What are your political stances for the future of Somalia?

What is your political stance

  • A-Strong centralism

  • B- Centralism with some aspects of Fedralism

  • C- Federalism with a strong FGS

  • D- Federalism with a weak FGS

  • E- Con-federalism

  • F- Independence


Results are only viewable after voting.
What are your stances?

A- Strict centralism where all power is concentrated in the capital. Representation within the central gov however is clan diverse where any Somali can take any position including presidency. Regional governance is limited to only the district level or the 18 regions with power being minimal

B- Centralism with aspects of Fedralism based on the 18 regions. The central government is still the strongest entity in every corner of the country however the gobols enjoy a minimal level of local governance and each gobol is given a budget by the federal government based on their populations to handle their internal affaies

C- Fedralism. This is where each of the 6 states (and whatever new ones are made) manage their own affairs similarly but not identical to our system of today. We will maintain an upper and lower house and encompass all forms of modern day federalism. The states will enjoy some autonomy in managing the states as well as collecting a small amount of state tax. We will however have a strong FGS where most things including foreign affairs, education, the military etc will be centralised. The FGS would be much stronger than the states.

D- Fedralism with a weak FGS. This isn’t much different to normal federalism only that the FGS is much weaker than the states. The 6 states handle all their own affairs. Most taxes would go to the states with only the bare minimum being used to maintain the FGS.

E- Confederalism. The FGS practically has no power outside the capital. The states function as independent countries with their owm militaries. The FGS handles only the essential things like foreign affairs and currency.

F- Aan kala yaacno. Independence for all with strict borders

If your thinking something different feel free to add on
Considering the nation's recent tumultuous history, Federalism with strong member States, and a weak Federal gov't, for now, as in option D, is the only option. Reflecting on phases US Federalism had gone through would benefit the discourse.
 
Considering the nation's recent tumultuous history, Federalism with strong member States, and a weak Federal gov't, for now, as in option D, is the only option. Reflecting on phases US Federalism had gone through would benefit the discourse.
I reflected on this on another thread.

US federalism:
a) Dual federalism in 1900s, with little collaboration,
b) Cooperative federalism post 2nd war, with greater cooperation,
c) Creative federalism in the 70s, with nation building in its core, and
d) Empire in its current form, with supreme economic and military might.

We are not even in stage (a), and must not be rushing the journey. Returning to Centralism, albeit attractive to the nostalgists amongst us, should not even be entertained.
 
Last edited:

GemState

36/21
VIP
I reflected on this on another thread.

US federalism:
a) Dual federalism in 1900s, with little collaboration,
b) Cooperative federalism post 2nd war, with greater cooperation,
c) Creative federalism in the 70s, with nation building in its core, and
d) Empire in its current form, with supreme economic and military might.

We are not even in stage (a), and must not be rushing the journey. Returning to Centralism, albeit attractive to the nostalgists amongst us, should not even be entertained.
How many decades to get from A-D?
 
Here is my idea, I am repasting it from a previous post I made based on a unitary system which has control over every inch of Somalia.

A 1 party state with local elections could work then ease into a multiparty system once development and education of the masses reaches a certain point. Somalia practically needs someone who can lead it for 20+ years, someone who can hold mold it. Like Josip Tito or Lee Kuan Yew.

It doesn't even have to be an individual per se as long as the idea is the same the same path can be followed. This is why a single party sharing a vision will be good, the leaders can be "changed" but the idea can be same.

Maybe in Somalia you can get all the popular leaders of each "tol" and create a party based on a shared vision, the "leader" is a figurehead but the party decided together what needs to be done. If the leader is seemingly unpopular due to his Qabil he can just be replaced by a party member that is another Qabil, this will continue in the same vision as him without disrupting any progress that was achieved

----------------------------
Of course you need a group people who are not corrupt and are willing to put the state and nation over their own "tol".
There is no merit in multiparty democracy it's inefficient and breeds sectarianism. It is for those nations that debate whether there are 72 genders or two and hantiwadaag vs ganacsi, etc. We don't need that buuq.

There is a real merit in a system where one party solely devoted on "Dhowrinta dhaxalka iyo maalgelinta shacabka iyo wadanka" rules. With elections where everyone can run for office. I'd take that over sham political parties that have imported manifestos.
 
Last edited:
A centralized state with an absolute monarchy, such as Saudi Arabia. Otherwise, it gives the same result as the reality you are experiencing now.

Damn the nonsense of federalism and the republic, this only gives the tribes more freedom to impose themselves on the rest of the tribes, and every time the president changes, the tribe that runs the state changes, and the hatred between them increases with that.

Our people are a people who can only be upright with absolute dictatorship; And you have the best example in Muhammad Abduallah hussain and Siyad Barre.
 

Libaax-Joore

Beesha haplogroup e-by8081
VIP
I support (E) confederate government I don’t think xasid and jahil Somalis will share a centralized government rule from 1 city like it used to be before 1991 @convincation will say tuulo hebel unuka leh and chase afweyne all over again beating his chest aado kaaare saaran karabin ma kaga tureey
 
For the first part, I didn’t understand what you said.

for the second; my bad, I meant Hassan*.

Oh I was asking what substance you were smoking in reference to your suggestion 'absolute dictatorship' was needed.

Sayid Mohamed was an enigma enveloped in ideals, and virtue, yet flawed, as most great leaders are, and I would not place him in the same company as Barre.
 
What would you choose ina adeer? And what do you think is best for beesha? I believe B is best laakin we have to go along with C which isn’t too bad itself
How does the interest of the nation fit into that ethos?
  • How do you reconcile that which is in the best interest of the 'beel' with that of the nation?
  • Will there be a 'beel', if there is no nation, and vice versa?
  • Which comes first?
  • What happens to the interest of the nation, if each 'beel' prioritises its interest over that of the nation?
  • Is there a common ground?
  • If so, where is it?
 
What are your stances?

A- Strict centralism where all power is concentrated in the capital. Representation within the central gov however is clan diverse where any Somali can take any position including presidency. Regional governance is limited to only the district level or the 18 regions with power being minimal

B- Centralism with aspects of Fedralism based on the 18 regions. The central government is still the strongest entity in every corner of the country however the gobols enjoy a minimal level of local governance and each gobol is given a budget by the federal government based on their populations to handle their internal affaies

C- Fedralism. This is where each of the 6 states (and whatever new ones are made) manage their own affairs similarly but not identical to our system of today. We will maintain an upper and lower house and encompass all forms of modern day federalism. The states will enjoy some autonomy in managing the states as well as collecting a small amount of state tax. We will however have a strong FGS where most things including foreign affairs, education, the military etc will be centralised. The FGS would be much stronger than the states.

D- Fedralism with a weak FGS. This isn’t much different to normal federalism only that the FGS is much weaker than the states. The 6 states handle all their own affairs. Most taxes would go to the states with only the bare minimum being used to maintain the FGS.

E- Confederalism. The FGS practically has no power outside the capital. The states function as independent countries with their owm militaries. The FGS handles only the essential things like foreign affairs and currency.

F- Aan kala yaacno. Independence for all with strict borders

If your thinking something different feel free to add on
Buddy Somalia already is con-federalism if you didn’t notice
 
Oh I was asking what substance you were smoking in reference to your suggestion 'absolute dictatorship' was needed.

Sayid Mohamed was an enigma enveloped in ideals, and virtue, yet flawed, as most great leaders are, and I would not place him in the same company as Barre.
Saudi Arabia is a good reference for that absolute dictatorship.

The people there live their lives to the fullest, completely away from politics. There is injustice here and there at times, but it does not cross any borders, as it does not go beyond being "arrest". What makes the people overlook it to keep the big picture intact, no one wants to become a sporadic country, right?

The Saudi government gives its people room to interfere in anything and everything except politics and religion (although they are beginning to tolerate religion a lot). These are two completely red lines for the people, and they consider them sacred. It is possible to you to being killed from the fanatical nationalists there if you make any opinion offensive to the royal family.

As a bad example of bad absolute dictatorship, you have dozens. Like the communist Chinese government, like North Korea, and like the Siyad Barre government as well. Look at the life of the individual over there in China, they are not human beings but robots. It is not reasonable for someone to tell me: You are allowed one child.

The reason for their badness is that they impose their ideas and systems instead of understanding what the people are suffering or what they want. People have limits in endurance, whether mentally or religiously. They do not tolerate extreme encroachment.

Even if any dictator imposes a new regime on any people, they will coexist with it at some point, as humans are not against change. But what they are against is extreme injustice, this is too much transgression, this is not something that any human being can bear.

What I seek is an absolute monarchy government that does not transgress the borders of others. It serves the people and follows the duties of the "guardian" in Islam, and is also respected by its people who work for their service.

Excuse me for prolonging my words.
 
if the government wasn't the most corrupt government on the planet, then A but id say B, federalism only works for civilised people not hot-blooded black and brown people. So B
 
Fedralism. This is where each of the 6 states (and whatever new ones are made) manage their own affairs similarly but not identical to our system of today. We will maintain an upper and lower house and encompass all forms of modern day federalism. The states will enjoy some autonomy in managing the states as well as collecting a small amount of state tax. We will however have a strong FGS where most things including foreign affairs, education, the military etc will be centralized. The FGS would be much stronger than the states.

I support Federalism with more control and oversight of Military By Central Gov, Military will represent every Clan and no One General has the power to control heavy weapons and thus cutting off the threat of a Barre 2.0.

Oil and Natural Resources will make every state rich and Thus be able to Build 10 Mogadishu's size cities along the Indian Ocean.

School and Education will be The most important task the Gov should undertake, We should copy the Styles of Barre, and send thousands of Teachers to far way regions to teach.

Agriculture will also be a big Budget thus allowing capacity building in case of Future Droughts and Famines.

Fishing Industry will Factories and trade, instead of these far away Asians coming into our waters, lets sell in their markets and take a share out of their cake.

Livestock, we are already one of the largest suppliers of Goat and Camel to the middle east.
 

Trending

Top