New Age Clans?

[Chimera]

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.

[Timur]

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.

 

Clans and sub-clans are the archaic Somali version of provinces and districts. 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 cannot be "one Somali clan" because it would be such a massive umbrella that it would ultimately become arbitrary, and useless. 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.

 

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. 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. 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.

 

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. 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.

 

You are out of touch with reality, like many Somalis who don't know their place in the world, so I don't blame you for looking at the subject from one narrow and skewed angle, but try to analyze things a bit better before jumping the gun, and you'll find suitable answers for your proposal.

 

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. 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.

 

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. 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. Don't advocate for people to give up their cars without first installing a metro system in their neighborhood.

 

I don't support the negative after-effects of the clan system either, but I will go about healing its pitfalls in a more appropriate manner which will deliver results. I believe the current systems of federalism are already replacing the clan system; now you have identities that encompass multiple clans at once rather than individual clans. That's why I support federalism, it's a realistic approach to the clan dilemmas and past frictions, and it also supports reconciliation in regions where various clans have common goals, rather than to vainly reconcile vastly separate clans whose relationships did not need healing. This may be the first real reconciliation period I've ever heard of.

[BoldNewSomali]

Timur;881934 wrote:

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,

I was getting noxious as I read your admittedly well written screed, then I got to the above line and the nausea overtook me and I just threw up. Qabils, and its evil twin Qabilnimo, is "the sole engine that has kept Somalis on this planet"? Say that to the countless women who've been raped by morayaan, and the many many thousands of our brethren that were killed by this qabil or that qabil.

[Chimera]

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?

[Chimera]

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.

[NGONGE]

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.]

:D

 

(Carry on).

[Xaruuri]

Qabaa’ilka Soomaalidu ma isbahaysi baa,

mise waa dhalasho?

 

Runtii waa su’aal ay adag tahay in jawaab waafi ah laga bixiyo. Waxa taas daliil u ah, siina adkaynaya innaga oo aan illaa maanta hayn qoraallo ama dokumantiyo taariikhi ah oo arrintaas wax ka yidhi. Waxa keliya ee aynu cuskannaa inta badan waa qoraallo kooban oo dad ajnebi ahi ay qoreen, xilliyo mudada laga joogaa ay aad u yar tahay, marka la barbar dhigo inta ay qowmiyadda Soomaaliyeed soo jirtay. Waxa intaas dheer, kuwaas oo aan dhul badan oo Soomaaliyeed marin, sidaa awgeedna xogta ay ururiyeen ay ku salaysan tahay dad iyo degaanno kooban.

 

Read the rest of the article here:

 

http://wardheernews.com/Articles_2010/April/Hirad/26_Qabaa'ilka_Soomaalidu_ma_dhalashaa.html

 

Xaruuri

[Mario B]

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.

 

Clans and sub-clans are the archaic Somali version of provinces and districts. 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 cannot be "one Somali clan" because it would be such a massive umbrella that it would ultimately become arbitrary, and useless. 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.

 

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. 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. 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.

 

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. 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.

 

You are out of touch with reality, like many Somalis who don't know their place in the world, so I don't blame you for looking at the subject from one narrow and skewed angle, but try to analyze things a bit better before jumping the gun, and you'll find suitable answers for your proposal.

 

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. 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.

 

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. 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. Don't advocate for people to give up their cars without first installing a metro system in their neighborhood.

 

I don't support the negative after-effects of the clan system either, but I will go about healing its pitfalls in a more appropriate manner which will deliver results. I believe the current systems of federalism are already replacing the clan system; now you have identities that encompass multiple clans at once rather than individual clans. That's why I support federalism, it's a realistic approach to the clan dilemmas and past frictions, and it also supports reconciliation in regions where various clans have common goals, rather than to vainly reconcile vastly separate clans whose relationships did not need healing. This may be the first real reconciliation period I've ever heard of.

 

You could have saved yourself from writing all those words, nextime just say "Clan is everyhing"

[Taleexi]

Clan factor can never be removed from the Somali way of thinking however, Somalis all they need is political justice and then the influence of tribalism will take be reversed.

[xiinfaniin]

History of human development has shown clan systems and identities hardly survive in a truly urban settings.

 

As Somalia comes back up, large cities considered clannish strongholds today will inevitably transform themselves to urban centers, which in turn will depress the clannish attitudes that are prevalent today to negligible levels.

[Xaaji Xunjuf]

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. The only way to have a Somali identity is if Somalia becomes a multi ethnic country where 40% of the people are not Somalis but from Kenya Ethiopia Tanzania Arabia Bangladesh India Jamaica Morocco.

 

Somalis care about 3 things

 

Their religion their tribe and their money

 

Chimera imagine adigu 18 century ku nool adigu hare digeed marayaa oo adigu geel badan wata iyo xoolo badan iyo dumar badan oo nin Somali ku yidha ana Xoolo badan baan haysta ma isku geyna xoolaheena. Dabeedna ninka halka fadhiya eeh waranka sita eeh Goa cad huwan aynu u dhiibano xoolaheena. What will his reaction be do you think he would accept or not.

[puntnomads]

"Why they did disintergrate themselves, which in turn degraded their 'clans' level of development and brought severe humiliation to their doorstep?"

 

"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."

 

"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?"

 

 

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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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.

 

"How long can people tolerate being at the bottom of the barrel?"

 

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.

[Chimera]

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!

[Xaaji Xunjuf]

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.

[Chimera]

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.