I don’t disagree with the concept of one ummah, but it just doesn’t exist right now.
For example, you know what’s happening in Syria, Yemen and you probably support the whole free Palestine movement. At the same time, you have no clue that Muslims are being ethnically cleansed in the Central African Republic.
Do you now see the problem with the one ummah concept that exists now?
I’m expected to feel compassionate towards people who already have a voice within the ummah and I 100% agree that Islam isn’t based of Arab supremacy but Muslims have, I don’t know the reason, evolved into Arab supremacists.
I’m sorry if I support the equality of turning a bling eye on both plights. No one cares about the Central African Republic, but they do care about Syria and Palestine.
And as someone who thinks this is wrong, I have decided not to care about the plight of any Muslims unless they are Somali. I don’t think what I’m doing is wrong tbh.
Btw, where are you from?
I do agree that Muslims are divided. It is frustrating, I think.
Of course I feel strongly about Yemen. My masjid is run by Yemeni people and they are loving, kind, pious people and I love them. If you came to my masjid and you hung out with the Yemeni women, I'm sure you'd love them. I have had Yemenis treat me with such kindness and I hope I never forget their kind treatment of me.
When I first took my Shahadah, it was a kind old Yemeni man who had me take my Shahadah. He saw me in the masjid and I had no idea about pretty much anything Islam-related. I was simply trying to learn and I was very clueless. I knew very little about Islam but I wanted to learn. This very kind old Yemeni man found out I had not taken the Shahadah and he had me take the Shahadah in front of the people in the masjid. It was something I think I'll never forget. The people there are so kind to me. I love those people.
Therefore I cannot take sides against Yemenis and for Somalis, nor against Somalis and for Yemenis. I am for Somalis and I am for Yemenis and I cannot be against either.
Can a person be only for one of the two?
If a person has children- should they only have one child? If someone has five children- does each child only receive a fifth of their love and so only one child they should have? Or can a person have more than one child and love more than one child?
Being for Somalis doesn't mean having to be against others.
Also, I think I agree with your basic cause. I think it is how you wish to carry it out which I disagree with.
I think that your grievance is Africans- including Somalis- being marginalized.
I think this is a legitimate thing to be concerned about. I think you have a noble cause.
However, I think one should consider the ends and the means. The ends can be noble but the means can contradict the nobility of the cause.
My family is from Mexico, I was born in the United States. I'd like to give an example. I used to be part of a Chicano group on Facebook. I was really upset when I saw one of the people in the group post racist stuff against blacks. I don't remember if I denounced it. I hope I denounced it.
My thing is this- if Somalis don't stick up for Somalis, who will stick up for Somalis? Do you know what's happening in Vietnam right now? I have no idea what's going on in Vietnam. Obviously I think, Vietnamese must stick up for Vietnamese. There are hundreds if not thousands of nationalities. No one can possibly keep up with all of them and to really understand their affairs you need to know their languages. That's unrealistic for one person. So therefore, I think it's perfectly legitimate for Mexicans to stick up for Mexicans. So I agree with the basic cause of the Chicano group. I think the cause is perfectly legit (especially in Trump era).
However, in seeking to uphold the dignity of Mexicans- is it just for that person to have made racist remarks about blacks? Of course not! I apologize if I am being overly Mexican-centric, I am simply going off what I know: I want to discuss a little about José Vasconcelos, who was a philosopher and theorist of Mexican nationalism and who has influenced my thinking on nationalism in general. If you're interested insha'Allah I can translate for you some material he wrote on nationalism (this particular material is on nationalism in general and not really specifically on Mexican nationalism) that isn't available in English.
Anyways, there was this very famous book he wrote called La raza cósmica. This is a very interesting book imo for anyone interested in Mexican culture. It was extremely influential and influential to this day. Anyways, he argued that we as Mexicans and I think Latin Americans in general are forced to adopt nationalism in order to deal with the imperialist Yankee (US) threat. I agree and I think Trump has proved him right (nearly 100 years later!).
He was a great theorist of nationalism imo and I support nationalism because of him. He argued for a very beautiful nationalism imo. He was saying we should have a nationalism which does not exclude people. We should accept all races and we should love ourselves but that we should not exclude other races or mistreat other races. He mixed this with some.... umm..... "interesting" theories about Latin Americans being "the Bronze race," "the Cosmic race," I think "the fifth race" and some stuff which may seem weird to people.... he also claimed that black people are spiritually gifted and I think claimed specifically that black people are more spiritually gifted than whites.... and I think he sort of claimed white people are primitive... I'm trying not to laugh heh..... but anyways, I need to talk not so much about all this as this is a Somali forum.... (also I apologize for the post being long- I'm on my laptop and I type quick- I usually post on my phone)..... but anyways what I think is important and of universal significance is the concept of embracing nationalism without being discriminatory against others. I don't view it as a cop-out at all. Vasconcelos saw it as we are at a sort of war with Yankee imperialists.... and that this was
spiritual.... Mexican culture might be seem weird to people.... anyways, part of this conflict was that we must defeat the Yankee imperialists
on a spiritual level...
that we must be higher than them spiritually.... as Vasconcelos saw it the Yankees were materialists who were technologically advanced but spiritually lacking.... and that we must overcome them in part by being more advanced spiritually and that part of this entailed that... even though Yankee aggression forced us to adopt patriotism.... that we made sure we adopted a form of nationalism which did not exclude others.... it is complex (more complex than I've conveyed) and sort of hard to explain but hopefully you can see what I hope insha'Allah has universal significance for patriots of any nationality...
anyways I apologize for such a long post but you are very intelligent and you bring up very interesting issues so it's hard not to wish to go in-depth as you bring up deep issues
very weak
