Adolf Hitler of Germany and Atse Menelik II of Abyssinia had had an unquenchable thirst for evil personal superiority and for the superiority of their own peoples’; for the reasons they had invaded various nations, nationalities and States of their respective continents. To implement their dreams both of the culprits had premeditated, methodically prepared, efficiently armed themselves and eventually invaded the countries of others to satisfy their egoist desires at the expenses of their subjects’ subjugation. When both of them dehumanised the peoples of independent, sovereign nations and nationalities and states, their intentions weren’t entirely different.
The European subjects were tortured and indiscriminately massacred. Buildings were bombarded, children and elderly were indiscriminately slaughtered. The peoples of several countries were terrorised at unimaginable scale; and others groups of peoples were differently targeted for being who they were by Adolf Hitler’s army.
In a similar vein, Africa’s Adolf’s counterpart equally committed comparable crimes against humanity on the peoples of Africa’s once egalitarian nations and nationalities whose peoples during the periods of pre-colonisation were independently ruled by their own kingdoms. He amputated tens of millions, burned villages and wiped out the entire districts with their peoples if his army faces minimum resistances. All of the subjects were brutalised and subjected to untold sufferings and tamed to eternal subjugation since the colonisation. Peoples of about 82 (minus both Abyssinians) distinct nations and nationalities similarly targeted for the reasons ‘who they were/are’ -as was the case with Adolf’s targeting of Gypsy’s, Jewish and over two million unreported black Africans whose predicaments unpublicised.
To make the situation different from Adolf Hitler’s barbarism, the grandchildren of Atse Menelik II condone the actions of their king whose colonial rule began in 1880s at the exact period of Scramble for Africa in 1880s; (by the way it was only Abyssinians’ empire that has taken part in Berlin’s colonisers’ ‘Scramble for Africa’ summit in 1884 from all black race of the world). The descendants of the king currently attempt to persuade their subjects to believe them on the fact that their king was different from his European colonial counterparts and brutal Adolf Hitler and further claim that his invasion wasn’t a colonisation, but it was a territorial expansion.
Such an attempt makes the debate about Ethiopian empire entirely different, very complicated and more essentially blatantly denied facts. This remains a very challenging subterfuge causing confusion by making colonial subjects to hardly understand their positions. Adolf’s descendants’ case however is entirely different from this.
However, the gravity of the crimes committed against humanity on Jewish people by Adolf Hitler grips the imaginations of generations to follow, although the Abyssinian counterpart’s is often obscured with false pretexts of territorial expansion. The ultimate crime committed by fanatically intoxicated eugenics unpleasantly feels fresh always pinching the minds and hearts of the peoples of the world. Abyssinian king’s subjects’ outcries often goes to the deaf ears. Friends and foes alike never condone the barbarism against the Jewish people. The Abyssinian subjects’ plights weren’t recognised let alone to be known by the international community.
The history of holocaust was told and retold by the global communities, with particular focus in the West, where the majority of Jewish communities sought sanctuary during and immediately after the aftermaths of the holocaust; whereas raising the Abyssinians subjects by rulers and their supporters is seen as an act of insanity and anti-Ethiopianisn. Those who mention about this historically accurate facts are often seen as an enemy of the Empire therefore often demonised by the rulers and their affiliates by using their well-established Medias at a global scale.
Numerous writers, historians, human rights activists, religious leaders and others groups of society discuss about the Holocaust tirelessly; whereas the burning issues related with the Abyssinian subjects is buried, or often erroneously interpreted by those who’re labouring hard to maintain the status-quo. Memorial ceremonies often take place on annual basis to commemorate Holocaust victims; yet in Abyssinian Empire the killers are praised where the victims are continually demonised since the 1880s conquest.
In the cases of holocaust victims, since its occurrence, remembrance ceremonies have taken places for more than 6 decades. During these ceremonies, not a single Germany gets up to say that such commemorations needn’t to take place either within Israel or in others parts of the world where the Jewish communities predominantly live, including the Germany itself. Instead the Germanys support such commemorations with humility and utmost civility. More importantly, the process of compensating the descendants of the Holocaust by German government is still ongoing. Apart from very few academics refuting the numbers of Jewish who have become the victims of holocaust, (which was believed to be between 5 and 6 million) the majority of global communities empathise with their causes and mainly support the descendant of the said heinous crime against humanity. The Abyssinian king, Atse Menelik II, has colonised Ethiopian nations and nationalities since 1880s to create today’s Abyssinian Empire. In his Empire, the reverse is true when we compare with Adolf’s descendants. Let alone compensating the subjects, acknowledging its existence is considered taboo. Those who brave to say a word are automatically regarded as a renegade pariahs. Compensating and decolonising the subjects would have been the logical way of dealing with this matter. The reality reveals that unless the colonisers are obliged to surrender (which seems inevitable), thinking in this manner is still remote as was the case for the last 130 years of colonial occupation. To make the situation more obfuscating, the descendants categorically deny the fact that their king had committed crimes against humanity which is comparable with that of the Adolf Hitler’s (most of which constitutes crime against humanity-Genocide) on independent, sovereign and egalitarian African nations and nationalities further arguing that their king’s actions were wholly justifiable.
Moreover, when it comes to Abyssinian Empire, discontents surrounding the colonial subjects and the colonisers diverge into two dimensions. One is that the entire descendants of the King Menelik II claim that his action was just and a holly one, whereas the victims claim that Menelik’s barbarism wasn’t different from European colonialism and Adolf Hitler’s acts of cruelty; therefore the subjects strongly believe that ‘Decolonisation’ is the only way forward. These irreconcilable differences will continue as long as the rulers continually brutalise peoples of nations and nationalities and systematically impoverish them through their imposed rules.
Regardless of the above, the defensive positions of the grandchildren of colonisers entirely focuses on continually hoodwinking their subjects with their usual denial about the existence of colonialism in Abyssinian Empire in the first place. Using the leverages they had consolidated during the colonial periods of last 130 years; they succeeded in partially assimilating their subjects. Therefore, the peoples of the colony are often mislead and persuaded to accept that Menelik’s crimes didn’t exist instead inclining to believe that the issues related with colonialism are the fabrications of yhe elites of colonised nations’.
They further their accounts that- even if it had happened, it is a past story (not a History) about which the subjects needn’t bother. Therefore, instead they try to preach us with their ‘Feteha Negest and Kibre Negest’ which states that Abyssinian kings including Menelik II are sacred who shouldn’t be negatively mentioned at any time. Driven to believe such erroneous accounts resulted from relentless mantra of the rulers, the subjects never vigorously demand for their total emancipation- instead are coerced to believe to fight for justices and equality (which makes sense if this becomes practicable but hasn’t been and never be the case). Genuinely recognising the past injustices, brutality and genocides committed by their kings including the Menelik II isn’t acceptable by the current oblivious Abyssinians.
The above debate is active and continues to be so causing further disparities in the Empire as the subjects are tacitly told that they are created inferior, therefore further indoctrinated with the rulers mantras on the fact that they must be ruled eternally. The rulers also persuade the subjects to unwillingly believe and accept that they must be the ones’ to tell others how to live their lives in their own soils; as if they were inherently given these rights by supernatural powers.International human rights groups and peoples of colonised nations and nationalities believe that behaving in the manners the Abyssinians currently think and perceive isn’t compatible with 21st century’s human values. Therefore the Abyssinians’ attitudes and perceptions aren’t different from the South Africa’s Apartheid’s leaders ‘Afrikaans’ who to date believe that black race is created inferior to white to show their utter ignorance and how inferior their judgements and assertions, instead are.
Contrary to Abyssinians’ and Afrikaans’ assertions of their superiority over others; Philosophers and renowned statesmen and true politicians’ vigorously refute such an assertion. These noble personalities fought for equality of all human beings declaring that all Human beings are created equal, ditching the unscientific, dogmatic and illogical claims of those with obdurate attitudes such as Abyssinians and residues of South Africa’s Apartheid to a dust bin.
Michael Pakaluk 2012 Law Review draws Aristotle’s philosophy on law of equality as:-
‘Rights as Truths About Equality’
The doctrine of human rights may be invoked simply to assert a truth, the equality of all human beings, a “proposition,” which political association is then meant to affirm through its institutions and procedures. Thus, Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence appeals to “truths” which are said to be “self-evident, and Abraham Lincoln astonishingly asserts that the purpose of the American republic was to affirm a proposition, as the nation was “conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal’.
Disregarding these irrefutable truth about the facts that all are created equal therefore can decide about their own destinations without being dictated; to date the Abyssinian rulers are dictating their subjects by telling them that they are not ready to govern themselves. Although the current regime has got the constitution that speaks volume; the Tigray People Liberation Front (TPLF) dominated regime’s substances and motto aren’t different from that of its predecessor’s cousins (the Amharas who are fighting for power). Their heinous agendas whose ultimate goals are dehumanising others whilst expropriating their resources unites these both.
The current regime as its predecessors imposes its barbaric rules on others while it consolidates its grips on a previously created colonial’s establishments including the imprisonments of 56 distinct nations and nationalities of the south in one region- totally disregarding the notion of choice, human value and self-determination stated in its paper tiger constitution. The above facts in addition to numerous gross violations of fundamental rights of nations and nationalities of the Empire –makes this part of the world a place where the historical residues of colonialism subjects it colonies to a systematic slavery in the 21st century. When I return back to Adolf Vs Menelik’s barbarism, there are ample evidences affirming and reaffirming that there is no difference with their intentions and actions. The gravity of the crimes committed by both criminals is comparable as were their intentions. The only differences is that the later committed crime against black Africans -whereas the former on non-black and non-Africans. Adolf’s crimes was mainly committed against Jewish people whose peoples have scattered to all over the world. By doing so, the Jewish have cemented their foundations thus are able to be deeply sophisticated, intellectually matured, financially and academically successful than their adversaries. The majority of the Jewish peoples live in most parts of the Western world where they could influence the decisions and actions of Western powerful politicians. Therefore, the crime against humanity committed on them received the necessary attention of the global community; more essentially from the western powers whose interests were equally threatened by the actions of Adolf Hitler’s aggressions.
When the British colonisers committed abhorring crimes against humanity on Aborigines of Australia and red Indians of Canada (on tens of millions of peoples causing genocides of unheard proportions for the crime no one is held accountable to this date), their crime wasn’t magnified simply because they were wiping out of the word an uncivilised groups of peoples (who were gravely needing their imported Civilisation, Commerce and Christianity), they claim. Such crimes against humanities were committed time and again by all colonial masters at all levels; but were given no attentions, and the victims weren’t compensated.
Crimes against humanity- the Abyssinian king Menelik II had committed on Ethiopian Empire’s subjects are seen in similar light with that of Aborigines of Australia and red Indians of Canada whose plights were concealed for eternity. The plights of Abyssinian colonial subjects’ aren’t different from the former in terms of all aspects of politico-economic and socio-cultural lives and systematic subjugation and slavery resulted from the lingering colonial occupations.
There are numerous evidences stating that the crime Abyssinian king Menelik II committed on the subjects wasn’t different from Adolf Hitler’s under whatsoever explanations. In addition to mouth to mouth testimonies of the subjects, there are also ample evidences from the international scholars, explorers, religious visitors all of whom affirming that the level of genocide Menelik II’s army committed against Oromo, Sidama, Wolayta, Ogaden Somale and others colonised nations is comparable with that of Adolf Hitler’s crimes against Jewish and others peoples of Europe in one way or another.
No comments:
Post a Comment