Somaliland is not Somalia BTW. Somaliland was a British Protectorate and had 76 harmonious relationship with Great Britian supporting Britian in both first and second world wars. Somalilanders always had a warm relations with Great Britain. Somaliland negoatiated their Independence from Britain and became independent on 26th of June 1960 where 35 countries recognised Somaliland. Sadly after 10 days Somaliland united with Somalia to form Greater Somali Republic in which Somalia was still under Italian colony. The union was declared illegal union and things did not go well right from the beginnin. Somaliland reinstated their Independence and Sovereignty in 1991 after a cruel genocide has been waged against their people by the regime of Siad Barre.

I think Bashir Goth is speaking from different experience which is positive. Somaliland preserved their culture under the British Protectorate rule and always kept their unique culture which makes it unique to date. Britain also helped Somalilanders receive quality education which helped Somaliland to date.

Somalilanders respect the Queen and the Monarchy a symbol of being Britishness I guess. Obviously people can differ but there is another side to the Monarchy that is positive and cultural.

Hi! I'm Dr. Phillips! I love your site - it's really good!
buy viagra online buy viagra online
[url=http://digg.com/world_news/Buy_Viagra_Online_THE_LOWEST_PRICE_GUARANTEE] buy viagra online [/url]
Thank you!

Hi! I'm John Strass and i like your site!
cheap viagra
Thank you!

Hi! I'm John Strass and i like your site!
cheap viagra
Thank you!

We need all the institutions possible to remind us that in this world of woe,there still is a concept called dignity.
Churchill was a staunch defender of constitutional monarchy.

"Can't imagine Britain without the Queen" someone says. That's the dumbest response I ever heard. It means nothing. To compare the Queen with statesmen like Churchill and Roosevelt is asinine. These men worked at fighting the greatest evil in the 20th century and probably ruined their health doing so. Britain wants the Queen though. Fine. Just don't pay her, and then see how commited she is to being a role model.

A role model though? Let's see. She's never held a job, not a real job like most Brits have. She's been pampered and spoiled all her life. They had to drag her kicking and screaming just to show her old puss in public when her ex-daughter-in-law was killed in a car crash (and royalists talk about duty!). In fact, you'd think for all the money the Brits shove her way, she and the rest of the royal clan would have the decency to put their mugs on the street at least once a week just to see how the peasants are doing, or at least show up at a food bank once a month to ladle out some soup. But no, once a year at Christmas the queen deigns to air on the telly a sacharine wish for a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. She's a barely-walking anachronism who has no relevance to the 21st century. We are not amused.

Hereditary rulers are also not bad for the country because there becomes at least one powerful soul to lead but the thing necessary is that he should be a just person and not like as have been rude and on their own in history. A hereditary ruler as in anciant Rome if supported by a powerful council may run the government far more better than as in democracy.

I wonder how many of the folks taking their *brave* stances against the evils of colonialism ever spent any time in any former British colonies. I grew up in one, and have visited many others since. I can tell you that most of the current inhabitants of Britain's former African colonies understand the nuanced trade-offs between the colonial era's inequitable distribution of power and the largely peaceful, comparatively prosperous states it created. These people would readily acknowledge an occasional nostalgia for the days when store shelves were full and they could send their kids to school without fear of having their limbs hacked off. It's a shame the more strident -- and, I have to assume, ignorant -- sloganeers here refuse to understand this.

Note, by the way, I'm talking about *British* colonial rule. I make no claims about anybody else.

Why are people so negative with regard to the viewpoints of others? Just because you don't agree with someone doesn't mean you have to be nasty and attack them.

Dear Mr Goth, thank you for submitting your essay. Not bad for a first effort but I suggest that you rewrite it without fawning over the British Royal Family. This time your mark is 3/10. Better luck next time. [In future, please leave out the drivel.]

Goth is right for his assertion that Britain brought a system of governance to Africa. No one is denying the evils of colonialism, however, without colonial powers Africa would have been a place with few million people, instead of billion, in it. All of them butchers who survived by killing other Africans.

The following quote best summarizes what is ACTUALLY and TRULY at the core of royalism, imperialism, colonialism, neocolonialism, etc., etc.:

"If you do not understand the system of White Supremacy (Racism) -- what it is, and how it works -- everything else that you understand will only confuse you."

(Quote from "The United Independent Code/System/Concept: A Textbook/Workbook for Thought, Speech and/or Action for Victims of Racism (White Supremacy)" by Mr. Neely Fuller)

Mr. Goth, Washington Post readers, et al, think about it.

Curiously it was Britain alone that went against the social norms of Europe, the Middle-East, Asia, Africa, and the Americas and begun the fight to abolish slavery across the globe. I don't need be a pompus ass and say that history is a complicated story, but I do wonder the point of these blogs if the only puspose they serve is as an outlet for obvioulsy ill informed and poorly considered opinion.

Well, I am UK and am thoroughly aware of the evils the British Empire levied on the world, including one which has surprisingly not been mentioned.

Our role in slavery.

It is to be hoped that we will make up for our lapses.

If we fail, it will not be for the want of trying.

Freedom without a system is anarchy.
Check this out.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5855323615829365487

What he writes is actually quite true. I have seen nostalgia of the old with Brit medals myself. I was suprised to see old men in Lesotho (Brit Basutoland) claim the Queen with a salute. Its also interesting that most of the former colonial subjects are clamouring to get into Britian and leave their own native countries far behind.

Mr. Goth
Insteading of writing crap like what you wrote. Here is an idea for your next column. After years of fighting and civil war, the Islamic courts brought rule and government to your country. The warlords were all defeated. Then, America called its cronies, The crusading Ethiopans, who have a humans rights record about as good as Saddam does, to wipe out the Islamic courts Government. Thus, the country goes right back to chaos and killings. People dead in the streets.
AND ALL YOU HAVE TO COMMENT ABOUT IS THE STUPID QUEEN OF ENGLAND? Who cares about her? Care about your country. Let people know what is really going on.

If all families as rich and powerful as the queens
put their young men in harms way,like young Harry is now about to,in service of their country and not only in service for themselves,we would all be better off.
The British Empire spread the roots of civilization where there formerly was none.
Many countries owes the british a debt of gratitude.

Well, it is pretty sad, that to salvage our melodrama we all called the European Colonist, the one whom are the source of disarray in Africa.
Since the invasion of Iraq, many immigrant dream to get close to the European power and claim reform in some part of Africa to share the large cake along with the European.
The one whom dream of change, must go in Africa and campaign for change out there, instead of writing book to get recognize and be place by the former master. I have no respect for those cowards
That why i stay out of it. If I’m eager of changes i will go there and make my mark no matter the circumstances.

The irony about this piece is that the author himself does not realize that his repulsive nostalgia for the illegal and racist colonial era is a result of that sense of inferiority that the brits (and any colonial cowards) instilled in the people they were basically robbing.
Peoples in every corner of the earth, no matter what their heritage, their religion, their customs have the capacity to grow on their own and there are ample historical examples of local home grown heroes who led their people to greatness. Somalia has produced many great minds that can be a more useful inspiration to Somali youths than the nice lady "ruling" England.
The premise, suggested in one of the comments, that "all the colonies that rejected them are now hell holes" is not only naive because it is stripped from the historical and political context but is also the sad reality of supremacist thought. Look at where that led the Nazis!

i can fully understand the desire of the brits to hold on to their crown. the only questions is, can the crown hold on to them? the recent activities of those within the royal family could the undoing of the royals.

This is an embarrassing post. Surely, Mr. Goth regards Somalis as little children, incapable of responsiblity for their own (good) governance. Then again, the Somalis themselves have done their very best to support his pathetic views.

Give the author a break, he's describing a nostalgic aesthetic, not lauding all of the elements of colonialism.

And while British colonialism did have its significant bad points (though sometimes benign compared to other forms of the era), it also helped spread successful western institutions and the rule of law to former colonies that benefit from those traditions today. Not everything is black & white, like the script of some simplistic political play.

I too learned of the British rule in Somalia from my father and relatives. One of the most memorable tale was;

Whenever the Colonial White English administrator goes for an afternoon ride in his LandRover, his dog use to sit with him in the Cabin while the locals rode in the Flatbet in the back...... in a nut shell that's the relationship between the Colonialist & their subjects

As a fellow Somali, I am extremely embarrassing to see Goth longing for the Colonial past. The colonial period was time of suppression, subjugation and Valgrant human rights abuse with regard of the indigenous population. I have never heard anybody or country as mentioned, heartfelt nostalgia for the glories of colonialism …it’s tragic

Somalia, after the civil war of 91, unfortunately failed to establish a functioning, robust democratic Gov’t for the last 16 years. However it will get there - No pain No gain…….afterall it took US some 200 years and a major civil war to get to where they are today …..but they don’t look back longingly to the past.

Somalia today is composed of small self-governing Bantusland enclaves such as Somaliland and Puntland but once the country unites we will have our glorious independent proud land.

Yeah, hmmmm, the British colonial system was garbage, right? Sort of funny how all the British colonies that took solid hold of British political and judicial systems have prospered and have high standards of living. Sort of funny how all the colonies that rejected them are now hell holes.

I guess thinking about that, though, is a bit more complicated than chanting bumper sticker slogans.

What have you been drinking or smoking to conclude that 'even citizens of former british colonies felt the same way about british royalty'? Perhaps you slept through all your high school history classes or history was prohibited from teaching in Somalia. To millions throughout Africa, the Caribbean and all the former "British Territories", the british monarchy stood in the forefront for slavery, colonialism, neo-colonialism, exploitation and the ultimate abondonment and misery of today.

How can Royal Britain save Somalia? Aren't they part of the reason why the country is destroyed now? give me a break. You know everywhere they go, they do major damage. Just look north at Iraq. They left Somalia scraps, so why do you want them back? So they can take the leftovers? you really won't have food then, my brother. Never ask for your oppressors back. That is so ridiculous.

People just hate the Queen because she's rich and white...

The British Monarchy can justify itself as a source of tourist revenues, and newspaper sales, but no way else. Harmless enough in its present state, but certainly not a model for modern national governance, nor for individual human intelligence, chastity, frugality, or humility. Admittedly, there is probably a distinction without a difference if one looks at the inheritance of great wealth in the unroyal level of other societies. It's impossible to resent them because they are such an entertainingly silly lark to observe, even while they do not realize that.

What's all this Goth bashing? The Queen is the public face of Britain and she's doing a great job. Not a whiff of scandal. America should be so lucky.

Contrary to what Bashir Goth wrote, the goal is NOT that every child can dream of being able to reach the highest position of power. I sincerely hope our children do not become power hungry like Goth.

I wonder if this heartfelt nostalgia for the glories of colonialism will translate well in the next century, when our Chinese overlords start collecting on their loans.

The monarchy is a public sector business of UK with very low or negative ROI. Maybe time to privatize it and have it fend for itself instead of sucking hard earned money from the poor people.

what garbage.

the queen...a divine person? no. she along with her sons and all her ancestors are just a rich family that took the brits for fools.