Identities in Ethiopia: The role of images, symbols, myths and stereotypes in imperial and post -imperial systems

The following research is a case study of the creation, structure and maintenance of dominant and subordinate identities in Ethiopian imperial and post-imperial society. The study identifies: (1) how dominant and subordinate identities occur, (2) their impact upon sustainable governance; and (3) how the relations and elements of identity dictate and/or transform the key values and institutions of a given society. In examining the aforementioned issues, this study focuses on the relationships between three identity groups (the Amhara, Tigre and Oromo), who have competed for dominance and recognition in the Ethiopian state. Investigation into these relationships relies on a study of the images, symbols, myths and stereotypes (ISMS ) associated with each group. These items are utilized as key identity elements, primarily because they contain perspectives on the groups' origin, values and goals as well as an articulation of the essence and role of “others” contained within a shared social environment (and what constitutes “ otherness”). In examining the promulgation of and changes in identity based elements, the study also examines intra and inter group discourse; historical patterns of interaction; social movements (both violent and non violent); as well as other factors that may have generated changes in the Ethiopian government and group relations. The identity based elements and the intra-inter group relationships arising from them (and how they have evolved, competed, and transformed over time) are examined during three historical time periods, namely: (1) the imperial administration of Emperor Haile Selassie; (2) the post-imperial administration of Major Mengistu Haile Mariam and the military committee known as the Derg; and (3) President Meles Zenawi's post-Derg Federal Democratic Republic. The research examines the general observation that historically conditioned expectations heavily influence issues of inter-group trust and cooperation, and enforces certain aspects of identity that highlight inter-group differences and diversity, as well as often inhibiting the groups from seeking (or even recognizing) shared identity elements and/or goals that may transform relationships, ease intra-group conflict and effectively build and participate in coalition governments. It also examines the argument that, while groups focus on defining “otherness” and establishing an ideological right-to-rule hegemony through the generation of competing images based upon stereotypes, myths and symbols, it is during the “debate” on these items that separate aspects of identity often become commingled so that they eventually transform both national government, intea-inter group goals and values, and ultimately the society itself.