WEYANE: ‘WHAT’S IN A NAME?’

A reply to Afura Burtukana

I am not a linguist who engages in the study of languages, but rather, a curious student of what the scope of a word can do to bring a profound change in the lives of many people. For Russ Rymer, author and a freelance journalist, “ linguistics is arguably the most hotly contested property in the academic realm.” As he flamboyantly puts it, “linguistics...is soaked with the blood of poets, theologians, philosophers, philologists, psychologists, biologists, anthropologists, and neurologists, along with whatever blood can be get out of grammarians.” This is fair enough but not an airtight assertion, since revolutionaries who concoct a word and sharpen it for over a life time with their own blood are inadvertently left out by Russ Rymer. You may say I am stretching this a bit far than it’s warranted, but bear with me, and I will dispel your contention otherwise.

I am what any foe and friends call a Weyane-the modern day revolutionary from Ethiopia with unambiguous principle for fairness, justice, and equality. Succinctly put: I am what Dr. Wayne W Dyer calls a soul with the power of intention to bring change. As he beautifully puts it, “when you change the way you look at things, the things that you look at change.” In so doing, I tune my thinking in the voices of those who have struggled and paid their dues with their life from Akurdet to Kismayo, to clear a path for all the good changes I see and will continue to see in my beloved country.

I am a Weyane, but also an Ethiopian by transcending from that which I am by choice. Yes, I am a Weyane in transcendence and thus everything Ethiopian-a Somali, Oromo, Amara, Welayita, Sidama, Tigri, and all the rest of my people at the same time for I see the answer clearly to the question ‘what’s in a name?’ that Afura Burtukana fails to see. Afura Burtukana’s futile attempt to sift Weyane from Tigreans, and that which is Ethiopian, is tantamount to overlooking the forest for the tree; since, in the most precise sense of the word, Weyane is a name of reverence given to those who had strenuously struggled, and are still struggling to translate the deeds of a locally born resistance into a powerful force of change- a change capable enough to engulf each and every aspect of deprivation everywhere. And thus, Weyane is a just and positive power word that can be shared universally for it’s pointed to secure freedom by facing those who are bent to oppose the choices that any people make as to how to live.

In opposition to the choices that the Ethiopian people made as to how to live, Afura Burtukana wrote an article under the title of “Don’t take it out on the Tigrians.” The title of the article “Don’t take it out on the Tigrains” is also the main conclusion of Afura’s argument. An argument can be formulated in various ways. An article such as Afura’s is one such way in which a fairly educated person formulates an argument and tries to make his point. The body of an argument in an article is composed of assumptions, intermediate conclusions, and a main conclusion. The validity of the main conclusion in an argument is solely dependent on the strength of the assumptions. It’s hence apparent that a valid argument is only made with uninterrupted logical flow, that is, the assumptions made within the argument should prove to be strong enough a bridge to warrant the main conclusion. The unspoken assumption that leads to the conclusion of Afura’s argument is that “the Tigreans and Weyane are two totally disjointed social and political entities.” Are they? Is this assumption strong enough a bridge to warrant the conclusion that Afura is asserting? “Fair and balanced” individuals with noticeable academic prowess embark with this premise in mind to test the validity of Afura’s argument.

The coloring of the Tigrean people as a disjointed social and political entity to that of Weyane is an assumption, and also an idea with a divisive plot much like the ideas of the colonialist who dismantled local authorities in almost all of Africa in lieu of a convenient centralized administration. In fact, the assumption forwarded by Afura even goes further than what the colonialist had in mind; that is, it belittles the historical knowledge of the Tigrean people about themselves in general. According to the history of the Tigrean people, Weyane is not the creation of TPLF, but rather, it is what created the TPLF. It’s the people of Tigri that concocted this visionary name of reverence and translates it into a material revolutionary force, in order to overcome deprivation and live on an equal foot with the rest of the many peoples of Ethiopia. Thus, any attempt to draw a social and political distinction between the Tigrean people and Weyane, which is the authentic progeny of the Tigrean people, mimics an attempt of politically abducting the sons and daughters of a people by solely claiming an unparalleled political righteousness.

Afura takes pain and apologetically paraphrases the idea of a Noble Prize laureate Amartya Sen in order to tacitly rebuke the building of KILIL-the superstructure that made it possible for the many people of Ethiopia take control of their own lives. Paraphrasing the paraphrased idea of Amartya Sen gives us that a rational human being should not base his thinking on “natural and manmade factors that ‘define’ his identity.” First and foremost, the fact that Amartya Sen is a Nobel Laureate doesn’t help to upgrade Afura’s unsound paraphrased argument into a sound one. In fact, with all due respect to his achievements, I would argue that the paraphrased idea of Amartya Sen, if it has been correctly paraphrased by Afura, is a very hollow one in that it assumes that a rational being should base his thinking on a vacuum rather than on who he is. What is left of a human being if he is to dispose of himself from the natural and the manmade factors that made him who he is? Nothing that resembles what we call life, I surmise.

Afura goes on to detail the mundane differences that we humans posses but fails to differentiate the natural endowment from that of the manmade endowments. But in fairness, I will try to differentiate the natural from the manmade, not to do a favor, but to point out how hollow the presupposition that a human being should not base his thinking on “natural and manmade factors that ‘define’ his identity is. To have been born male or female is natural, but to become a middle class joint or cigarette smoking professor isn’t. Who in his right mind would then think that not basing your decision from the perspective of a smoker is as equally desirable as not basing your decision on your gender? Are any political and social points to be made from the point of view of a smoker in defense of his right to smoke, as significant and as imperative, as those political and social points that are to be made to bring about gender equality from the point of view of a feminist? Is it possible for us to even ponder the viability of gender equality without the continuing struggle by women for it? Are we to devalue the struggle of a woman for equality by asserting that a rational woman should not base her thinking on natural factors that define her identity as Afura is suggesting that we should?

Let’s assume Afura to be a woman living in what is labeled as a developed country-the US. And hence, let’s also assume that Afura is cognizant of the fact that a woman in America is paid 72 cents for every dollar that a male is earning. Are we to envy Afura for not basing her decisions to struggle for fairness in pay on the natural factors that define her identity? Should we criticize Afura for struggling to overcome gender inequality since she has used the natural factor that defines her identity in order to do so? If any, what will be the premise for Afura to struggle for equal pay? Would she be having a motto “equal pay for all humanity” just to make her thinking in line with what she has paraphrased in her article, such that a rational woman should base her thinking beyond the natural factor that defines her identity. Is she not going to ask the rational question as to why women are being paid less than men for the same job?

Afura’s article makes a transition from an unsound philosophical argument to describing five political theories on ethnic tension and ethnic conflicts. These five political theories, according to Afura, are coined as biological, elemental (historical), high culture (elitist and/or superiority), defensive, and instrumental. Afura chooses the political theory “that intellectuals coined to be instrumental” in order to analyze the ethnic state of affairs in Ethiopia as that which is “...designed to capture state power and control.” However, in a dishonest academic manner, Afura takes only part of the theoretical assertion and uses it to present a nonexisting ethnic political scenario.

The fifth political theory that Afura has forwarded “...believes that ethnic violence is the result of projects designed to capture state power and control” since “the only way for ethnic groups to have national/cultural autonomy...is by providing power to the groups.” However in a very dishonest way, Afura fails to mention how fitting is this political theory in describing the Ethiopian ethnic relations during the previous regimes. Amassing fertile land from the natives of Sidamo, Bale, Harar, Arusi, Gemugofa, and from all the southern regions of Ethiopia, and building schools to teach children in Amarigna, and rationing ‘justice’ with a translator to bring about a national/cultural autonomy fits what Menilik designed and Hailesellasie executed for decades. If any, it’s this precise designed ethnic political power play that facilitated for the emergence of all the ethnic-based liberation fronts, with plans to liberate their people from what was a very apparent hegemonic rule of a single ethnic group.

The TPLF has transcended into becoming a member of a national front as a result of having a designed program that calls for the unabated sovereignty of people, peoples, nations, and nationalities of Ethiopia, and by no means is insisting to build schools in Somali-Ethiopia, for example, to teach Tigrigna in an effort to seize national/cultural autonomy. In fact, quite to the contrary, the TPLF as a member of the EPRDF has made it abundantly clear that the right of any people in Ethiopia, to teach its children in its own language, to cultivate its culture and govern itself is what it’s primarily willing to die for protecting. In fact, it’s this fifth political theory on ethnic conflict that describes also the possibility of a harmonious relationship between ethnic groups. Quoting Afura’s own paraphrased take of the fifth political theory on ethnic conflict explains that”...one has to be careful here because stable relationships between ethnic groups does not necessitate for one or the other groups to seize power.” Isn’t this aspect of the theory that describes the ethnic state of affairs in Ethiopia now? Can Afura honestly infer that the ethnic Tigreans are in a political power play to seize national/cultural autonomy? If the ethnic Tigreans are set on this power venture by design, why do they have to be willing to be a partner with EPRDF and diligently work for a constitution that by far is the most liberating document in Ethiopian history? Why then Afura takes pain to equate Weyane as that which has

the potential to create a social havoc much like Hitler?

Afura is the typical academically tainted alarmist detractor of the EPRDF, and I have no problem understanding that, since I am cognizant of the fact that some mediocre and alarmist scholars from the Ethiopian Diaspora have consistently and dishonestly portrayed the state of social and political affairs of Ethiopia. For example, in 1992, after General Siad Bare lost his power, and after Somalia entered a stateless existence of anarchy and social upheaval, five PhD holders in Los Angeles collaborated to write an article for Ethiopian Mirror under the title “Ethiopia: the next Somalia.” Dr. Getachew Mekasha was one of those mediocre and alarmist PhD holder who collaborated to write the article, and who also happens to have a perverted faith on the ability of a king to resolve all problems of Ethiopia. It takes some guts to have such a line of conviction from a PhD, and then again, I respect his world-view since I am expecting the same from him toward mine. The fact of the matter is, almost seventeen years later and counting, Ethiopia, under the leadership of the EPRDF, and contrary to the wishes, actions, and predictions from the likes of Dr. Getachew Mekasha and Afura Burtukana have become a daunting power to reckon with.

As usual, those who wish to destabilize Ethiopia under the guise of ‘fighting’ Weyane by shouting fire should expect nothing other than a very cold shower. For all interested citizens of Ethiopia, however, there is an open forum if they wish to criticize and amend the affairs of their beloved country instead of chewing on a Weyane for making an argument on behalf of all the ethnic groups of Ethiopia. The lines of all arguments by a Weyane are transparently drawn on the constitution of the Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, and by no means allude to the hegemony of the Tigrean people, but rather, to the collective power in equilibrium of all the people of Ethiopia since the constitution is all “what’s in a name?”

Adal Isaw

February 10, 2007