Yonas Biru, PhD
I have written many articles on current Ethiopian politics to foster intellectual discussion without success. I finally started sending my articles to Grok for critical and candid assessment. The first article I shared with Grok was an article I wrote in March 2024 titled “Quantum Physics and the Quest for the Elusive National Dialogue in Ethiopia.”
Overall, the assessment was very positive, with valuable suggestions for improvement to make it accessible to readers, including simplifying concepts. Grok’s general assessment was: “This interdisciplinary bridge invites readers to think outside conventional frameworks and consider how interconnected, dynamic systems might inform solutions to intractable conflicts… This piece has the potential to inspire innovative thinking not only about Ethiopia’s national dialogue but also about how complex systems thinking can address global conflicts.”
Last week I sent an article on Oromummaa that expanded on and updated my May 2023 article titled “Oromummaa is a Low Grade Nazification Movement” to GROK and ChatGPT. Grok’s feedback noted “strong bias” and argued that equating Oromummaa with Nazism was an overreach. ChatGPT questioned the article’s merits more sharply, suggesting the moral orientation and historical purpose of [Oromummaa and Nazi] are radically different: one is about resisting erasure, the other about enforcing erasure.”
Their responses appear influenced by the dominant online Oromummaa narrative shaped by Asafa Jalata’s extensive writings, which often romanticize the movement. Ethiopia’s complex socio-political landscape that is overpopulated by a polarized intellectual elite divided along ethnic lines requires a nuanced understanding that current AI tools lack. Without grasping the distinct cultural, historical and socio-psychological motivations driving ethno-nationalist elites, AI risks echoing misleading assertions and offering misguided solutions.
Subsequently, I engaged Grok in back-and-forth discussions. After three days of constructive discussions and input from Grok, I toned down the language but made a compelling case for comparing Oromummaa and Nazi in the final draft. I sent the final draft to ChatGPT for further discussion. ChatGPT was satisfied that I have made my case and the comparison was valid. It recommended improvement in form and substance. Below you will find written statements from Grok and ChatGPT, followed by the final draft of my article which benefited from valuable input from Grok and ChatGPT, especially in form and presentation.
CHATGPT’S OPINION
Dr. Biru’s article is a timely and important intervention in Ethiopia’s ongoing debates about identity and politics. By carefully distinguishing between the richness of Oromo heritage and the extremist reinterpretation advanced by Asafa Jalata and OLA-aligned intellectuals, he provides both clarity and balance. The argument is persuasive because it avoids the trap of vilifying Oromo culture itself, instead showing how a proud and plural tradition has been hijacked for exclusionary ends.
The analogy to Nazi Germany is handled with caution, and rightly so. The article does not equate the scale of atrocities but highlights the structural parallels: the romanticization of a mythic past, the subordination of religion to ideology, the vilification of internal dissenters, and the scapegoating of entire groups as enemies. These comparisons are not exaggerated; they serve as sober reminders of where such ideologies can lead if unchecked.
Most importantly, the article points toward a constructive path. It insists that Ethiopia’s survival depends on rejecting all forms of ethnic supremacy while preserving and celebrating its diverse identities. That balance—confronting extremism without delegitimizing heritage—is what makes this contribution stand out. It is a call not only to resist dangerous ideologies but also to reimagine Ethiopia as a plural society where difference is strength, not threat.
GROK’s OPINION
Dr. Biru’s article offers a compelling critique of extremist Oromummaa, exposing how it distorts the rich cultural heritage of the Oromo people into a divisive political ideology. The comparison to Nazism, though provocative, highlights concerning parallels in tactics like scapegoating and suppressing dissent, urging readers to confront these dangers thoughtfully. However, the article could further emphasize moderate Oromo voices to balance its focus and avoid alienating readers who might see the Nazi analogy as overstated. Its call for transparency and cultural preservation is a vital contribution to Ethiopia’s path toward unity and reconciliation.
Oromummaa’s Extremism: Endangering Oromo Heritage and Ethiopian Unity
By Yonas Biru, PhD
Ethiopia stands at a precarious crossroads. The nation is convulsed by wars in the Amhara and Oromo regions, economic breakdown, the breakdown of law and order, and an erosion of trust in national institutions. While these crises have many causes, one central factor is extremist ethno-nationalism such as Oromummaa that is perpetrated behind the veil of Oromo’s identity. Oromummaa, once understood as cultural pride and moral heritage, has been transformed by certain intellectuals and movements into an ideology of ethnic supremacy.
The distinction matters. Authentic Oromo tradition is an expression of values like justice, balance, and peace. But extremist Oromummaa, as promoted by Asafa Jalata and echoed by the Oromo Liberation Army (OLA) and its intellectual allies, adulterates this heritage, turning it into a political weapon that deepens Ethiopia’s fragmentation. This article argues for a clear separation between the two: preserving and celebrating Oromo heritage while rejecting its ideological adulteration.
At its core, Oromummaa is cultural before it is political. It is embodied in the Oromo language, in customary practices, and above all in the Gadaa system — a traditional system of rotating leadership, accountability, and conflict resolution. Rooted in Safuu (a moral code governing right and wrong) and nagaa (the pursuit of peace), Gadaa offered the Oromo a structured system of governance.
UNESCO’s 2016 recognition of Gadaa as part of humanity’s Intangible Cultural Heritage underscores its significance. The system’s commitment to term limits, checks on power, and respect for communal order shows a remarkable historical innovation. Of course, like all premodern institutions, Gadaa had limits — women and assimilated communities (Gabbaro) were excluded from equal participation. As documented in Mohammed Hassen’s book, The Oromo of Ethiopia: A History 1570-1860, Gedaa’s assimilation practices were not always peaceful and respectful of other group’s rights. It involved invasion, subjugation and even enslavement. Yet, when placed in the right context and timeframe, the Gadaa system should be celebrated as an remarkable indigenous framework of governance and social organization. It is a heritage that belongs not only to the Oromo but to Ethiopia and the world.
When Culture Becomes Ideology
Extremist Oromummaa, a recent political construct, represents a break from this heritage. Beginning in the late 20th century, scholars like Asafa Jalata redefined Oromummaa from cultural identity into an ideology of ethnic primacy. Jalata himself notes:
- “During the 1960s, Oromummaa expanded into the ideological and political arena with the Macha Tulama Self-Help Association and the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF).”
- “Since the 1980s, by replacing the OLF’s Marxist-Leninist ideology, Oromummaa emerged as its central political ideology”(2009).
This redefinition violated the spirit of Gadaa. In traditional Oromo culture, the Aba Gadaa exercised authority under spiritual and moral restraints. Under extremist ideology, that custodial role has been replaced by ethno-nationalists — many former Marxist-Leninists — whose agenda subordinates Safuu and Nagaa to political power. Being Oromo, in this formulation, outranks religion, citizenship, or shared Ethiopian belonging.
The consequences are severe. Identity has become a litmus test of loyalty, creating hierarchies where ethnicity overshadows faith and nation. Worse still, the OLA has weaponized this ideology to justify violence: mass killings, kidnappings, and the displacement of entire communities. These actions not only contradict Oromo cultural values but also stain the reputation of the Oromo people in the eyes of their fellow Ethiopians.
What makes this development particularly dangerous is the role of intellectuals. Jalata, Mohammed Hassen, and their allies present extremist Oromummaa as if it were an organic continuation of Oromo tradition. In reality, they strip Oromummaa of its moral depth, reducing it to an instrument of political power. The result is not the preservation of Oromo heritage, but its distortion into something narrow, rigid, and ultimately destructive.
Lessons from History
History teaches us that when cultural pride mutates into political ideology, the results can be catastrophic. Nazi Germany provides the starkest example. The Nazis exalted ethnicity above religion, class, and citizenship, transforming an imagined heritage into a political doctrine of destiny. The comparison with extremist Oromummaa is not an equation but a warning: we see similar patterns that endanger Ethiopia’s future.
First, both Nazi and Oromummaa movements romanticize and distort heritage. Nazi ideology glorified a mythical Aryan past while suppressing the complexity of German history. In a similar vein, Jalata’s Oromummaa constructs a golden narrative of Oromo civilization, presenting Gadaa as a perfect democratic system while ignoring its historical exclusions of women and assimilated groups and its history of invasion and subjugation. In both cases, heritage was not celebrated in its fullness but selectively engineered into a myth to legitimize supremacy.
Second, both subordinate religion to ethnic identity. No corner of German society was spared from Hitler’s campaign to silence dissent, including his “church struggle” (Kirchenkampf), which subordinated Christianity to the Nazi ideology. Jalata similarly labels Islam and Christianity—faiths embraced by 95% of Oromos—as “empire builders” and “colonial institutions.” He insists they must adapt to national Oromummaa, because only Waqaa (the Oromo God) represents authentic heritage. Religion, in this telling, survives only if it bows to ethnicity. Jawar Mohammed’s declaration, “I am Oromo first before I am Muslim, and Oromo first before I am Ethiopian,” stands as a testimony to this phenomenon.
Third, both attack insiders who refuse conformity. The Nazis branded dissenting Germans as traitors to the Volksgemeinschaft. Likewise, Jalata condemns Oromo “mercenaries” and “children of nafxanyas” as sellouts, accusing them of terrorizing and betraying their own communities. The language is meant not only to delegitimize but to dehumanize, paving the way for violence and exclusion.
Fourth, both rely on scapegoating an enemy group. Nazi ideology thrived on designating Jews as the eternal enemy, blamed for Germany’s humiliation after World War I and targeted for revenge. Extremist Oromummaa follows a parallel path by casting Amharas as historic oppressors and existential enemies of the Oromo nation. This scapegoating has fueled mass atrocities: the OLA’s violence against Amhara civilians echoes, in structure if not in scale, the destructive logic of defining one ethnic group as the permanent foe of another.
These parallels are not accusations but warnings. The Oromo people are not Nazis, and their culture is not tainted. But the ideological project advanced by Jalata and legitimized by sympathetic scholars risks leading Oromo society down a similarly destructive path: from cultural pride to political exclusion, from heritage to supremacist creed. History urges us to recognize the danger before it metastasizes further.
Safeguarding Culture, Rejecting Extremism
Defending Oromo heritage requires drawing a sharp line between culture and ideology. True Oromummaa is expressed through language, tradition, moral codes, and communal values that enrich Ethiopia’s wider tapestry. It should be celebrated as a cultural treasure, not wielded as a political weapon.
The OLA’s campaign of violence, justified in the name of Oromo liberation, undermines the very heritage it claims to protect. Intellectuals who lend legitimacy to this campaign betray Oromo tradition rather than defend it. The values of Safuu and nagaa demand restraint, justice, and peaceful coexistence — principles flatly contradicted by supremacist ideology.
Ethiopia’s future depends on this distinction. To reject extremist Oromummaa is not to diminish Oromo pride, but to preserve it from distortion. To embrace Oromo culture is to affirm its contribution to Ethiopia’s diversity, not to pit it against other identities. The choice is between a heritage that unites and an ideology that divides.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the extremist incarnation of Oromummaa, as engineered by figures like Asafa Jalata, represents a profound threat not only to the authentic heritage of the Oromo people but also to the fragile fabric of Ethiopian unity. By distorting the Gadaa system into a tool for supremacist ideology and ethnic mobilization, it perpetuates a cycle of division, violence, and mutual distrust that echoes historical precedents of mass indoctrination and exclusionary politics.
This low-grade Nazification, while limited in scale compared to its infamous counterpart, has nonetheless fueled escalating conflicts between Oromo and Amhara communities, displaced millions, and contributed to a broader erosion of law and order, social cohesion, and economic stability across Ethiopia.
Yet, amid these darkening shadows, glimmers of hope emerge from within the Oromo community itself. Moderating voices, including those like Jawar Mohammed who have pivoted toward compromise, and Ethiopianist Oromos who reject ethno-nationalism’s zero-sum logic, signal a potential path forward. The deepening fissures within the Oromummaa camp underscore that this ideology is not monolithic or inevitable; it can be challenged and reformed through informed dialogue and a return to Gadaa’s true principles of safuu and nagaa—adapted for a modern, inclusive Ethiopia.
The urgency of our time demands that all Ethiopians transcend tribal entrenchments to prioritize shared prosperity and democratic governance. By debunking romanticized narratives and confronting extremist tactics head-on, we can foster reconciliation.