Debates among the Somalilanders in the social media is
many times ideological: secularists vs Islamists; liberals vs socialists;
clannists vs nationalists etc. But, in the mainstream media and public
platforms, these topics are not in the agenda. It is puzzling why the two do
not resemble. Despite the huge freedom and sometimes anonymity the social media
(specifically the faceboook) is offering, the explanation is not quit easy. I
argue if such ideological discussions and point of views are embedded in our
political, social, economic and cultural dialogues, we would have different and
positive direction.
Although deep intolerance is evidently apparent in
these debates at the social media, it shows the presence of people who hold
ideas above clan politics, people bound together by what they believe, but not
the clan they belong to. I have observed how people who belong to same clan
have very distant (or even hostile) views. Almost endless debate involved by
people who are scattered all over the world continue in our social media. It is
wrong to claim that the debate in the social media is positive and may have fruitful
results if mainstreamed, but it is a sign of different topics that interest the
masses without taking into consideration the dominant narration.
The two leading debaters, in my assessment, are secularists
and Islamists. There is a presence of atheists in insignificant number. However,
the robust and leading sides are Islamists and secularists which are neither homogenous
nor united. Many Islamists in the social media hold conflicting ideas whereas secularist
are not united as well.
Most surprisingly, the centre of the arguments is not only
the role of religion in public life. This does not mean there is no debate on
this subject. There is big one on the matter. However, the questions that
repeatedly ring the bell are those directed to the meaning of Islam, its interpretation,
role of reason in religious understanding, the influence of Arab culture, the power
of religious leaders and freedom of religion.
Therefore, in many occasions arguments is sparked by
for instance someone questioning how traditionally certain things were attached
to a religious meaning or the long held negative views on women. Others focus
on the change of religious trends and feel outnumbered and influenced by new
religious movements. This later group stand to defend Sufism which they see as
the true religious path.
Another thing I have so far observed is the people who
are involved in the debates. The secularist (if I group together all those
oppose the Islamists) mostly comprises of two groups. One group is young and educated
and based in Somaliland. The other group are predominantly educated in Muslim
countries. This composition surprises me because I would have expected secularist
to be educated or to live in the Western countries.
The Islamists (all those who campaign for religious
laws to administer in the state and private lives) encompasses two group. One group
is members of religious organizations/movements. The second group is young and
educated in religious institutions based in the Arab countries or in
Somaliland. They may not belong to particular religious organization/movement,
but they are influenced and trained by religious movements. The Islamists are better
organized and have other platforms outside of the social media.
The above categorization
is not inclusive. The masses are in fluid positions; one time siding with secularists
and another time siding with Islamists depending on the topic on hand.
The word secularist (in Somali the Arabic word of
Cilmaani is adapted) is taboo because it is depicted as atheists, although two
are totally different topics. Therefore, the word secularism/secularists is rarely
used in these debates.
My point in this commentary is not to analyse the
trends and who is winning. What I would like to suggest is giving the social
media discussions a space at the mainstream platforms and forums so that the
people are equally informed and clan politics is suppressed.
This view is my own and
I do not express in representing any entity.
Guleid Ahmed Jama
No comments:
Post a Comment