The alchemist
VIP
The Identity of Somalis has been fairly stable and stable if you read the anthropological work and facilitated by the genetic realities I wrote about (and it changes predictably over time as a continuity). These cannot be exclusive to each other whatsoever. This notion that the Somali identity is fairly new is not supported by any form of anthropology and there was never any heterogeneous pluralistic identity -- otherwise, you would see collective behavioral divergences documented on this and very different genetic realities that reflect that. Simply put, the identity cannot be new because of what I wrote, I gave you the hard science backing, the anthropological work supports this, and linguistically, ethnographically, and geospatial relationship as well is coherent. Your stance is fairly ignorant of the matter.That's some informative stuff you wrote there will save it but has nothing to do with what I talked about.
I am referring to the identity of Somali, the word itself not the people. I am viewing this from a social prespective so I hope you'll drop something as informative on that.
And please add the sources
If you want to pivot to a semantic discussion, then the grounding of the conversation becomes clearly meaningless because the groundwork for the Somali people is that of strict coherency, no matter the semantical pivot. If I change my name now - that does not mean I am a different person. Granted the word Somali probably is not much documented at any point beyond the medieval time. Still, you need to grasp this simple reality, this absence of evidence is not evidence of absence argumentation is not strong. If Somalis suddenly change their ethnic name right now, doesn't mean they're an ethnic baby all of a sudden. It's that silly.
And to call you out, you mentioned the word identity related to the word, not the semantical word itself existing as a linguistic point with no symbolic meaning. So you're clearly being disingenuous trying to move the goalpost since I clearly demonstrated how we were always a people no matter what point you bring up. If you struggle to accept that, that is on you, but I gave you references on how we related to each other historically betrays any notion of ethnic discontinuity, and how some new colonialist arbitrary constructivism is impossible.
Anyway, I have written enough for you to chew on and internalize. If you have issues with this then that is on you, but I can't force people that neglect reason and evidence. Accept or don't, that's the facts. There is nothing to talk about beyond this point if you cannot concede because then you're stuck with something personal that is not my problem or concern.