|
Two
Wrongs in EthioMedia.com's Accusations of Lencho Bati's Two Rights
This
note is in response to a "Letter
to the (EthioMedia.com's) Editor" from one Lemlem responding to
Professor Lencho Bati's comment in an article titled "As
Ethiopia Boils, Minnesota's Ethiopians Feel the Heat." The content of
Lemlem's response is weak in its argument. However, the two wrongs in that
letter are being committed not only by Lemlem, but by a majority of
Ethiopianists, proponents of the Abyssinian System of Domination. Therefore, it
is important to take up the task and show how Lemlem and other Ethiopianist
camp mates make two wrongs - consistently and shamelessly.
Wrong
#1: Individual Oromos Were Part of Abyssinian System of Domination, So the
Oromo People Were Not Oppressed.
Here's
how they start giving examples for this line of wrong argument: "Many
Oromos were generals, ministers, senior government officials, etc. during the
_____ regime (in the blank space, fill in Menelik, Haile Sellasie, Derg or
even Zenawi); so, the Oromo people were not subjected to become
second-class citizens." Some may even try to list out those so-called
Oromo generals and senior government officials of the Abyssinian repressive
regimes.
As
expected, Lemlem mentioned that history was the witness that many Oromo
individuals were part of Ethiopian regimes for the last 100 years; therefore,
the Oromo people were not oppressed by these regimes. Lemlem even got the gut
to tell us Dr. Negasso Gidada was Zenawi's "first President"
and he was Oromo; and that meant the Oromo people were not persecuted by Woyane
during Dr. Gidada's term. Well, Lemlem failed to hear and watch Dr. Gidada
himself apologizing and taking responsibilities for the human rights crimes
committed against Oromo during his term (Watch
the video here). The fact that Dr. Negasso Gidada is an Oromo with the
title "President" does not translate into 40+ million Oromo people
having freedom, equality and justice.
Lemlem
and other Ethiopianist mates failed to recognized the difference
between being Oromo and becoming Oromo. As far as the individual
"is" just a mere government official that follows the orders given to
them by those benefiting from the Abyssinian System of Domination, he or she
can remain part of the regime. In other words, the fact an individual is
"an Oromo" is not a threat to the Abyssinian System of Domination.
What is a threat to the Abyssinian System of Domination is the transformation
of an Oromo individual from being a "mere" Oromo targeted for forced
assimilation to one embracing and becoming Oromo.
To
become Oromo means to feel the oppression imposed on the Oromo people - the
destroyed Gadaa System, the barred language, the barred & destroyed
culture, the barred expression of self-determination, the barred access to
Oromia's vast opportunities, the barred access to education - AND
to do something about it. In short, becoming Oromo is about bringing about
an Oromo renaissance in the Horn of Africa. On the other hand, the core goal
of the Abyssinian System of Domination is to strip Oromo off all human rights and
subject them to forced assimilation; otherwise, the Abyssinian System of
Domination will cease to exist - it can not be THE Abyssinian System of
"Domination" without dominating others. In contrast, the Oromo
renaissance is about reclaiming lost heritage and power; it has never been
about dominating others.
A
good example here is the story of General Taddasa Biru, the commander of the
police force during the Haile Sellasie regime. General Taddasa Biru was an
assimilated Oromo government official posing no threat to the regime until he
transformed himself into one of the modern-day Oromo national freedom movement
leaders. (Read more in detail here)
He was promoted to the top of the echelon as far as he had not
become an Oromo; however, as soon as he
embraced and became Oromo, he was executed in broad daylight in the middle of
Finfinne.
Therefore,
Lencho Bati's comparison of the situation of Oromo people in Ethiopia to the
situation of blacks in South Africa during the Apartheid era was right on. The
Abyssinian System of Domination is a "black-on-black" Apartheid
system only visible to those living under it.
Wrong
#2: Oromos Are Not the Only Ones Oppressed by Ethiopian Regimes, So the Oromo
National Freedom Movement Shall Be Stopped.
This
one is really funny - and confused. It seems that the Ethiopianist camp has run
out of reasons for derailing the Oromo national freedom movement. They just
argued in "Wrong Argument #1" that the Oromo people "were never
oppressed" since a few Oromo individuals were part of Ethiopian regimes.
Now, they turn around and say, "OK, even if the Oromo people were (and are
being) oppressed, they ought not to fight against this brutal Abyssinian System of
Domination ALONE." They say, "the Oromo
people's fight against aggression is not justified as far as "we"
(the Ethiopianists) are not part of it." In a way, they want to keep the
"black-on-black" Apartheid System in Ethiopia intact (as shown in
Wrong #1) and at the same time, they want to join (actually, be the leaders of)
the fight against this System of Domination that they want to keep intact.
Confused? .... Yes.
Again,
as expected, Lemlem made the point as follows: "Is the brutality of the
Zenawi regime confined to the Oromo only? And the rest are grouped into the
same class as the ruling white minority regime of apartheid South Africa?"
To answer these questions: No and No.
The
brutality of the Zenawi regime is not confined to the Oromo only; that does not
in any way mean that the Oromo people do not have the right to fight against
such brutality. It is the Oromo national freedom movement's strategic choice
whether to wage such a fight alone or with meaningful allies. Lemlem and the
other Ethiopianist camp mates do not get to choose how Oromo should fight
against the "black-on-black" Apartheid in Ethiopia; Oromos themselves
do. After all, the largest nation living under this tyranny in Ethiopia are Oromo.
Besides,
it was not blacks only that were subjected to Apartheid in South Africa. It was
Asians (watch
the Ghandi movie to learn how Gandhi fought for equality in late 19th century
in South Africa), Arabs and many more. Did that prevent blacks from taking
up the fight against the Apartheid regime? Are you out of your mind? No.
Did the fight by blacks against the Apartheid regime imply that Asians and
Arabs were part of the white minority rule? Hell, No.
Conclusion:
No reasoned argument puts two wrongs in the same paragraph, only Lemlem's does.
After stating that Oromos were never oppressed since individual Oromos were
part of various Ethiopian regimes, Lemlem went on to deny the Oromo people the
right to fight the current "oppressive" regime, which - according to Lemlem's
own argument #1 - must not be oppressing Oromos since this regime had Oromo officials. What is ravaging Ethiopia is the
"black-on-black" Apartheid system, which must be done away with by
Oromos and all others willing to bring about change to the Horn of Africa. The approach must not be "Oromos must stop fighting alone since they are not the only ones oppressed by the repressive Abyssinian System of Domination"; it must be "let us fight with Oromos since we also want to see the brutal regime and the repressive System removed from Ethiopia".
Back
to the Archive @ Gadaa.com
|
