Colonisation of Somalia was a good thing.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kratos

Sonder
Title is a bit provocative and this is a long read, but hear me out:



Colonisation by European powers is generally regarded as a bad thing and a lot of African countries claim that their current problems are long-term consequences inherited from their colonial history. However, that can't really be said for Somalia. The British technically didn't colonise Somaliland (mainly due to disinterest in the region) and have a largely negligible historical presence there; except for maybe Berbera. The Italians only colonised the South but signed treaties with the Majerteen Sultanates. Although the territory of the Majerteen was annexed by 1927, they still retained a high degree of autonomy and governed themselves and it was only for a relatively short amount of time (14 years). The Italians also didn't settle in these regions or build anything there. Compare that to Ethiopia who actually lost the second war to Italy and were occupied for 6 years, but are still credited with having avoided colonisation even though the Italians began settlement and the construction of significant infrastructure projects.

The Italians also didn't really do anything that bad either. The reason why European colonialism is universally viewed as such a terrible thing is because people associate it with the notoriously infamous type of colonialism that occurred in places such as the Belgian Congo and the atrocities that were committed there. Enforced labour (slavery), ethnic genocide, cultural and linguistic genocide, as well as religious imperialism just to name a few. None of these things happened in Somalia. The Italians only enslaved the Bantus. But then again, Benadiris and some southern ethnic Somalis like Abgaal and Bimaal had Bantu slaves anyway. They were only upholding the status quo of the region at that time. Have you ever wondered why there aren't that many christian Somalis? It's because the Italians didn't really try to enforce Christianity. In fact, they left Islam alone as the state religion. They built a cathedral but they were the only ones who attended it. Muqdisho had the highest standard of living out of all the African colonies, for both the colonists and the local inhabitants. In contrast, the Congolese were getting severely karbashed during this time period.

They even supported Greater Somalia. They invaded British Somaliland and liberated Somali galbeed from the Amxaar and established the Somali governate (as part of Italian East Africa). This is the only time in history Somaliweyn has been united. Then, when the SYL was formed and the British took back Somaliland and the Italians lost the second world war along with their colonies, they were made to sign an agreement which gave them trusteeship over "Italian Somalia" under the condition that it would gain independence in 10 years. They accepted the terms and unlike the bastard British who dismantled everything they built in their former colonies (railways and other infrastructure in India) before leaving, the Italians did no such thing. Infrastructure and educational development actually increased significantly during this 10 year period. This culminated in the emergence of Africa's first democrats upon independence.

Overall I would say that the Italians did a good job :nvjpqts:. I'm not saying that they were perfect and had noble intentions. Of course they weren't. But the positives outweigh the negatives. When Somalia gained independence we were in a very good position to build a fantastic nation. We had a democratically elected government, access to higher education, one of the most developed capitals in all of sub-Saharan Africa and a relatively homogeneous population. We even had af-Soomali as our official language. Compare this to some of the other countries in Africa who have a million different official languages or the ones who use English or French in government and education. Things should not have gone as wrong as they did. The only negative thing we inherited are the stupid borders but that's because of the bastard British and the greedy Amxaar and Kenyaati; our true enemies. Maybe if the Italians won the 2nd world war then Somaliweyn would be united today.
 
Italy actually lost more than they gained in Somalia and look at it now, Somalia at its peak was the 50s and 60s. The mistake they did was thinking centralized government and having one capital in Mogadishu would work when we have clans play major role in society.
 

YourBroMoe

Who the fuck am I? ギくェズー
Title is a bit provocative and this is a long read, but hear me out:



Colonisation by European powers is generally regarded as a bad thing and a lot of African countries claim that their current problems are long-term consequences inherited from their colonial history. However, that can't really be said for Somalia. The British technically didn't colonise Somaliland (mainly due to disinterest in the region) and have a largely negligible historical presence there; except for maybe Berbera. The Italians only colonised the South but signed treaties with the Majerteen Sultanates. Although the territory of the Majerteen was annexed by 1927, they still retained a high degree of autonomy and governed themselves and it was only for a relatively short amount of time (14 years). The Italians also didn't settle in these regions or build anything there. Compare that to Ethiopia who actually lost the second war to Italy and were occupied for 6 years, but are still credited with having avoided colonisation even though the Italians began settlement and the construction of significant infrastructure projects.

The Italians also didn't really do anything that bad either. The reason why European colonialism is universally viewed as such a terrible thing is because people associate it with the notoriously infamous type of colonialism that occurred in places such as the Belgian Congo and the atrocities that were committed there. Enforced labour (slavery), ethnic genocide, cultural and linguistic genocide, as well as religious imperialism just to name a few. None of these things happened in Somalia. The Italians only enslaved the Bantus. But then again, Benadiris and some southern ethnic Somalis like Abgaal and Bimaal had Bantu slaves anyway. They were only upholding the status quo of the region at that time. Have you ever wondered why there aren't that many christian Somalis? It's because the Italians didn't really try to enforce Christianity. In fact, they left Islam alone as the state religion. They built a cathedral but they were the only ones who attended it. Muqdisho had the highest standard of living out of all the African colonies, for both the colonists and the local inhabitants. In contrast, the Congolese were getting severely karbashed during this time period.

They even supported Greater Somalia. They invaded British Somaliland and liberated Somali galbeed from the Amxaar and established the Somali governate (as part of Italian East Africa). This is the only time in history Somaliweyn has been united. Then, when the SYL was formed and the British took back Somaliland and the Italians lost the second world war along with their colonies, they were made to sign an agreement which gave them trusteeship over "Italian Somalia" under the condition that it would gain independence in 10 years. They accepted the terms and unlike the bastard British who dismantled everything they built in their former colonies (railways and other infrastructure in India) before leaving, the Italians did no such thing. Infrastructure and educational development actually increased significantly during this 10 year period. This culminated in the emergence of Africa's first democrats upon independence.

Overall I would say that the Italians did a good job :nvjpqts:. I'm not saying that they were perfect and had noble intentions. Of course they weren't. But the positives outweigh the negatives. When Somalia gained independence we were in a very good position to build a fantastic nation. We had a democratically elected government, access to higher education, one of the most developed capitals in all of sub-Saharan Africa and a relatively homogeneous population. We even had af-Soomali as our official language. Compare this to some of the other countries in Africa who have a million different official languages or the ones who use English or French in government and education. Things should not have gone as wrong as they did. The only negative thing we inherited are the stupid borders but that's because of the bastard British and the greedy Amxaar and Kenyaati; our true enemies. Maybe if the Italians won the 2nd world war then Somaliweyn would be united today.
Interesting analysis.

I disagree because the Sultanates in the land mass we now call Somalia already had relationships with European powers and nations in the old world due to our historically strategic location.

As a result, we probably would of ended up in a similar position with or without colonialism in my honest opinion.

Hell without colonialism, the Somali expansion would of continued without any barriers. We probably would of owned most of the Horn of Africa.
 

Kratos

Sonder
Italy actually lost more than they gained in Somalia and look at it now, Somalia at its peak was the 50s and 60s. The mistake they did was thinking centralized government and having one capital in Mogadishu would work when we have clans play major role in society.

Exactly. And Siad Barre has to take the blame. His failure to re-take Somali galbeed and his subsequent alienation and indiscriminate killing of specific clans were the catalysts for the civil war
 

Kratos

Sonder
Interesting analysis.

I disagree because the Sultanates in the land mass we now call Somalia already had relationships with European powers and nations in the old world due to our historically strategic location.

As a result, we probably would of ended up in a similar position with or without colonialism in my honest opinion.

Hell without colonialism, the Somali expansion would of continued without any barriers. We probably would of owned most of the Horn of Africa.

Well Somali galbeed was already conquered by the Ethiopian empire. Maybe the MJ sultanates would go on to form a state but Ethiopia would most likely be able to annex galbeed and maybe even SL. Who knows they may have even conquered all of Somalia. Their population was far larger and they had military support from the British
 

Kratos

Sonder
Interesting analysis.

I disagree because the Sultanates in the land mass we now call Somalia already had relationships with European powers and nations in the old world due to our historically strategic location.

As a result, we probably would of ended up in a similar position with or without colonialism in my honest opinion.

Hell without colonialism, the Somali expansion would of continued without any barriers. We probably would of owned most of the Horn of Africa.

Not to mention the Sultanate of Zanzibar owned parts of the Benadir coast. Italy gained control of the region after they sold them some of the ports
 
Not to mention the Sultanate of Zanzibar owned parts of the Benadir coast. Italy gained control of the region after they sold them some of the ports
Zanzibar was non issue as they joint ruled with geledi sultanate which the king just few decades before made the arabs pay tribute gold to him. Somalia today would probably have seen expansion of those sultanates or form new ones against Ethiopian expansion.
Well Somali galbeed was already conquered by the Ethiopian empire. Maybe the MJ sultanates would go on to form a state but Ethiopia would most likely be able to annex galbeed and maybe even SL. Who knows they may have even conquered all of Somalia. Their population was far larger and they had military support from the British
Not sure did Britain not give it away? I also heard the emperor bribed elders and leaders to side with Addis Ababa.
 

Kratos

Sonder
Zanzibar was non issue as they joint ruled with geledi sultanate which the king just few decades before made the arabs pay tribute gold to him. Somalia today would probably have seen expansion of those sultanates or form new ones against Ethiopian expansion.

Not sure did Britain not give it away? I also heard the emperor bribed elders and leaders to side with Addis Ababa.

They conquered it initially (though they didn't fully govern the region) but then the Italians annexed it when they defeated Ethiopia in their 2nd war. But when the Axis powers lost the 2nd world war Italy lost all their former colonies and the Biritish took control of it. After Haile Selassie begged the USA the British gave it back to the Ethiopians. Idk about the bribery though I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that there were some treaties
 
images
 

Kratos

Sonder

The Dervishes were mostly limited to the northern regions. That's because the Ethiopians and the British were evil and needed to go but the Italians were good people :nvjpqts:. The southerners were eating good. Especially reer Muqdisho
 
why the Europeans didn't settle Somali territories was cos its all desert. if we had like the lands of Kenya or congo we would've end up the same situation. they didn't leave any structure or educational facilities behind. the only place there were couple 100 Europeans were in Mogadishu.
we haven't seen any colonization. the only Somalis suffered horrendously are the ones incorporated by the british to black states of Ethiopia and Kenya. better hang out with whites.
 
Last edited:

Kratos

Sonder
Somalia wasn't colonised

Yes it was

why the Europeans didn't settle Somali territories was cos its all desert. if we had like the lands of Kenya or congo we would've end up the same situation. they didn't leave any structure or educational facilities behind. the only place there were couple 100 Europeans were in Mogadishu.
we haven't seen any colonization. the only Somalis suffered horrendously are the ones incorporated by the british to black states of Ethiopia and Kenya. better hang out with whites.

They did. They settled the whole of the South. At one point 40% of Muqdisho was populated by Italians. They left behind lots of infrastructure and educational facilities. They built roads, schools and hospitals, all of which were functional upon independence. Also unlike Somalia, Kenya and Congo didn't have any pre-colonial states, kingdoms or empires. The interior of both Kenya and Congo were only visited by Arab slave traders prior to the arrival of the Europeans.
 
There was no extremist Islam when the Italians were in Somalia. Extremist Islam has caused so much damage to the image of Somali people worldwide, look at the terrorist attack last week in the middle of Melbourne, Australia. We need to eradicate the cancer that is extremist Islam in our country.
 
Yes it was



They did. They settled the whole of the South. At one point 40% of Muqdisho was populated by Italians. They left behind lots of infrastructure and educational facilities. They built roads, schools and hospitals, all of which were functional upon independence. Also unlike Somalia, Kenya and Congo didn't have any pre-colonial states, kingdoms or empires. The interior of both Kenya and Congo were only visited by Arab slave traders prior to the arrival of the Europeans.

We wuz never colonized! Period!
 
I think the OP needs to go back and read historical accounts about Italian colonisation.

1) There were missionaries
2) They destroyed most of old Mogadishu
3) A lot of Somalis (especially those in SL) were put into missionary school and made gaalo
4) They ruthlessly dealt with Somalis and tried to put Somalis in the most subservient positions

The most abhorrent thing they tried to do was to try control of Somalis after independence.

Luckily, the SYL cut off ties with Britain immediately but it took until 1972 for Somalia to shake off the Italians.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top