|
|
 Re: ازدواج الجنسيه ...هل بالضروره تخلي عن مسقط الراس (Re: الامين حمد)
|
Alameen Hamad
I think you deserve to be given credit and even a 'standing ovation' for raising one of the highly contesting issues concerning the sense of 'who we really are'. And whether this sense could be recognised, affected or, as others derterminedly suspected, altered by a piece of official paper, be it involuntarily decided by a birth certification, or voluntarily proven by a naturalisation document.
On the face of it, the question may seem to be as easy as expected, and the the set of reasons you listed may suffice to exonerate the 'doers' of such a thing from the cursed feeling of 'being a traitor' or, let me say, of the betrayal of those who've written our still-unknown historical statement (technically known as a NATIONAL identity signified by a travel document known as a NATIONAL passport).
At the deep level, the question doesnt apear to be a 'piece of cake' as we thought, and the conflicting responses indicate that the question may never lend itself to an easy or peaceful resolution. Put it bluntly, a part from the economic justifications for officially adopting another differring nationality as stark nakedly listed by Wd Alsheikh, the question addresses in principle 'who we really are'. Does the term 'Sudanese' imply a sort of psychological beloning, as cogently hinted at by Abu bakr Ali? Or does it refer to something more tangible than that, as essentialistically stated by Beyan? Or whether is it the case that the answer is not necessarily in 'black or white distinction' or 'all or nothing', as eloquently expressed by Iman?
Thus, the output of the question, so far, is a set of different views by different people belonging to the same piece of land. Yet, I think there's a common denominator linking all of the responses together so far, except Beyan's, which is that there is an element of 'optionality' in their rhetoric (we can choose who we want to be without losing our historically-rooted identities).
Ustaza Beyan, it's fortunate that the generalisation you've drawn does not fit ALL the people, thanks God. With due respect to your honest feelings toward the long-cried home-land, let me tell your majesty straight up how I view the thrust of the matter. There are some ethnicities in the Sud-land who lost their physical belonging to the Earth notably in Dar-Fur) , let alone their fictitious NATIONAL identification by a 'green' paper with the country . It's my contention that we should re-write the Sud-land history to accommodate the different polities, cultures, languages and religions, and only in that sense, I think, the question of identification may lend itself to an easy reply, and the term 'sudanese' itself to an easy definition, and believe me we won't be in need to leave the mother-land except for health or educational reasons, as longed by Abu bakr.
|
|
 
|
|
|
|
فيس بوك
تويتر
انستقرام
يوتيوب
بنتيريست