Lack of decisive wars, reason for Africa's underdevelopment

Samaalic Era

QurboExit
On state formation

Political scientist Jeffrey Herbst argues that interstate war is a requisite factor in the formation of strong states.[44] Using Europe's history of state formation as his model, Herbst identifies interstate war as the factor that enabled states to effectively collect revenue and to generate a spirit of nationalism, two results that Herbst considers "crucial developments" in the formation of strong states.[44]:118 War increases both a leader's incentive to establish an efficient system of taxation and the population's willingness to assent to higher taxes.[44]:119–21The existence of an external threat is also a powerful impetus for the development of a cooperative or unified state.[44]:122 Because the system of revenue collection, increased rate of taxation, and spirit of nationalism generally persist after war ends, war can have long-term consequences on a state's formation.[44]:121–2 This is particularly true of states in regions or periods of consistent warfare because states generally either adapted or were conquered.[44]:120 Herbst postulates that the stability of borders and lack of credible external threats between African states could result in "a new brand of states", those that will "remain permanently weak".[44]:119

Charles Tilly, an American sociologist, political scientist, and historian, claims that within the context of European history, "war makes states."[45] While the purposes of war were to expand territory and to check or overcome neighboring states, the process of war inadvertently engendered European-style state-building. War making resulted in state making in four ways:[45]

  1. War making that culminated in the elimination of local rivals gave rise to one centralized, coercive strong state power that had a large-scale monopoly on violence.
  2. Eventually, this large-scale monopoly on violence held by the state was extended to serve the state's clients or supporters. This encouraged pacification, led to the formation of police forces, and provided protection as a state service.
  3. War making and military expansion would not be possible without extracting resources from the population and accumulating capital. Historically, this led to the establishment of fiscal and accounting institutions to collect taxes from the population to fuel war.
Quote from wiki
 

4head

The one and only 4head
VIP
On state formation

Political scientist Jeffrey Herbst argues that interstate war is a requisite factor in the formation of strong states.[44] Using Europe's history of state formation as his model, Herbst identifies interstate war as the factor that enabled states to effectively collect revenue and to generate a spirit of nationalism, two results that Herbst considers "crucial developments" in the formation of strong states.[44]:118 War increases both a leader's incentive to establish an efficient system of taxation and the population's willingness to assent to higher taxes.[44]:119–21The existence of an external threat is also a powerful impetus for the development of a cooperative or unified state.[44]:122 Because the system of revenue collection, increased rate of taxation, and spirit of nationalism generally persist after war ends, war can have long-term consequences on a state's formation.[44]:121–2 This is particularly true of states in regions or periods of consistent warfare because states generally either adapted or were conquered.[44]:120 Herbst postulates that the stability of borders and lack of credible external threats between African states could result in "a new brand of states", those that will "remain permanently weak".[44]:119

Charles Tilly, an American sociologist, political scientist, and historian, claims that within the context of European history, "war makes states."[45] While the purposes of war were to expand territory and to check or overcome neighboring states, the process of war inadvertently engendered European-style state-building. War making resulted in state making in four ways:[45]

  1. War making that culminated in the elimination of local rivals gave rise to one centralized, coercive strong state power that had a large-scale monopoly on violence.
  2. Eventually, this large-scale monopoly on violence held by the state was extended to serve the state's clients or supporters. This encouraged pacification, led to the formation of police forces, and provided protection as a state service.
  3. War making and military expansion would not be possible without extracting resources from the population and accumulating capital. Historically, this led to the establishment of fiscal and accounting institutions to collect taxes from the population to fuel war.
Quote from wiki
Nice
 
On state formation

Political scientist Jeffrey Herbst argues that interstate war is a requisite factor in the formation of strong states.[44] Using Europe's history of state formation as his model, Herbst identifies interstate war as the factor that enabled states to effectively collect revenue and to generate a spirit of nationalism, two results that Herbst considers "crucial developments" in the formation of strong states.[44]:118 War increases both a leader's incentive to establish an efficient system of taxation and the population's willingness to assent to higher taxes.[44]:119–21The existence of an external threat is also a powerful impetus for the development of a cooperative or unified state.[44]:122 Because the system of revenue collection, increased rate of taxation, and spirit of nationalism generally persist after war ends, war can have long-term consequences on a state's formation.[44]:121–2 This is particularly true of states in regions or periods of consistent warfare because states generally either adapted or were conquered.[44]:120 Herbst postulates that the stability of borders and lack of credible external threats between African states could result in "a new brand of states", those that will "remain permanently weak".[44]:119

Charles Tilly, an American sociologist, political scientist, and historian, claims that within the context of European history, "war makes states."[45] While the purposes of war were to expand territory and to check or overcome neighboring states, the process of war inadvertently engendered European-style state-building. War making resulted in state making in four ways:[45]

  1. War making that culminated in the elimination of local rivals gave rise to one centralized, coercive strong state power that had a large-scale monopoly on violence.
  2. Eventually, this large-scale monopoly on violence held by the state was extended to serve the state's clients or supporters. This encouraged pacification, led to the formation of police forces, and provided protection as a state service.
  3. War making and military expansion would not be possible without extracting resources from the population and accumulating capital. Historically, this led to the establishment of fiscal and accounting institutions to collect taxes from the population to fuel war.
Quote from wiki
I agree
 

Farm

VIP
Its based on the notion that without competition or the need to increase your capability, a nation and even an individual will remain stagnant and not progress.


Wonder how things would have turned out if the Soviets/Cubans didn’t interfere in the 77 war.
 

Shaolin23

Seeker of knowledge and truth
On state formation

Political scientist Jeffrey Herbst argues that interstate war is a requisite factor in the formation of strong states.[44] Using Europe's history of state formation as his model, Herbst identifies interstate war as the factor that enabled states to effectively collect revenue and to generate a spirit of nationalism, two results that Herbst considers "crucial developments" in the formation of strong states.[44]:118 War increases both a leader's incentive to establish an efficient system of taxation and the population's willingness to assent to higher taxes.[44]:119–21The existence of an external threat is also a powerful impetus for the development of a cooperative or unified state.[44]:122 Because the system of revenue collection, increased rate of taxation, and spirit of nationalism generally persist after war ends, war can have long-term consequences on a state's formation.[44]:121–2 This is particularly true of states in regions or periods of consistent warfare because states generally either adapted or were conquered.[44]:120 Herbst postulates that the stability of borders and lack of credible external threats between African states could result in "a new brand of states", those that will "remain permanently weak".[44]:119

Charles Tilly, an American sociologist, political scientist, and historian, claims that within the context of European history, "war makes states."[45] While the purposes of war were to expand territory and to check or overcome neighboring states, the process of war inadvertently engendered European-style state-building. War making resulted in state making in four ways:[45]

  1. War making that culminated in the elimination of local rivals gave rise to one centralized, coercive strong state power that had a large-scale monopoly on violence.
  2. Eventually, this large-scale monopoly on violence held by the state was extended to serve the state's clients or supporters. This encouraged pacification, led to the formation of police forces, and provided protection as a state service.
  3. War making and military expansion would not be possible without extracting resources from the population and accumulating capital. Historically, this led to the establishment of fiscal and accounting institutions to collect taxes from the population to fuel war.
Quote from wiki
European intervention always makes sure there is no winner if Europe didn’t interfere in Africa Somalis would of had villages in Mozambique and Congo
 

Samaalic Era

QurboExit
Wonder how things would have turned out if the Soviets/Cubans didn’t interfere in the 77 war.

The victory would be the start of basically Somalia vying for control in East Africa and the Middle east. There would be a 3-way Cold war in the Middle east between us,Saudi and Iran while tightening our grip in Horn and East africa
 

Samaalic Era

QurboExit
European intervention always makes sure there is no winner if Europe didn’t interfere in Africa Somalis would of had villages in Mozambique and Congo

For Europe and Britain esp, they dont want the Balence of Power to be disturbed and will interfere to prevent it. Its there policy for last 400 years
 

Samaalic Era

QurboExit
We need a new civil war winner takes all :trumpsmirk:
Thats how all centralised powers start.

Ridda war-Abu bakr unifies Arabia.

Adal crisis-Ahmed Gurey seizes power.

Tokugawa Shogunate in Battle of Sekighara in which all the clans fought it out in a winner takes all
 
Thats how all centralised powers start.

Ridda war-Abu bakr unifies Arabia.

Adal crisis-Ahmed Gurey seizes power.

Tokugawa Shogunate in Battle of Sekighara in which all the clans fought it out in a winner takes all
The USC and SNM had a chance but they fucked it over, to this day the Darood boogeyman unites them tribally but afaik no consensus have been reached on reunification. I want post independence Somalia back sxb seeing the way our country is now hurts my soul. As a Darood I don't mind if my people become the scapegoat I'd happily retire in the homeland I dream of a developed and I never concerned myself with qabiil politics :mjcry:
 

Samaalic Era

QurboExit
The USC and SNM had a chance but they fucked it over, to this day the Darood boogeyman unites them tribally but afaik no consensus have been reached on reunification. I want post independence Somalia back sxb seeing the way our country is now hurts my soul. As a Darood I don't mind if my people become the scapegoat I'd happily retire in the homeland I dream of a developed and I never concerned myself with qabiil politics :mjcry:

The Problem was that there was no plan for change but just to get rid off Siad Barre. Other successful revolutions were nationalistic and no qabil based. Every one was concerned about their tuulo
 

World

VIP
I agree 100 %. Strong states can only be forged by war. But unfortunately, the Americans and Europeans will not allow an African Fredrick the Great to create an African Prussia. Any such man will be brought before the ICC on genocide charges. Before European borders were made, they viciously fought for centuries to build their strong states. Us Africans are still in the Middle Ages in terms of our state development.
 

Samaalic Era

QurboExit
I agree 100 %. Strong states can only be forged by war. But unfortunately, the Americans and Europeans will not allow an African Fredrick the Great to create an African Prussia. Any such man will be brought before the ICC on genocide charges. Before European borders were made, they viciously fought for centuries to build their strong states. Us Africans are still in the Middle Ages in terms of our state development.

Indeed. European countries were at always at war or competing for resources in a survival of the fittest between nations. Only the strongest survived while countries like Poland were wiped of the map by 1795,only to re-emerge in 1900s.

Somalia in its current state will not be able to make much progress if any at all. Only a drastic action, mostly like in a war or revolution can change.
 

Farm

VIP
Indeed. European countries were at always at war or competing for resources in a survival of the fittest between nations. Only the strongest survived while countries like Poland were wiped of the map by 1795,only to re-emerge in 1900s.

Somalia in its current state will not be able to make much progress if any at all. Only a drastic action, mostly like in a war or revolution can change.

Isn’t Somalia already in civil war? What do you mean by a war?
 

Samaalic Era

QurboExit
Isn’t Somalia already in civil war? What do you mean by a war?

most of the Somalia excluding some areas in the South are relatively stable. What i mean by war is one of the regional adminstraion collasping and being replaced by a new entity that is not based on qabil but nationalism. I assure all the regional adminstrations will declare them as imposters and rebels which will pit the qabilist thugs and the Nationalists in all out war
 

World

VIP
If Al Shabab were not as extreme, and more like the muslim brotherhood, I’d have supported them even tho I’m against islamists.
 
Makes sense...

Rwanda
Ethiopië
V
Somalië
Libië

In the long run an all out decisive war is the best outcome in a civil war.. or atleast a full internationally witnessed agreement that is lead by a coalition of victorious organisations.

At the Carta conference we nearly had the latter option become a reality. Unfortunately it was an agreement between USC and SNM and was mainly a coalition based on hatred and fear of Darood and when Cabdulahi yusuf AUN walked out, it died and never surfaced again.

All darood figure heads walked with cabdulahi yusuf accept 1 man...

Cali Khaliif galayr
That man never fails me to :snoop:
 

Keeysan

The humble one
@Farm @Shaolin23 @World @Samaalic Era

Expansion and such hardcore political changes may not be far fetched for the future walaalayaal

I was shook when Russia annexed Crimea and no one did anything. I thought you couldn’t do such anymore, that this kind of stuff was for back in the day, like the 60’s, empire times,world wars and what not
 

Samaalic Era

QurboExit
@Farm @Shaolin23 @World @Samaalic Era

Expansion and such hardcore political changes may not be far fetched for the future walaalayaal

I was shook when Russia annexed Crimea and no one did anything. I thought you couldn’t do such anymore, that this kind of stuff was for back in the day, like the 60’s, empire times,world wars and what not

The tide is certainly changing. As US influence steadily declines, there will be the birth of new nations and the deaths of imcompetent ones.

Somalia will either be changed through a political upheaval where the clans are subdued similiar to what Abu Bakr RA did to the unruly Arab tribes or be colonised completely within 50-100 years.

Time is not on our side but us Somalis from the diaspora are the only hope for Somalia(not referring to SJWs,Gaal-rac and Feminists)
 

Trending

Top