Hello Everyone, Chickens come home to roost, the adage goes. I am glad Dr. Negaso has finally discovered the real side of narrow Ethiopianism-welcome to the Oromos perspectives on the hidden agenda of narrow Ethiopianism. We argued same some five years ago for the fact that we clearly understood how Ethiopianism is narrowly defined, particularly among the Diaspora Ethiopianists. Ethiopia and Ethiopianism are strictly defined in terms of the Imperial creation of Ethiopia, with Amharanization process as its core unifying and Ethiopianising factor. This is the core essence of Ethiopianism, as it is defined by narrow Ethiopianists. Take or leave it! Dr. Negasas eloquent response to one of the narrow Ethiopianists is commendable. Even more importantly, it is high time the activists and politicians of the oppressed people end the dichotomy of dividing the politics of the Ethiopian Empire unionists vs. secessionists. This misguided dichotomy served the narrow Ethiopianists and hurt the nationalist movements, particularly in the diplomatic affairs. Politics of the Ethiopian Empire should be reframed in different dichotomies that reflect the essence of the politics of the country. •Self-determination proponents vs. self-determination denials/opposers. •Multiculturalism promoters vs. Amharanization pursuers. •Freedom seekers vs. oppressors. •Equal opportunity seekers vs. Exploiters, etc. The fundamental problem is not about unity or disunity per se but the underlying political, economic, cultural, social, linguistic, etc. problems of Ethiopia, and the presumed solutions thereof to deal with these enduring problems of the Ethiopian Empire. Barii
Posted on: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 20:46:31 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015