Why doesn’t the international community put pressure on leaders they fund to help solve the refugee crisis? Leaders like IOG for example rely on foreign support. They get millions from the international communities to fund infrastructure projects, but obviously the money never goes to that. Why doesn’t the global community, including Africans abroad try to help create dialogue to solve these issues of tribalism, corruption, etc. Africans can’t keep migrating abroad it isn’t the same anymore and I feel like things will only get worse in the near future. Africa is such a beautiful place, I know it’s stupid to say but how hard is it to just start building? My family has been to Somalia and Alhamdullilah the development looks good, but it is only pocket communities…I think we are doing better than some African countries but still. I wish Somali children had better opportunities.
Why don’t they solve the problems causing the refugee crisis?
- Thread starter minaaa
- Start date
That's the job of the African governments and people. Cadaan people can't be taking care of us forever. The only way Somalia will become stable is if we revert to 18 regions, ban qabiil (completely not just 'qabyaalad'), get a strong central government, and mass/forced education and reeducation. There's going to be a lot of resistance that would need to be delt with violently but I doubt it would happen, so Somalia will likely only improve slowly.
Yes but if Western governments are alreaddy financing the Somali government and helping Somali refugees abroad, why can’t they help stop the refugee crisis and the amount of Somalis in government housing/ welfare in the West by holding the leaders accountable?? Israel was initially funded by the diaspora and foreign intervention with the help of Israeli people abroad…Somalis can’t keep migrating en-masse and allowingg our country to be pillaged and destroyed by corrupt leaders and terrorists. The future generation deserves better
Khaem
VIP
First of all, the international community doesn't exist, you mean the west.
The western nations have no obligation to develop random countries and for all of history the strong nations have used the weak ones to further their influence and get recourses.
Now why the west doesn't want to stop accepting refugees. That's because the capitalists don't want to pay larger wages to the native whites so they import desperate refugees and make them do the work for dirt cheap. No matter the ideology of the politician, they never end immigration from third world and instead use them for cheap labour and scapegoats for their failures.
The native working class European of course doesn't want all this cheap labour from the third world which undercuts the value of his labour and makes him live a worse standard or living compared to his parents generation where labour held more value. These same politicians who imported these refugees and economic migrants then turn around and pretends to be anti immigration and tells the working man that all his problems are because of these migrants and if only he voted correctly it would all go away. Then the working man votes right only for the rightists to do nothing to stop immigration as seen by the shit ton of boats heading to italy long after the supposed "facist" lady was voted in.
It's all because of the people at the top who are addicted to cheap labour that we see all this immigration. As for the poverty in third world, this is a different issue and it's important not to group the third world as this one entity. It is a group of nations who have poverty, that's all that binds them together. The reason for their poverty are very different.
The western nations have no obligation to develop random countries and for all of history the strong nations have used the weak ones to further their influence and get recourses.
Now why the west doesn't want to stop accepting refugees. That's because the capitalists don't want to pay larger wages to the native whites so they import desperate refugees and make them do the work for dirt cheap. No matter the ideology of the politician, they never end immigration from third world and instead use them for cheap labour and scapegoats for their failures.
The native working class European of course doesn't want all this cheap labour from the third world which undercuts the value of his labour and makes him live a worse standard or living compared to his parents generation where labour held more value. These same politicians who imported these refugees and economic migrants then turn around and pretends to be anti immigration and tells the working man that all his problems are because of these migrants and if only he voted correctly it would all go away. Then the working man votes right only for the rightists to do nothing to stop immigration as seen by the shit ton of boats heading to italy long after the supposed "facist" lady was voted in.
It's all because of the people at the top who are addicted to cheap labour that we see all this immigration. As for the poverty in third world, this is a different issue and it's important not to group the third world as this one entity. It is a group of nations who have poverty, that's all that binds them together. The reason for their poverty are very different.
China level authoritarianism.
What about the clan militias that posses light and heavy weapons and is virtually equal to the national army in terms of might and effectiveness. The national army and police are also fractured on clan affiliation lines..
Khaem
VIP
The only way someone could achieve this is by having a cult of personality and a devout loyal base that occupies the millitary and government. Then have 30 years of millitary dictatorship by such dictator and his followers which includes harsh laws and prison camps for those that defy. Then a education system and media which pushes the pan-somali anti-qabil ideology onto everyone.
For the next generation, this is all they will know, and so they will pass this sentiment onto their children and so on and it will permanently change society.
Via what means do you seek to establish a cult of personality and for that cult to in direct opposition to the centuries old and established clan system win its ideological war. The current crop of politicians are so deeply inbed with this system do you not think that it would spark conflict all over the somali political map? For one to establish a mass reeducation program would have to be in government? Will the masses of crooked brokers and clan elders not be against and with all their might seek to crush your so ill fated rebellion against the system so dear and near to their power base and influence?
Khaem
VIP
It's never easy to do but the only way to change such an ingrained system is by brutal and borderline genocidal group of fanatics. Somalis aren't as anti government as they seem, Be brutal enough and they will obey. The modern world is that in which a small group of trained and well armed army could wipe the floor with an entire nation. For this to work, this group would need to have proper training and organisation and also decent weapons. Clan militias are a bunch of Toyota jihadists with AKs and murder on their mind, a well armed and organised army can manhandle every clan militia in Somalia, or in africa in general.
Once this group destroys the clan militia and man handles the country, they would have to remain brutal and you can expect public executions of those against the revolution and other atrocities commonly seen after a group of extremists take power. Think the brutal early years of the soviet union as the communists eliminated the centuries old russian monarchy and any sympathisers
Last edited:
Khaem
VIP
I finished it
My reply still stands kkk. I will help you become President of the nation with total control and then i will wake up a month later with the secret service knocking on my door and notifed i've been placed under house arrest and then a summary execution will take place in my basement.
GaradShabeel
VIP
Sounds like a fairytale. Most of your listed suggestions came into fruition during the rule of MSB. And we all know how Somalia look today as a result of it, which you seemingly want to replicate again, especially the 'a lot of resistance that would be need to be dealt with violently'
Highly unlikely. Again, what you're suggesting also happened under the rule of MSB; military dictatorship, harsh 'laws'/prison sentence (and executions) for those who defied him etc. Qabyaalad wasn't banned, but it was frowned upon for a long time. Unless it happens naturally, you can forget about Somalis becoming anti-qabiil
Why won't they solve the refugee crisis? Because they caused it in the first place. Do you think that waging crazy wars across half of Africa, constant meddling in Middle Eastern affairs, assassinating every leader you dislike, installing useless puppet dictators who contribute nothing to their citizen's lives but misery and pain and a myriad of other causes won't have a knock on effect on immigration and refugees?
We’re so screwed the wildfires r a big issue where I’m from. I hope Somalia gets its shit together soon. Europeans are gaajo too, you don’t see the majority of them running to refugee camps, especially the men instead of helping the women and children that would be left behind. Went to Somalia and Ethiopia mashallah with a bit of effort and a normal government they would have the best lives Allah blessed us with nice land
Actually, many European countries need manpower, and cheap labor. That's why they are not trying to stop it.
Thousands of farms in Italy and Spain are worked by these refugees who get peanuts.
Thousands of farms in Italy and Spain are worked by these refugees who get peanuts.
