Would somalia be better off colonized

[AdoonkaAlle]

Love how you skipped of you being called out about “social freedoms and economy”, looking at Somalia the last 30 years that argument alone was nonsense.But let me get this straight so you don’t weasel your way out of this. You’re literally arguing that as a colony we had a worse society than we did during and after a civil war? Clearly you don’t understand the damage of a civil war or war in general. Yes I said violence because guess what? War is violent and what comes with it? The break down of society itself whether it’s infrastructure, education, health services not to mention the rise in gender based violence.


And that’s just war, by definition civil war has more casualties. Why? Because you’re killing you’re own people. What war has caused the most American deaths? The civil war. How is that possible when it wasn’t the longest conflict. I know it’s difficult but try to work it out.


It’s as if you’re claiming that half a million Somalis were slaughtered during colonization. And half a million is only and I literally mean was only killed just by the war. It’s not even the number one cause of death which is respiratory infection and other treatable issues.


Where should I start from and what’s the criteria? Death from combat? I can easily find numbers for that more Somalis died from civil war than colonialism. Rape? Again it’s obvious the stats were higher during the civil war but I can go for it. Death from preventable diseases? A population increase and the fact that we had better health care institutions can easily prove that.


Abaayo macan it was a post to troll you nationalists but this denial of common sense has peaked my interest. I didn’t mean to have you in your feelings like this but if you want to discuss politics with men atleast put your big girl kastumo on. Yes obviously conflict and war was far more brutal than colonization. That’s not even addressing Siad Barre and his regime.

Just as i had suspected your argument is simply empty and revolves around using civil war as a justification and citing it out of context. Civil war despite being brutal had different transitions( as some periods were relatively calm, there was also variations among the regions as the war didn't impact them in a similar manner) and then there was outside interference which further escalated it.

None of this facts feature in your argument as you simply don't care about it, furthermore no one in their right mind compares stats in war time to when there's relative stability reason being they're not the same. War is an exception to the rule as no one expects living standards to be the same as when there's peace, in our case the government collapsed and we were left we different tribal factions fighting for power. How you then compare this to a time when there's a colonial government in place that oversees everything is simply dishonesty on your part.


To top it off your claim didn't revolve around the civil war but the governance of somalis starting from independence, civil war is only a section of our history what about the rest ? is it not your point to claim that we weren't fit to rule ourselves ? you need to show our stats post independence was worse than pre-Independence, have you done it ? no are you able to ? no

If according to you civil war is a good indicator that we're bad at governance how does this justify arguing for foreign governance where we loose our political, economic and social autonomy ? how is this any better ? from a logical point of view you should be arguing for a better governance not one that's similar or worse

The point isn't how many somalis died but what rights did they have, no where in history has it ever occurred that a group of people flourished when they had no rights to speak of. This is what you don't understand at all which is why it foolish to argue that under colonialism we would've flourished when evidence points to the contrary. Could you kindly state rights that somalis had during colonialism that were better ?

"Colonialism is good because we had a civil war ", "We only flourish when others oppress us" this is what your argument amounts to yaab

 

[Cilmi-doon]

Nope. Besides who would wanna administer 15 million Somalis ?

 

[Zakeriya]

Just as i had suspected your argument is simply empty and revolves around using civil war as a justification and citing it out of context. Civil war despite being brutal had different transitions( as some periods were relatively calm, there was also variations among the regions as the war didn't impact them in a similar manner) and then there was outside interference which further escalated it.

None of this facts feature in your argument as you simply don't care about it, furthermore no one in their right mind compares stats in war time to when there's relative stability reason being they're not the same. War is an exception to the rule as no one expects living standards to be the same as when there's peace, in our case the government collapsed and we were left we different tribal factions fighting for power. How you then compare this to a time when there's a colonial government in place that oversees everything is simply dishonesty on your part.


To top it off your claim didn't revolve around the civil war but the governance of somalis starting from independence, civil war is only a section of our history what about the rest ? is it not your point to claim that we weren't fit to rule ourselves ? you need to show our stats post independence was worse than pre-Independence, have you done it ? no are you able to ? no

If according to you civil war is a good indicator that we're bad at governance how does this justify arguing for foreign governance where we loose our political, economic and social autonomy ? how is this any better ? from a logical point of view you should be arguing for a better governance not one that's similar or worse

The point isn't how many somalis died but what rights did they have, no where in history has it ever occurred that a group of people flourished when they had no rights to speak of. This is what you don't understand at all which is why it foolish to argue that under colonialism we would've flourished when evidence points to the contrary. Could you kindly state rights that somalis had during colonialism that were better ?

"Colonialism is good because we had a civil war ", "We only flourish when others oppress us" this is what your argument amounts to yaab

The impact of war is literally the break down of society. That is exactly what we are trying to bounce back from today. If you want to talk about dishonesty look at how you deliberately want to omit that part out. The same person that acted like the picture above was some anomaly. Some out of place building that’s rare as if our literal capitol wasn’t in that state recently.

What is the impact of war? The break down of society whether we talk about communication, health care services, education etc. Pretty much all levels of society is broken down and that has been our legacy the last 30 years. The claim that it was more brutal under colonialism is untrue. Literally no one makes that assertion, the worst that people say is colonialism was the catalyst for things that came after but that that oppression was more brutal? Nonsense, you have nothing to back that up while it is fact that the worst recorded incidents of violence in Somalia’s happened during the civil war.


Again the civil war impacted our governance or lack thereof so anything post 1990 is barely worth mentioning. Because your claim of political, economic and social autonomy goes out the window when voting and decision making is restricted to elites. That leaves what? The 21 years where Siad Barre was poisoning livestock of rivals minority clans, had a secret police watching over people, committed genocide in a region and put the nation in debt while also spending recklessly. What a magnificent government from the man who said I was brought in by a gun and only the gun can remove me.


And sure you could say we had more rights, if you ignore the fact that we lived in a virtual police state for 21 years and anarchy for the next 30 with no legitimate government.

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

The impact of war is literally the break down of society. That is exactly what we are trying to bounce back from today. If you want to talk about dishonesty look at how you deliberately want to omit that part out. The same person that acted like the picture above was some anomaly. Some out of place building that’s rare as if our literal capitol wasn’t in that state recently.

What is the impact of war? The break down of society whether we talk about communication, health care services, education etc. Pretty much all levels of society is broken down and that has been our legacy the last 30 years. The claim that it was more brutal under colonialism is untrue. Literally no one makes that assertion, the worst that people say is colonialism was the catalyst for things that came after but that that oppression was more brutal? Nonsense, you have nothing to back that up while it is fact that the worst recorded incidents of violence in Somalia’s happened during the civil war.


Again the civil war impacted our governance or lack thereof so anything post 1990 is barely worth mentioning. Because your claim of political, economic and social autonomy goes out the window when voting and decision making is restricted to elites. That leaves what? The 21 years where Siad Barre was poisoning livestock of rivals minority clans, had a secret police watching over people, committed genocide in a region and put the nation in debt while also spending recklessly. What a magnificent government from the man who said I was brought in by a gun and only the gun can remove me.


And sure you could say we had more rights, if you ignore the fact that we lived in a virtual police state for 21 years and anarchy for the next 30 with no legitimate government.

For someone that's adamant that "we need a boot on our necks" you're quite selective who that "boot" belongs to. An advocate of oppression and subjugation yet has issues when it's only carried out by somalis but not cadaanka ? how do you justify this ?


This is my last response as you seem not to realise just how deluded you're in romanticising colonialism and it's legacy.

 

[Zakeriya]

For someone that's adamant that "we need a boot on our necks" you're quite selective who that "boot" belongs to. An advocate of oppression and subjugation yet has issues when it's only carried out by somalis but not cadaanka ? how do you justify this?


This is my last response as you seem not to realise just how deluded you're in romanticising colonialism and it's legacy.

There you go twisting words again as if the “boot on our neck” comment wasn’t also referencing Siad Barre. And we have had something worse than oppression since the end of his dictatorship and colonialism which is anarchy. I guess you can compensate with the delusion that people have political autonomy while ignoring there’s hardly a government let alone a voting system for the masses not to mention your disregard of the body count since colonialism. So to recap your freedom means death and your autonomy means leaving the power to old fools who sell out to Arabs and can’t even build a road. Oh well you’re dismissed, enjoy your rose tinted glasses

 

[Medulla]

I don't mind becoming a dictator in order for Somalia to become stable again. Let me know if you're interested in my 100% solid plan ,but it means qabiils won't exist anymore and the deportation of certain "preachers".

 

[Zakeriya]

I don't mind becoming a dictator in order for Somalia to become stable again. Let me know if you're interested in my 100% solid plan ,but it means qabiils won't exist anymore and the deportation of certain "preachers".

Deportation? I would make a better dictator, I’m bbq right on villa Somalia with the masses watching

 

[Medulla]

Deportation? I would make a better dictator, I’m bbq right on villa Somalia with the masses watching

That's cause you enjoying suffering, doesn't do anything but ensure you'll die after a coup occurs. My plan doesn't allow for mistakes to occur

 

[The Truth]

We are better of killing ourselves than bow down to the enemy, Somalia was never colonized (only parts of the country), it was business agreement that’s why we flourished as a country, nothing wrong with using your enemy then kicking him out once the goal is accomplished. Someone with a bloodline of a warrior race shouldn’t have those thoughts