrations prevailed and lived on. Not a form of State-building I want to see in Somalia, we can achieve the same through economic prosperity and a common cultural revival. The old Somali state reminds me of the Spanish Umayyid caliphate in its dying decades. even though the most loyal subjects to the caliphate was the Spanish converts who were 80% of the caliphate population, the caliph relied on Arab and Berber tribes for political and military support and discriminated against the majority of his subjects. Make me think they deserved what happened to them. Make me think that the old Somali republic deserved to die. Did the 500 thousand Somalis that died after the collapse of the Somali state deserve to die? This will be an interesting answer, and will reveal a lot about you. You are whitewashing their bad example and not realizing Somalis have incredible long memories about any injustice done to them. The issue isn't ideological, it is practical and you have no answer how injustice will be remedied. Somali will only trust a strong central state if it is unbiased for decades and it has the strength to deliver equal justice for all clans and doesn't commit injustice on certain clans. That doesn't mean the government doesn't commit injustice, it just means it does it in an unbiased manner. No, I'm not white-washing anything, nothing in my previous posts even referred to the 1980s dictatorship. I'm discussing the concept of a Somali state where the ultimate clan is the Somali identity. Where economic prosperity in the form of trade-unions and nationwide/global companies provides the necessary safety-nets that will render clan-loyalty obsolete. Where Somali cities are flourishing multi-clan metropolises with cosmopolitan populations. From your name I deduce that your from Puntland, do you want me to highlight all the injustices occurring there? Will there be a collapse of Puntland in the future based on that sentiment too? If Somalis in your expert opinion reject the concept of a united republic, will not accept a regional state, and prefer their cities to remain clan-strongholds, how the hell are they going to progress into the future? indefinitely, perhaps forever. People will not tolerate injustice, especially Somalis, they would rather have a failed state than have a certain clan enjoying the benefits of the state at their expense. We are not Ethiopians. If you don't believe this then you don't know Somalis, me included. You say that from the comfort of Birmingham, a city in the United Kingdom; a flourishing civilization based on a strong national identity. Where meritocracy rules, and where a person, regardless of his or her colour or creed can achieve success. Not a single Somali in Somalia would agree with you, outside of the clan-chieftains sitting in their pseudo-Gold thrones eating five meals a day, while their clan-constituents are dying of conflict, hunger, thirst, disease, and crossing the sea for a better life. All I proposed is a Somali State with a single clan in the form of the Somali People, where a Somali president from Ras Kamboni would work just as hard for the people of Zeila as he would for his birth-region. Where a Somali Prime-Minister from Hargeisa would attract foreign direct investment just as passionately for the cities of Garowe and Bosaso as he would for his birth-city. Where a man or woman from Qardho could become mayor of Mogadishu, and a man or woman from Merka could become the manager of the Berbera port. Indefinitely? Most definitely not!

Puntnomads, I'll get to your post later today, insha'allah. Xaaji Xunjuf;882944 wrote: Chimera you made some good points but what you are also forgetting is prior to colonialism Somalis were the same as how they operate now divided loyal to clan even at sub clan level. You are correct when you say Somalis are the most homogeneous group in Africa speak the same language culture look the same physically. But the problem Somalis were nomads conquering lands from the 14 century till the 18 century. So they don't have this mindset of ownership of land, every somali clan or sub clan went his own direction in capturing new lands this is where the friction comes. True the Adal and Walashama dynasties were capable governments or the Ajurran empire in the south but even they came short when it came to uniting their forces. You have a point that if Somalis had no clan or sub clan structure but based themselves on regions and provinces it would've been better than the Somali identity for all would've worked. Do you know Somalis are the only group in Africa with the biggest territory but they cant seem to unite politically they aren't able to shape a common Somali identity the question is why you should answer that Chimera. The reason why political unity was so fluid is because Somalis before the Europeans had no serious threat to their way of life, or their ownership of the lands they lived upon. Each time a local power like the Amharas, the Tigres or the Oromos rose to threaten Somali cities and towns, there was a mass-mobilisation of Somali soldiers, and the threat was neutralized for the next several centuries. Even with pre-19th century foreign powers, the Somalis had the political, economic and military clout to maintain ownership of their destiny and lands. The Portuguese were repulsed and never achieved a foothold, the Omanis who ruled most of the East African coast south of Somalia had to pay tribute to a Somali Sultan and ask for his permission if they wanted to build something in the Somali cities 'they claimed', though never ruled. The Ottomans had no troop presence in the two Somali ports they claimed, only a tribute was send annually after the collapse of Adal. Hence the need for long-term political unity wasn't there, because we never faced a long-term existential threat. The moment we did, in the form of Menelik II, history was about to repeat itself in the form of the Dervishes, who even with the European presence reclaimed the O-region and began building fortresses and cities across the Horn as if they were signatories of the Berlin Conference themselves. The reason why a Somali national identity never solidified despite all the ingredients being there is solely the result of defeat. Unfortunately for us, we had to contend with the most imperial campaigns, the wealthiest european empires, the most equipped military forces. Unfortunately for us on the other side of the battlefield weren't our traditional enemies we could easily subdue, no, instead we had to fight superpowers, and everything you see today is a direct result of those defeats. Victories would have resulted in a surge of nationalism, when that was denied by overwhelming forces and odds, artificial borders, divisions and disgruntlement took root.

Xaaji Xunjuf;882728 wrote: Chimera wants to redefine the Somali identity as the only tribe of the Somali country but there was never a Somali identity there were always tribal fiefdoms prior colonialism. There was a single language, a clear indication of universal development. There was a single cultural complex, another indication of universal development. There was the adoption of a single religion with a specific religious school of thought, another good example of universal development. All clans identified themselves under a well-defined sobriquet i.e Somali, without force or misrepresentation. What this shows is there was already a well-established Somali Nation before the arrival of the Europeans. You might define yourself by that period of foreign dominance, but I do not, for Somali history is rich and ancient, with multiple historic states, The Somali state is one of a handful of countries in Africa based on a identity predating the scramble of Africa. The Kenyan, Ethiopian and Djiboutian identities are all post 1930/60s, while ours is centuries old, and with more research most likely thousands of years old. You're parrotting the neo-colonialist agenda of 'Somalis were never politically united before the 1960s' mass deseminated by Pan-Ethiopianists and those with clear agendas, but that is to employ the concept of 'European politics' on a ancient African society, nothing could be further from the truth. There are multiple instances of unity in historic Somalia, the case of the 14th century Barkhadle Alliance uniting the Somali Islamic strongholds of Mogadishu and its southern sister cities with Zeila and its northern dominions is a good example. The myriad of clans rallied by Ahmed Gurey in the 16th century covered the vast majority of clans known to us today, and some which have not survived. That is political unity in its rawest form. The Dervish State had fortresses, ports and political alliances with other Somali entities all over Greater Somalia, from the North to the South, and from to the O-region to NFD. Somalia has a rich literary history, but none of it has truly been studied. I'll bet if it was, more such alliances would surface, and permanently refute that neo-colonialist argument. Its absurd that a country with so many historic seats of knowledge and archaeological wealth has been ignored to this extent. There are hundreds of countries around the world who have build a unified national identity with far less common history and common characteristics than what we have going for us. You go to a great extent to discredit the Somali identity, yet wholeheartedly accept that of our neighbours, which is completely based on colonialism, with no common culture, no common religion, no common history, no common language. Who historically never existed politically, or never ruled over the territory they do today. Xaaji, your livestock analogy is weird, the waranleh could accept our offer in the name of becoming our protector. In any case, we are discussing the 21st century, where we could make a 100x more from our camels and goats, if we shared it with the rest of the Somali nation. In terms of factories, multiple products and exports. You and I would be millionaires before we hit the age of 30 all in the name of co-operation and Somalinimo, instead of the 'dog eat dog world' you see today. Xaaji, I know you, I've seen you on other forums, you know the type of progress that is happening in other countries, you have seen the heavy infrastructure projects, the rising cities, the booming economies. I cannot understand why you would want your people to miss out on this sort of development all in the name of clan. Its madness.........no...this is..........Somalia!

Pathetic yet amusing, the amount of propaganda he employs is comical. Turkey was part of UNISOM, and there are thousands of Somalis living in Turkey, not to mention around 2000 Somali students, who will return as engineers, architects, agriculturalists, policemen and soldiers.

Habesha enemy Somalia who?

^You're hurting his feelings,

Imagine that creature creeping on the wall while your leaning with your head against it and watching a movie. For a moment I thought it was a small hand, and died for a second, then saw it was spider, and died a second time............tarantula looking mofo lol

Fought a long battle with a T. gigantea which is a ankylosaurid dinosaur species from the late Cretaceous of Mongolia AKA the Giant House Spider.

All African countries were, but in Somalia's case that was taken into account in 1991 when the per capita figure declined from $836 to $600. Even then the closest estimate to the actual 2012 GDP per capita figure would be $1800 today based on the 1990s economy and current dollar exchange rates. A rebasing of the economy factoring in the vibrant private-sector, the myriad of new companies and the $2.6 billion worth of remittances, could push that estimate even higher. Somalia is the only country featured in economic indexes with a static $600 figure 20 years straight, while accompanied by 2.4% growth annualy LOL.

PART 2 You, and many others, are going about the issue of solving Somalia's social and political problems the wrong way, by refusing to acknowledge the current reality and refusal to acknowledge your accurate placement in the current dilemma. Somalia is not Japan, there are not 100 million of us sharing an island the size of Eritrea. Somalia is not France, or Germany, or England. Somalis need to stop looking at the wrong places for reference. Indeed, 19th century Japan never had the natural resources Somalia has an abundance of to succeed. Indeed 19th century France had a much larger population than Somalia to lift out of our poverty. Indeed 19th century Germany had to bring together hundreds of German states into a union, which in comparison to Somalia is like comparing a Nintendo Wii with an 8-bit Nintendo in terms of sheer complexity. We got it easy compared to them. Those societies became shaped by their demographic realities. Somalis can only mimic those societies by moving the majority of our entire 20-million population throughout the peninsula into a tiny corner of modern Somalia. But if we are to maintain our current geographic spreading, then we can't become Japan. So long as the mainland is flourishing, the rest of the Somali world will eventually enjoy the same economic and educational rights, and eventually adopt a more transcendent mindset. We do not need to shift the entire Somali world into one corner, we just need to make sure that specific corner is flourishing, and nature will prevail. The clan system may spell the source of all problems for you, but it's the sole engine that has kept Somalis on the planet this long, especially the past few centuries that it's been around. Our adoption of the clan system centuries ago has formed us into sub-societies which acted on their own, gradually expanding "Greater Somalia" into the largest contiguous ethnic territory in all of Africa, and which places Somalis as one of the 5 largest land-owning ethnic groups in the world. The reality is; in the 19th and 20th centuries the petty clans saw their clan-brethren swallowed up by colonial superstructures driven by unified ethnic groups. The latter in turn ceded these same clan-territories to other superstructures in the form of neighbouring countries. The clan system did squat to save them from this situation. Indeed, these clans are now living under the jurisdiction of ethnic groups that never had jurisdiction over them historically. It was Somali nationalism that came closest to recovering these areas, and successful or not, this is an undisputed fact. Greater Somalia was not created by nationalism, it was created by clannism, and this would have been impossible if we all had one supreme leader who kept us isolated in a corner of East Africa. This may not mean much right now, but it has left a huge starting deposit in the Somali bank account, and we're free to use it any time we're ready. Greater Somalia is a result of Somali Islamic expansion between the 11th and 16th centuries, not just 'clannism'. The fact that it was a single ethnic group speaking the same language, and practicing the same culture and religion doing all of this expanding. it points to a well functioning civilisational system. It therefore wasn't just clannism, this was a form of proto-nationalism. This was however a long time ago, when Somalis could expand into a non-Somali region and sack its cities and towns, but that time is gone. Today its unified ethnic groups that rule the world, and you argue for the continuation of a 'archaic' system? I'm not sure what you are fighting here, is it the clan conflicts, or the clan identities? Because it has to be one of them, since you won't ever erase the clan system. Tell that to the derelict Japanese clans, or the vanguished Scottish clans. The time of the Somali clan system will come, one way or another. How long can people tolerate being at the bottom of the barrel? Not long! People seek protection, and the clan provides that in a number of ways. It is their only state, unless you are providing them an alternative. We have a country, that is a BIG ALTERNATIVE we could work and strive to make better. Putting our heads in the sand like ostriches and pretending the clan-system is some symbiotic organism we can never remove from our society certainly is not a solution. Don't advocate for people to give up their cars without first installing a metro system in their neighborhood. Did you even read the original post before you replied? The historic societies where clans and tribes used to be supreme had theirs replaced with modern versions in the form of countries, trade-unions, military-complexes, melting-pot cities, etc. That was the entire point of my original post.

PART 1 Timur;881934 wrote: Clan is a necessity in Somali society. A basic understanding of political and economic structures can teach you that. It has nothing to do with people's own personal desires, no one woke up one day to embrace their clan - clans were formed to address local realities, and everything happening afterward is just a side-effect. No one is disputing that the system of clan evolved over the centuries, and that it once upon a time was a functioning positive force in the development of the Somali people. However for long term progress the system is obsolete, and counterproductive. Nothing you have highlighted in your reply provides an argument against this fact. Every analysts that has covered and studied the conflict unanimously agrees that the disintergrating system of clan was the achilles-heel of the country's progress, and brought it down to its knees. Clans and sub-clans are the archaic Somali version of provinces and districts. Exactly, its an archaic system in the 21st century, A clan, much like a formal geographic zone or state, is formed to fill a power vacuum and bring the people of a certain area under the control of a governing system. If you have noticed, in areas where clan structures did not exist traditionally, they have formed to serve the basic purposes they do in other areas (the regions of Bay, Bakool, and Shabelle Hoose demonstrate the recent formation of supra-clans in the place of less formal structures). There was no power-vacuum, a viable superstructure in the form of the Somali Republic was established, with a system of 18 districts, the Somali people had devised a governing system together, and one they had agreed to live under as the law of the land. The clan system employed by various dubious actors was directly competing against a far more beneficial and inclusive system, and eventually became its undoing. There cannot be "one Somali clan" because it would be such a massive umbrella that it would ultimately become arbitrary, and useless. Plenty of historic precedents around the world where the national identity prevailed over the petty clan-identities, its not impossible! That's the sole reason why Somali nationalism has never worked, and will not work today, at least not for another century or more. Nationalism and other wider encompassing identity systems only work in dense societies which fall under a governing authority which has the resources to control all of the people. In that case, it becomes the ethnic umbrella clan concept you're talking about. Somalis under a era of 'Nationalism' achieved more in education, economics, militarism, and global standing, than any of the regional and clan structures have managed to accomplish in the last twenty years. The people were safer, more educated, and healthier than their divided descendants today. You speak of 'dense societies', I presume you're referring to an urban society? Well by 2020 Somalia will be the most urbanised country in East Africa, it already is if we leave out Djibouti. Hence if Somalis want to ascend to a higher economic and educational level, the concept of clan will have to become obsolete. No Somali city will flourish as a viable metropolis if they are seen as clan-strongholds, they have to become melting-pots of various clans. Ethnic groups that are spread out across large areas, like Somalis and the various nomadic groups in arid Africa and Western Asia, have naturally developed to break into clan and tribal groupings out of necessity. No need to highlight the historic development of clans, and the reason why they exist. I already know that, but we are discussing modern Somalia. A Somali who lives in Garissa and a Somali who lives in Djibouti have never in their history been under the same system, precisely because of the logistical impossibility of that happening. Red herring, we are discussing the Federal Republic of Somalia, a country in East Africa, with internationally recognised borders. Greater Somalia is a complete different subject I wasn't even referring to. This dilemma means that there would have always been large tracts of the Somali peninsula that suffered power vacuums due to their dependence on an authority which could not take care of everyone. It was this realization, for the Garissa man who didn't know about Djibouti, and the Djibouti man who didn't know about Garissa, that clan systems formed; it wasn't meant to divide anyone or anything, but to unite people in an isolated community. Once again, an unwanted explanation on history of the clan-system's genesis. Its irrelevant to me why a 15th century Somali man in Garissa or a 17th century Somali man in Djibouti adopted kin-membership with those in their vicinity. I'm talking about modern Somalis who had a country and a government representing them. I'm talking about politicians and institutions with mandates to serve their people. Why they did disintergrate themselves, which in turn degraded their 'clans' level of development and brought severe humiliation to their doorstep?

"Stability" means obedience to U.S. domination. - Noam Chomsky

DoctorKenney;881793 wrote: P.S. Now, the reason why I'm so emphatic about educating the young Somali boys first rather than all Somali children is simply due to a lack of financial resources. In a nation with as little financial resources as Somalia, it is imperative that we make as big an impact as possible. Somalia is a very patriarchal society, and for a woman to gain influence would be extremely difficult. It would be better to first educate the males of the society, and then when they start moving forward we can focus on the young females in the country. This is not to be misinterpreted as sexism, it's just more strategic. “If you teach a boy, you educate an individual; but if you teach a girl, you educate a community."

Exactly Blackflash, each of the neglected and badly managed industries you mentioned potentially could reap billions in revenue. The coastal belts, the fertile regions, the urban areas all would see their standards of living rise with the right economic policies in a time-span much faster than any of its larger neighbours. A single factory has a much broader effect in Somalia than it would have in either Kenya or Ethiopia. The distribution of these same jobs and wealth would be amongst a smaller population, which translates into every Somali family and individual having a higher spending power, which in turn would result in a strong consumer based economy, and more taxes for the Federal government. This means better infrastructure, a flourishing retail sector and higher standards of living.

You would need a 500k strong Somali army of orphans with no ties to qabiil sustaining at least fifty years of undisturbed peace and progress. Only then will the concept and appeal of clan be significantly degraded in Somali society to the point of it being a thing of the past. That was the case with Germans, Scots and more vividly the Japanese. Either that or a huge economic boom and educational revolution.

Naxar Nugaaleed;881778 wrote: There is no spinning this, I find the whole idea of equating Somalia with the two largest economies in East Africa funny carry on I don't understand what you're trying to convey, but give me Switzerland over China any day of the week my friend. When I say Somalia's sizable population is a boon rather than a disadvantage its no spin. The 'Largest economy' tag doesn't equal most efficient and beneficial to the average citizen. A 100 billion economy translates for Somalia into a GDP per capita of $10000, while for Ethiopia it translates into a $1200 GDP per capita, hence the spending power of the average Somali would be far greater when it utilizes all of its resources.

Firstly most members know I do not understand the appeal of clan, its neolithic. The idea of an educated Somali man degrading himself into being a slave of a backwards system is strange, in-fact I believe the concept of an independent minded Somali man deeply rooted in his culture while at the same time being a non-qabiilist is science-fiction. There has to be a form of displacement or detachment from the core-culture first for one to have a better persepective, this is the case of many diasporans who choose a path of either becoming a transcendent Somali or indulge in petty clan-wars. I denied it in the past, but sophisticated and transcendent Somali men deeply rooted in their culture such as the likes of Hadrawi, and Aden Adde are few and far in between. All of them have an agenda, point out any politician, activist or journalist and one way or another it will appear on their foreheads. It takes guts to go against the grain, hence most Somali men prefer to go with the flow. I do this with my father, out of respect, when he points at a map of Greater Somalia and says 'our people live here and our people live there' in reference to some crappy clans, I keep quite, evendo deep down I say 'no father our people live on that entire landmass'. Therefore I do understand the 'pressure' of why some politicians work for their 'tol' or 'degaan', instead of the country, they're simply going with the flow, but in the process they have actually prevented 'true development' from reaching 'their people'. . I'm not going to go on a tirade of why I dislike qabiil, because I'm beginning to get tired of my own words, it feels redundant. However are you guys aware that no qabiil has ever invented a distinct language? Are you aware that no qabiil has ever invented a distinct culture? Are you aware that no qabiil has a distinct genetic code? Are you aware that no qabiil is recognised on a global scale? For example: Taking the stand that the two items were closely linked to the troubled question of resource mobilisation, which the CoP is currently working to resolve, the EU delegation said these should be deferred until then. China, Malaysia and Somalia came out in favour of passing the listed agenda item , with China stating that it did not want to see "more texts in square brackets" (text which does not have agreement). It proposed a compromise text to get over the impasse. However, the EU stood firm and was supported by Australia, New Zealand and Switzerland. LINK The world does not recognise petty societal structures, they only acknowledge and engage superstructures in the form of countries. Are you aware that the Somali people invented a distinct language? Are you aware that the Somali people invented a distinct culture? Are you aware that the Somali people have a distinct genetic code? Are you aware that the Somali people have a country - regardless of its current predicament - recognised on a global scale, unlike the Kurds, Assyrians, Tibetans and Chechens? Why can't the Somali Republic be the 'ultimate clan'? Why can't the Somali ethnic group be the 'ultimate sub-clan'? Why can't Somali companies, conglomerates and trade-unions be the 'ultimate sub-sub clans'? Competition in such a scenario is vastly more beneficial to the average Somali than the current situation. These new Age clans would have no specific territories, and span the entire country.