Somalis and Humiliation (good read)
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 10:01 pm
Evelin G. Lindner, 2004, Effect of Humiliation on the Escalation of Conflicts
Masters who invoke humiliation and victimhood
Before travelling to Somalia for my fieldwork in 1998, I contacted various organisations in Africa and explained that I wanted to do research on humiliation. I recall a member of a humanitarian aid organisation telling me on the phone from Nairobi that “the NGOs and UN people are fed up with these arrogant and impertinent Somalis.†My interlocutor, who did not want to be named, presented much evidence, for example, he recounted, many Somali refugees in refugee camps are not happy with corn, they want rice, or the women in the camps want money for luxurious cosmetic products – in brief, Somalis apparently did not appreciate the efforts of the international community to help them out of their crisis, but seemed to define this help as their rightful “pasture.†My interlocutor said: “No NGO will support your work if you aim at depicting Somalis as victims!†He concluded that many helpers, especially those who started out as idealists, think that the Somalis “deserve what they getâ€Â!
Abdulqadir H. Ismail Jirde, Deputy Speaker of the Parliament in Hargeisa explained in an interview on 19thNovember 2000, in Hargeisa, that democracy with its majority rule violates the old nomad tradition of decision by consensus of the elders. He explicated that majority rule has the potential to deeply offend and humiliate those who lose out. He described in detail how he would prevent violent responses by approaching losers after voting, how he would express appreciation for their views and show confidence that their views would be honoured at a later stage.
Thus, we might conclude, that, although many Somalis perceive themselves as victims, some among them still have to learn humility. Somalia has never been a proper part of any empire that deserved the name, probably because Somali nomads are known to be proud, stubborn, unruly and fickle. Their pastoral democracy built on equality, as described by Lewis, 1961, did not provide a strong hierarchical ranking order that conquerors could easily instrumentalise and dominate.
In other words, Somalis are difficult to humiliate; they are too proud. Somalis are proud – for example, of the fact that they did not bow to colonisation in the same way others did in Africa (they kept their Islamic faith, for example, unlike neighbouring Kenya).
Yet, there is a dark side to that, namely that some Somalis may not always know enough about the humility that is necessary for effective cooperation. Local warlordism, for example, undermines attempts to build functioning “traffic rules†that protect every citizen.
To use the traffic metaphor, Somali warriors, who follow the proverb “a man deserves to be killed, not humiliated,†may have problems with rules such as “traffic lightsâ€Â. They may interpret red lights as an attempt to humiliate them. They may vow to choose victory or death instead of bowing in humility. Every single man may want to fight his way through at every single traffic light. The weakest ones are pushed to the wall and there is no peace and calm for anybody.
Indeed, this is not an unfair description of Somalia after the demise of Dictator Siad Barre, and to a certain extent also of the equally proud Afghanistan after the Soviet retreat. Many mountainous or scarce regions, difficult to subjugate by former empires, preserve a degree of pristine pride that makes it difficult for them to integrate into a new world system where humility is important: Resisting humiliation is not everything, learning humility is equally important. Or, masters, when asked to step down, often portray themselves as victims, as victims of humiliation. However, in human rights contexts they have to learn humility instead of nurturing a victim identity. And human rights defenders might be caught in between.
http://www.humiliationstudies.org/docum ... erence.pdf
Masters who invoke humiliation and victimhood
Before travelling to Somalia for my fieldwork in 1998, I contacted various organisations in Africa and explained that I wanted to do research on humiliation. I recall a member of a humanitarian aid organisation telling me on the phone from Nairobi that “the NGOs and UN people are fed up with these arrogant and impertinent Somalis.†My interlocutor, who did not want to be named, presented much evidence, for example, he recounted, many Somali refugees in refugee camps are not happy with corn, they want rice, or the women in the camps want money for luxurious cosmetic products – in brief, Somalis apparently did not appreciate the efforts of the international community to help them out of their crisis, but seemed to define this help as their rightful “pasture.†My interlocutor said: “No NGO will support your work if you aim at depicting Somalis as victims!†He concluded that many helpers, especially those who started out as idealists, think that the Somalis “deserve what they getâ€Â!
Abdulqadir H. Ismail Jirde, Deputy Speaker of the Parliament in Hargeisa explained in an interview on 19thNovember 2000, in Hargeisa, that democracy with its majority rule violates the old nomad tradition of decision by consensus of the elders. He explicated that majority rule has the potential to deeply offend and humiliate those who lose out. He described in detail how he would prevent violent responses by approaching losers after voting, how he would express appreciation for their views and show confidence that their views would be honoured at a later stage.
Thus, we might conclude, that, although many Somalis perceive themselves as victims, some among them still have to learn humility. Somalia has never been a proper part of any empire that deserved the name, probably because Somali nomads are known to be proud, stubborn, unruly and fickle. Their pastoral democracy built on equality, as described by Lewis, 1961, did not provide a strong hierarchical ranking order that conquerors could easily instrumentalise and dominate.
In other words, Somalis are difficult to humiliate; they are too proud. Somalis are proud – for example, of the fact that they did not bow to colonisation in the same way others did in Africa (they kept their Islamic faith, for example, unlike neighbouring Kenya).
Yet, there is a dark side to that, namely that some Somalis may not always know enough about the humility that is necessary for effective cooperation. Local warlordism, for example, undermines attempts to build functioning “traffic rules†that protect every citizen.
To use the traffic metaphor, Somali warriors, who follow the proverb “a man deserves to be killed, not humiliated,†may have problems with rules such as “traffic lightsâ€Â. They may interpret red lights as an attempt to humiliate them. They may vow to choose victory or death instead of bowing in humility. Every single man may want to fight his way through at every single traffic light. The weakest ones are pushed to the wall and there is no peace and calm for anybody.
Indeed, this is not an unfair description of Somalia after the demise of Dictator Siad Barre, and to a certain extent also of the equally proud Afghanistan after the Soviet retreat. Many mountainous or scarce regions, difficult to subjugate by former empires, preserve a degree of pristine pride that makes it difficult for them to integrate into a new world system where humility is important: Resisting humiliation is not everything, learning humility is equally important. Or, masters, when asked to step down, often portray themselves as victims, as victims of humiliation. However, in human rights contexts they have to learn humility instead of nurturing a victim identity. And human rights defenders might be caught in between.
http://www.humiliationstudies.org/docum ... erence.pdf