Sunday, October 31, 2010
HALLOWEEN FEAST: TRICKING OR TREATING OUR HALLOWED GROUNDS?
Nobody writes Halloween stories these days. For the good reason that there is nothing particularly hallowed in our lives.
Mikhail Zoshchenko.
The history of modern culture is one that has the unholy mix of religion and secularism; the sacred and the profane. Many annual holidays have their antecedents from profane customs and in other to supplant them; religious customs or rituals and rites were introduced to dwarf the effects of such practices. This was precisely the origin of Christmas for instance which was originally a pagan celebration of the winter solstice to the Roman honoured Saturn, the ancient god of agriculture, in a festival called Saturnalia. This was often associated with boisterous entertainment and rancorous revelry. This was celebrated around December 17th but the Christian introduction of Christmas had to check the pervading moral lousiness that was more associated with it. The same is the background of the public feast of the Halloween. The Halloween feast too has had a Christian deposition in the celebration of All Saints day. This annual feast has its influence on some modern beliefs and practices even on our African people and practices too. The question now is, like the customary Halloween jingle: has the celebration tricked or treated us?
The Halloween holidays which is observed on October 31st in most parts of North America and Southern Europe is one that has its origin in the festival of Samhain; one of the important and sinister celebrations of the Celtic year. The Samhain festival was celebrated in November 1, which commonly marked the end of summer. It was believed at this celebration, the world of the gods was to be made visible to mankind and then the spirits visited humans and the gods played tricks on those whom they visit. Sacrifices were often offered at this period because they were thought to be propitious and vital. The Samhain heralded the Halloween festival.
As it was believed at the Samhain festival, at Halloween, the souls who have died was believed to visit their homes and they play petty tricks on their family members and so members of the family wore masks to prevent the evil spirits from recognizing them and tricking them. This was the foundation for the Halloween practices of wearing masks especially the Jack-O’-Lanterns; a weird and bizarre face, was a traditional costume. The celebration of the Halloween was fraught with folktales, both in its origin and practices. The feast thus, prominently was a feast to celebrate the dead. The wearing of Jack O’Lantern was against a belief that Jack O’Lantern was a certain deceased man who was barred from heaven and earth and thus made to wander the earth with lantern and thus did play tricks on people. Again, other mask were worn but took on representation of witches, ghosts and somewhat monstrous beings.
Another common custom of the Halloween festival is the trick-or-treat practice. This tradition was a borrowing from the original belief of ghosts’ visits but now with a modern overtone. The trick and treat tradition is one where children go from home-to-home to seek for a treat with masks on, now usually the satirical mask of popular figures, actors, celebrities and so on and asking for a treat, especially offer of candies or they play a prank. So, they come in with the mantra: trick or treat which meant give me a treat or I play you a trick.
Today Halloween feast has experienced a lot of reforms but have since served as basis for many common social practices. Since Halloween was a religious practice in Druidism, the religion of the Celts which began from 2nd century BC to sometime around Second century AD. Until this time, this practice thrived but was really swallowed up with Pope Boniface IV in 7th century AD that supplanted this practice bringing the Christian feast of All Saints from May 13th to November 1st and bringing the feast of All Souls to 2nd of November to retain the celebrations of the dead associated with it and for allowing the Christian understanding of the dead to gulp the fetishism and myth of Halloween practices.
Even though Halloween has been transposed by a Christian feast and shaped thoroughly by modern cultures, its effects have remained almost indelible in western understanding of witchcraft, belief in supernatural forces, pageantries, some games like bobbling of apples in inter-house sports, festival visits, etc. These cultures have equally have their own share of effects of effects on the African understanding of some of these concepts and some of these influences have not been positive.
In modern western understanding, the concept of witchcraft came from the understanding a witch moved with a broom and a black cat is symbolic of witchcraft or a bad omen. This belief has had a way of tricking our hallowed African understanding of witchcraft too as one who has the ability to inflict ill on her victim or target. It has also made black a repugnant color and worse still, a black cat irrespective of the genetic component to be a bad omen. Similarly, Halloween spiraled the understanding of spiritual forces because of the belief associated with the deceased.
The celebration of Halloween which is still a practice in Britain, some parts of Europe and America, is one that has been modernized. Since children who go treat-or-tricking were sometimes given poisoned candies, children seldom then went outing. Instead, there is the contest who wears the most psychedelic and sometimes best clothes or mask. This probably has given room for modern pageantry and the like. More so, part of what was game of sack race, who ate fastest a bobbling apple were revivals from Halloween feasts.
Halloween has since remained a public holiday in America and some other countries but has lost its original emphasis. However, the effects of Halloween in modern cultures are ones that when not pruned would leave one with a distorted image of the relationship between the spiritual and the physical, between the living and the dead. Halloween as a religious concept may have influenced Christian understanding of the dead. The dead in Africa are dreaded with an unbridled fear, one not of respect alone but of fear of the unknown. This feast has equally influenced praying to the dead who have lived good lives. These are those that are believed not to trick us but treat us. The same is the basis of the cult of ancestor and ancestor worship, reincarnation and the like.
While the Christian supplant of the feast of All Saints and All souls have helped the African understanding of the dead and our obligation to them and the reverence that should be due to them, it has equally helped us to understand that life is in one continuum. Thus, at death, a person could best be understood as having transited and not annihilated (Cf. Wis 3:5). However, the irreligious part of the celebration which comes with wild, flamboyant celebrations bereft of depth meaning has continually desecrated our hallowed nature as people whose hope is beyond this world. Secular Halloween continues to inadvertently promote the make-belief that life after life is vain, but the Christian feasts of All Saints and All Souls seek to redirect our minds to our original goal and essence of living. While the world by secularism and feasts like Halloween tells us nothing is hallow in our lives, All Saints and All Souls hijacks us from this syllabus of errors. There is something still hallow in you. Modern Halloween: is it to still trick or treat you?
Sunday, October 24, 2010
No one wins it all
If you ask me what I detest most, I would probably say, injustice. This is so because; it is something that denies someone of self-actualization. But most often than not, justice is not best sought when one fights. What is due to one can be also sought without protest. The robbery of justice can be most felt when one knows he glaringly should not be denied what is withheld but one can similarly get a relief when he comes to the realization that no one wins it all.
The feeling of injustice would readily recall the feeling for justice. I don’t know if there is any such thing that tastes better than success. Success is so relishing that one may just think it is one’s birth right once one starts getting it. Justice can be similarly so elating because you have been given your rightful due. This is so true for all the good things of life. But I dare to reflect on this that is one due to all the good things always and never to bad things even if one has worked tremendously hard for it? But differently, if one has all good things without any bad does not make for better living? I think even the most assiduous persons are bound to get failures or challenges sometimes. Insofar we are contingent beings, we are bound to get the feeling of the other side of the coin, only then can we appreciate the face of the coin we have often had and seen. NO one wins it all.
A pretty good illustration to describe this and which will help us analyze the point in case is the storyline given in Alpacino’s Devil’s Advocate. In that classic mafia movie, there was a young successful Lawyer; Lomax who was hired by a big firm to be its legal defendant. The very reason he was hired was because he never lost any case in his over ten years of practicing. He was immersed in success and never lost even the most unlikely cases. But there came once a case which he was handling and he knew he was defending the cause of his company even though he knew he wasn’t on the right. Taking a recess after a particular session, he had to withdraw from the case and that was his first loss. The point was later revealed, that behind the numerous successes was the fact that a Godfather was interested in him for the making of the Devil’s advocate. His success was later revealed to be the antic of the Godfather. When he realized this, he opted to recline from this machination, but was quickly reminded that: ‘no one wins it all’.
In winning we are exposed to what it takes to become successful. We would certainly get many admirers and accolades. In winning, we become very often appropriative. We are more likely to fan our embers and massage our ego. We think that our merits have won us such wreath. Winning comes most often as a result of hard work, but hard work is not often a necessary condition for winning. Ultimately, any success and win is the oeuvre of the Grand artist, God. HE alone permits success according to how one could manage it. Success is very often functional. That is, it plays a particular role or point on the part of the recipient. It could play the role of exalting the bringer of success, help to strengthen the will of the recipient to appreciate the ultimate Bringer of success, it could serve as a medium to edify a community or serve some other remote purposes within the time frame of reception, the recipient, or the community in which the recipient lives. Thus, success is very instructive and does not come in isolation.
Success or winning should not often be perceived as something to make us arrogant because that would be misappropriating the essence of success. Once success strikes in us pride, then, we are having failure lurking around. This temptation often comes in because we often fall into the temptation of thinking success is the brainchild of ability and capability and even seeks to measure accomplishment. True this is to an extent, but not always. Any success or wining which is built on the foundation of success, once it experiences a whiff of failure may not be able to stand properly again. This is so because, it has been misleading built on the belief that one’s effort had been the prompts for it. Success I here would admit that can propel more success. The time one wins, the more he would want to win. So, winning is as contagious as any other virtue. No one would want to leave the acme of success to the nadir of failure. But only with the right perspective can one keep being on the pinnacle of winning. The more challenge is not in winning but in maintaining a win. This point brings us to the ambit of failure. Only failure can make us appreciate success and this is where we can talk of failure as also functional and not all bad.
Failure is in itself negative and so no one would wants to associate with it. But if we realize that failure plays an active role in realize success, then we can begin to appreciate the function of failure. Although failure is bad, but if there is no failure, we would not have been able to recognize success. Success has a function of making one humble. So when one is faced with failure, it gives him an opportunity to make a rethink about his plans and to re-strategize. For every man who fails once, he has the opportunity to see why he has fallen and then that like dialectics becomes a new thesis while in itself is an antithesis. This is the precise background of once bitten twice shy. Once a person has failed, he then has the impetus to forestall failure.
I do not have problem with failing. The problem I have is failing again. Failing once should be instructive enough and then it should help one attain success once longed for. I also think it is good for one to fail once and that is the only time success can be better appreciated and relished at that. History is decorated who stood on the platform of failure to attain success. Abraham Lincolm is the most common example invoked. From his profile, he was never deterred by the failures that punctuated his history. When one fails, he can be said to be lying down and when one is lying down what he does is generally thinking. This is the soul of success; activated thinking. No truly successful person has avoided failures or dramatic setbacks.
Be that as it may, failure should not mar belief in our potentials and powers even our goals. We must know that we all are in a period of self actualization. We are always becoming and so, we must know that the best is yet to come in life, come what may. In becoming, there is a character that can only be consistent with such a realization. For any person to be truly successful, he must be focused on the goal of action. He must have moral courage and the spirit of perseverance. We must be firm and resolute. We must be able to command a situation. It was US historian, Barbara Tuchman who in The March of Folly said: “The power to command frequently causes failure to think. The synopsis of our reflection is: never be afraid to fail, for then know success is in the offing but never aim at failure. Know too, no one wins it all, for in life we win some or lose some. No one wins it all and no one loses it all.
IKHIANOSIME, Frankl
The feeling of injustice would readily recall the feeling for justice. I don’t know if there is any such thing that tastes better than success. Success is so relishing that one may just think it is one’s birth right once one starts getting it. Justice can be similarly so elating because you have been given your rightful due. This is so true for all the good things of life. But I dare to reflect on this that is one due to all the good things always and never to bad things even if one has worked tremendously hard for it? But differently, if one has all good things without any bad does not make for better living? I think even the most assiduous persons are bound to get failures or challenges sometimes. Insofar we are contingent beings, we are bound to get the feeling of the other side of the coin, only then can we appreciate the face of the coin we have often had and seen. NO one wins it all.
A pretty good illustration to describe this and which will help us analyze the point in case is the storyline given in Alpacino’s Devil’s Advocate. In that classic mafia movie, there was a young successful Lawyer; Lomax who was hired by a big firm to be its legal defendant. The very reason he was hired was because he never lost any case in his over ten years of practicing. He was immersed in success and never lost even the most unlikely cases. But there came once a case which he was handling and he knew he was defending the cause of his company even though he knew he wasn’t on the right. Taking a recess after a particular session, he had to withdraw from the case and that was his first loss. The point was later revealed, that behind the numerous successes was the fact that a Godfather was interested in him for the making of the Devil’s advocate. His success was later revealed to be the antic of the Godfather. When he realized this, he opted to recline from this machination, but was quickly reminded that: ‘no one wins it all’.
In winning we are exposed to what it takes to become successful. We would certainly get many admirers and accolades. In winning, we become very often appropriative. We are more likely to fan our embers and massage our ego. We think that our merits have won us such wreath. Winning comes most often as a result of hard work, but hard work is not often a necessary condition for winning. Ultimately, any success and win is the oeuvre of the Grand artist, God. HE alone permits success according to how one could manage it. Success is very often functional. That is, it plays a particular role or point on the part of the recipient. It could play the role of exalting the bringer of success, help to strengthen the will of the recipient to appreciate the ultimate Bringer of success, it could serve as a medium to edify a community or serve some other remote purposes within the time frame of reception, the recipient, or the community in which the recipient lives. Thus, success is very instructive and does not come in isolation.
Success or winning should not often be perceived as something to make us arrogant because that would be misappropriating the essence of success. Once success strikes in us pride, then, we are having failure lurking around. This temptation often comes in because we often fall into the temptation of thinking success is the brainchild of ability and capability and even seeks to measure accomplishment. True this is to an extent, but not always. Any success or wining which is built on the foundation of success, once it experiences a whiff of failure may not be able to stand properly again. This is so because, it has been misleading built on the belief that one’s effort had been the prompts for it. Success I here would admit that can propel more success. The time one wins, the more he would want to win. So, winning is as contagious as any other virtue. No one would want to leave the acme of success to the nadir of failure. But only with the right perspective can one keep being on the pinnacle of winning. The more challenge is not in winning but in maintaining a win. This point brings us to the ambit of failure. Only failure can make us appreciate success and this is where we can talk of failure as also functional and not all bad.
Failure is in itself negative and so no one would wants to associate with it. But if we realize that failure plays an active role in realize success, then we can begin to appreciate the function of failure. Although failure is bad, but if there is no failure, we would not have been able to recognize success. Success has a function of making one humble. So when one is faced with failure, it gives him an opportunity to make a rethink about his plans and to re-strategize. For every man who fails once, he has the opportunity to see why he has fallen and then that like dialectics becomes a new thesis while in itself is an antithesis. This is the precise background of once bitten twice shy. Once a person has failed, he then has the impetus to forestall failure.
I do not have problem with failing. The problem I have is failing again. Failing once should be instructive enough and then it should help one attain success once longed for. I also think it is good for one to fail once and that is the only time success can be better appreciated and relished at that. History is decorated who stood on the platform of failure to attain success. Abraham Lincolm is the most common example invoked. From his profile, he was never deterred by the failures that punctuated his history. When one fails, he can be said to be lying down and when one is lying down what he does is generally thinking. This is the soul of success; activated thinking. No truly successful person has avoided failures or dramatic setbacks.
Be that as it may, failure should not mar belief in our potentials and powers even our goals. We must know that we all are in a period of self actualization. We are always becoming and so, we must know that the best is yet to come in life, come what may. In becoming, there is a character that can only be consistent with such a realization. For any person to be truly successful, he must be focused on the goal of action. He must have moral courage and the spirit of perseverance. We must be firm and resolute. We must be able to command a situation. It was US historian, Barbara Tuchman who in The March of Folly said: “The power to command frequently causes failure to think. The synopsis of our reflection is: never be afraid to fail, for then know success is in the offing but never aim at failure. Know too, no one wins it all, for in life we win some or lose some. No one wins it all and no one loses it all.
IKHIANOSIME, Frankl
Thursday, August 5, 2010
WHY POINT AT ME SO?
WHY POINT AT ME SO?
Why point at me so?
Why do you poke me as though I am
a worm and no man?
Is my failing not nature’s defect?
You point at me with one finger but others
turn to you with equal accusing prick.
That my mouth smells and cooks spittle,
is not your nose a running tap inviting flies to drink?
My legs are thin but they help me stand.
My head suffer lakpalakpa but does my
brain leak like the fisherman’s basket?
My color is black but is my blood black?
Is nature not a mother-cheat on me as it is on you?
And is one cheating more than the other?
Cheating is cheating. There is no holy cheating
So why point at me so?
You say I am too tall and without sense
but you call me to remove cobwebs from
the gliding skies of your room but you cannot.
You are a book wizard and live on wild books
Knowing all knowledge like Zeus
But you ask me to paddle you through the waters.
You ask me to get you on my back so you don’t sink
Book whiz kid! Do your books not teach you swimming?
Your books make you more a kid than a king.
Why point at me so?
Is it not better we carry each other on our backs?
Are backs meant for sleeping and not for carrying?
Is patience not more a nurse and a healing balm?
are the bricks for our broken fence not in our own hands?
If I am not weak can you know you are strong?
Then, why point at me so?
IKHIANOSIME, Frankl
Why point at me so?
Why do you poke me as though I am
a worm and no man?
Is my failing not nature’s defect?
You point at me with one finger but others
turn to you with equal accusing prick.
That my mouth smells and cooks spittle,
is not your nose a running tap inviting flies to drink?
My legs are thin but they help me stand.
My head suffer lakpalakpa but does my
brain leak like the fisherman’s basket?
My color is black but is my blood black?
Is nature not a mother-cheat on me as it is on you?
And is one cheating more than the other?
Cheating is cheating. There is no holy cheating
So why point at me so?
You say I am too tall and without sense
but you call me to remove cobwebs from
the gliding skies of your room but you cannot.
You are a book wizard and live on wild books
Knowing all knowledge like Zeus
But you ask me to paddle you through the waters.
You ask me to get you on my back so you don’t sink
Book whiz kid! Do your books not teach you swimming?
Your books make you more a kid than a king.
Why point at me so?
Is it not better we carry each other on our backs?
Are backs meant for sleeping and not for carrying?
Is patience not more a nurse and a healing balm?
are the bricks for our broken fence not in our own hands?
If I am not weak can you know you are strong?
Then, why point at me so?
IKHIANOSIME, Frankl
Friday, July 30, 2010
Tales of a Black Politics
TALES OF A ‘BLACK’ POLITICS
Democracy is a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder, and dispensing a sort of equality to equals and unequals alike.
-Plato (428 BC - 347BC)
I
f we are to go by Abraham Lincoln’s definition of democracy as; “government of the people, by the people and for the people”, then Nigeria’s democracy certainly would be an exclusion, but if we are to go by the French Philosopher and writer; Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s claim that: “In the strict sense of the term, there has never been a true democracy, and there never will be. It is contrary to the natural order that the greater number should govern and the smaller number be governed”, then we could understand why the drollery in Nigeria’s politics still pass it for democracy or call it pseudo-democracy. There is no gain saying the fact that politics in Nigeria is a product of surprises and counter surprises. It is one that virtually has a new face with each dispensation and a perfection of its malfeasance. I would want to say for the sake of respect, Nigeria’s politics be with a name. It is bad enough we have a polluted politics, but it certainly is a worse situation when it has no name. It is against this backdrop I want to call our politics, ‘Black’ to at least accommodate description and then possible solutions.
Politics is one area that gives identity to a people and in our case; it has given Nigeria an international identity. This is so because it is the most conspicuous area where we can either project our image internationally or mar our integrity by it. Politics is like a message dropped on facebook; it is open to everyone and subject to everyone’s comment. Thus, one cannot afford to mortgage his integrity on the altar of technology. This fact we may not have considered with a pinch of salt and what we have today in the international world is a product of that. Nigeria because of her politics is rated so dubious and corrupt. I am sure the average Westerner thinks of a Nigerian as a cheat unless proven otherwise. It is disheartening to know however that despite this sullied image we have, Nigerians have not probably made any frantic move to change the status quo and any structure put to attend to this is corrupted even before operation. This is what is called ‘Black’ politics.
The derogation ‘Black’ is being used to couch our politics because, it is increasingly clear that the problem with our politics is not because we have not received appropriately the proper structure and frame of democratic politics but because, Africans’ practice of it is in the characteristic way of an African. It used to be a typical argument that ‘Black’ is beauty, golden and symbol of pride but more and more this argument cannot be tenable as those who even project this argument make it counterproductive by their attitude towards this colour which we gratuitously have from God. ‘Black’ now has come to stand for anything warped, an aberration, a corruption or a problem. Thus to use black to label a thing can no longer accommodate the carriage of pride, beauty or golden. Instead, black evokes a negative imagery. The roots of this are arguably imperialistic but its growth and popularity has been a product of African character.
African politics is characteristically dubious, helmed with a fevour for power-fixation and with the governing propensities of egotism, selfishness, nepotism and impropriety. The typical African craves for power because he wants to railroad into fame and prosperity through the ladder of politics. He believes that, that is the opportunity to share from the national cake which they have not baked. In African politics, the bullet is stronger than the ballot and one where there is a tyranny of the minority and the majority live is squalor, one where the elite continually thrive at the cost of the poor. This is not typically human, it is typically Black. This is the name by which our politics can then better be known; Black. In Nigeria, the bane of our political fiasco is the Senate. Here I wish to analyse two events which have further justified the derogation ‘Black’ politics for Nigeria.
Apart from the fact that holding a political office in Nigeria is the quickest means of saying goodbye to penury in one’s life time, being in the senate is a threshold of securing same not only for yourself but for your children’s children. In recent politics within the senate, they are no longer content with their money bags but want also immunity like state governors, the vice-president and the president. For them, the senate should pass a bill to that effect which would allow them be free from prosecution while in office. The point is not just the request but the implications and what that ultimately betrays. First, it has laid bare the fact that we are in a nation where privileges swallow up duties and obligation. It is very clear too that our honourable senators are looking for a law to back their thievishness. To have passed a bill of that sort is to have reduced the rule of law a complete pun in the whimsical jamboree of the senators. It is dispiriting enough that laws are rarely passed and that senators unabashedly snooze away at their sessions in full view of public cameras, then, they blatantly ask for immunity for other more culpable misdeeds. Counterproductively, the senate which is supposed to be the organ which facilitates development is now that which clogs her wheels.
If the senate is granted immunity then it becomes only wise that commissioners and the members in the states’ houses of senate be granted same. At least, if it is a viable argument that the senators need it so as not to be distracted, this is equally a valid argument for state houses of assembly members. By a down slope, all political office holders need it and by the rule of fairness, all Nigerians need it. If this is pursued to its logical conclusion, will this not be self-annihilative? What other generous description can we call such a politics if not black politics?
Another recent tale which has further stiffened the already copious indications of our political malignancy, or call it, politricks is the fact that the two chambers of this same house are strutting for superiority. This struggle for supremacy is one that is no called for as the constitution is clear how things should run. This struggle somewhat blinded their eyes in recent times that the supplementary budget the president is suppose to present to the senate was deferred because of a struggle for a host chamber. This incident which is a revelation of the discord within the house is one even the international community has decried. It is said that the causes of a war are first internal disunity and then external aggression. Our politics have provided us sufficient internal disunity; only an external aggression which a snap of the finger can spark off can bring our political frame on her knees. Is this not black politics?
Our black politics has soiled both our communal integrity and our individual ego as Nigerians. But who will bell ‘Black’ politics? Unless, politics transcends personal gains and interests to common good, politics in Nigeria would remain a product of black selfishness and greed. Unless our black politics is transformed, our political history and democratic practice would remain at the level of agreed buffoonery and humorous orchestration. Black politics would continually widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots and more and more crucify the prompts for honest politics. Unless, black politics is re-baptized, our international image would remain at the mercy of austerity and any effort for rebranding is a contraditio-in-terminus. The rebaptism must begin from the top to the bottom; from the leaders to the followers. Unless, there are corporate signs of seriousness, even the individual fight would remain a case of dry wood falling on dry wood. This is the challenge. It is our bounden duty therefore, to check if we are ‘black’ in character and see how we can begin the change we await.
IKHIANOSIME, Frankl
Democracy is a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder, and dispensing a sort of equality to equals and unequals alike.
-Plato (428 BC - 347BC)
I
f we are to go by Abraham Lincoln’s definition of democracy as; “government of the people, by the people and for the people”, then Nigeria’s democracy certainly would be an exclusion, but if we are to go by the French Philosopher and writer; Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s claim that: “In the strict sense of the term, there has never been a true democracy, and there never will be. It is contrary to the natural order that the greater number should govern and the smaller number be governed”, then we could understand why the drollery in Nigeria’s politics still pass it for democracy or call it pseudo-democracy. There is no gain saying the fact that politics in Nigeria is a product of surprises and counter surprises. It is one that virtually has a new face with each dispensation and a perfection of its malfeasance. I would want to say for the sake of respect, Nigeria’s politics be with a name. It is bad enough we have a polluted politics, but it certainly is a worse situation when it has no name. It is against this backdrop I want to call our politics, ‘Black’ to at least accommodate description and then possible solutions.
Politics is one area that gives identity to a people and in our case; it has given Nigeria an international identity. This is so because it is the most conspicuous area where we can either project our image internationally or mar our integrity by it. Politics is like a message dropped on facebook; it is open to everyone and subject to everyone’s comment. Thus, one cannot afford to mortgage his integrity on the altar of technology. This fact we may not have considered with a pinch of salt and what we have today in the international world is a product of that. Nigeria because of her politics is rated so dubious and corrupt. I am sure the average Westerner thinks of a Nigerian as a cheat unless proven otherwise. It is disheartening to know however that despite this sullied image we have, Nigerians have not probably made any frantic move to change the status quo and any structure put to attend to this is corrupted even before operation. This is what is called ‘Black’ politics.
The derogation ‘Black’ is being used to couch our politics because, it is increasingly clear that the problem with our politics is not because we have not received appropriately the proper structure and frame of democratic politics but because, Africans’ practice of it is in the characteristic way of an African. It used to be a typical argument that ‘Black’ is beauty, golden and symbol of pride but more and more this argument cannot be tenable as those who even project this argument make it counterproductive by their attitude towards this colour which we gratuitously have from God. ‘Black’ now has come to stand for anything warped, an aberration, a corruption or a problem. Thus to use black to label a thing can no longer accommodate the carriage of pride, beauty or golden. Instead, black evokes a negative imagery. The roots of this are arguably imperialistic but its growth and popularity has been a product of African character.
African politics is characteristically dubious, helmed with a fevour for power-fixation and with the governing propensities of egotism, selfishness, nepotism and impropriety. The typical African craves for power because he wants to railroad into fame and prosperity through the ladder of politics. He believes that, that is the opportunity to share from the national cake which they have not baked. In African politics, the bullet is stronger than the ballot and one where there is a tyranny of the minority and the majority live is squalor, one where the elite continually thrive at the cost of the poor. This is not typically human, it is typically Black. This is the name by which our politics can then better be known; Black. In Nigeria, the bane of our political fiasco is the Senate. Here I wish to analyse two events which have further justified the derogation ‘Black’ politics for Nigeria.
Apart from the fact that holding a political office in Nigeria is the quickest means of saying goodbye to penury in one’s life time, being in the senate is a threshold of securing same not only for yourself but for your children’s children. In recent politics within the senate, they are no longer content with their money bags but want also immunity like state governors, the vice-president and the president. For them, the senate should pass a bill to that effect which would allow them be free from prosecution while in office. The point is not just the request but the implications and what that ultimately betrays. First, it has laid bare the fact that we are in a nation where privileges swallow up duties and obligation. It is very clear too that our honourable senators are looking for a law to back their thievishness. To have passed a bill of that sort is to have reduced the rule of law a complete pun in the whimsical jamboree of the senators. It is dispiriting enough that laws are rarely passed and that senators unabashedly snooze away at their sessions in full view of public cameras, then, they blatantly ask for immunity for other more culpable misdeeds. Counterproductively, the senate which is supposed to be the organ which facilitates development is now that which clogs her wheels.
If the senate is granted immunity then it becomes only wise that commissioners and the members in the states’ houses of senate be granted same. At least, if it is a viable argument that the senators need it so as not to be distracted, this is equally a valid argument for state houses of assembly members. By a down slope, all political office holders need it and by the rule of fairness, all Nigerians need it. If this is pursued to its logical conclusion, will this not be self-annihilative? What other generous description can we call such a politics if not black politics?
Another recent tale which has further stiffened the already copious indications of our political malignancy, or call it, politricks is the fact that the two chambers of this same house are strutting for superiority. This struggle for supremacy is one that is no called for as the constitution is clear how things should run. This struggle somewhat blinded their eyes in recent times that the supplementary budget the president is suppose to present to the senate was deferred because of a struggle for a host chamber. This incident which is a revelation of the discord within the house is one even the international community has decried. It is said that the causes of a war are first internal disunity and then external aggression. Our politics have provided us sufficient internal disunity; only an external aggression which a snap of the finger can spark off can bring our political frame on her knees. Is this not black politics?
Our black politics has soiled both our communal integrity and our individual ego as Nigerians. But who will bell ‘Black’ politics? Unless, politics transcends personal gains and interests to common good, politics in Nigeria would remain a product of black selfishness and greed. Unless our black politics is transformed, our political history and democratic practice would remain at the level of agreed buffoonery and humorous orchestration. Black politics would continually widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots and more and more crucify the prompts for honest politics. Unless, black politics is re-baptized, our international image would remain at the mercy of austerity and any effort for rebranding is a contraditio-in-terminus. The rebaptism must begin from the top to the bottom; from the leaders to the followers. Unless, there are corporate signs of seriousness, even the individual fight would remain a case of dry wood falling on dry wood. This is the challenge. It is our bounden duty therefore, to check if we are ‘black’ in character and see how we can begin the change we await.
IKHIANOSIME, Frankl
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Fear is in the eye of the Beholder
FEAR IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER
I am afraid to think what I have done; Look on't again I dare not…. Infirm of purpose! Give me the daggers. The sleeping and the dead are but as pictures; 'tis the eye of childhood that fears a painted devil. If he do bleed I'll gild the faces of the grooms withal; For it must seem their guilt.
William Shakespeare (1564-1616)
The human emotion of fear is one of the human demons as well as one of her angels. It plays the paradoxical role of being remedial and destructive. It is both a stimulus and a response. This demon so heavily of concern is a common denominator to man. It is only a fool who would say never a time has he feared. This human cracker is so influential in man that excess of it could wreck a whole man and the absence of it could similarly wreck a man. But this demon has no physical existence like other human emotions and so it is only in the eye of the beholder. But since this phenomenal enigma is both good and bad, what sort of fear is needed or does it remain purely a figment of our imagination and really could and should be avoided. Can we do without fear? If fear is no less than an effigy, and could be highly destabilizing, why do we still behold it? To behold a thing shows a conscious desire. Do we really desire fear or it is an imposing impostor? In this work, we shall be looking into the character and nature of fear and then tell what kind should be beheld.
Psychologists have described fear as an innate emotion and it is often a response to a threat. Fear is quite similar to anxiety but the difference is while the former is with a threat, the latter is without a threat. Fear is related to specific behaviours of escape and avoidance. More so, fear always relates to future events, such as worsening of a situation, or continuation of a situation that is unacceptable. Fear could be an instant reaction to something happening. (Cf. Wikepidia Encyclopedia). Fear is often preceded by astonishment and often means something taken by surprise. Fear is not a phenomenon that grips an individual alone; it can also grip a community or a body. In this way, personal fears are compounded by social influence or mass hysteria. From a certain Gallup poll conducted in the US, it was found that a majority fear terrorism. In this case, terrorism becomes a mass hysteria.
But what causes fear? Fear is a result of learning. Supposing a person goes to swim and almost got drowned but was rescued. He may likely develop fear for water. That fear is a product of the swimming experience. So, we say that such fear is a product of learning. This is the same with children who seeing fire a beautiful sight, and so what to behold it; their attempt and the subsequent hurt makes them scared of fire and naturally learn from that experience that fire hurts. This is what psychology calls fear-conditioning. Apart from the fact that fear is learned, it is part of human nature. The human nature probably has fear as a constitutive element.
There are varieties of fear. Fear could be manifested in the form of terror which is an intense or an overwhelming fright. It can also be manifested in phobias which are a strong dislike for situation or things. We also have paranoia which is more of a psychological disorder caused by distrust or cynicism. We could also have personal fear which is what could be called house-hold fear. While fear is generally understood to be a condition of anxiety of a threat or apprehension caused by the presence of a threat, it could more fittingly be used be used to describe our personal fear, since personal fear is a common denominator. While personal fear, a brand of fear is both common and maybe healthy, the other graduated versions of personal fears are unhealthy.
Personal fears are products of anxiety. In life, we are shaped by our past and what the future would hold for us. We are often clouded with the air of becoming relevant, not getting cut of our goals and ambitions, being a misfit and all what not. These are what yoke to form our personal fears. These personal fears serve as restraints for unbridled passions and motivation or impulse to conquering the demon of fear. Far from being a case of mere denunciation, this capturing goes to tell that personal fear are often created and not necessarily borne because of practical dangers. It is the fear of a thought danger that is personified and animated and which we now in turn dread. This illogic of a movement from a probability to certainty is one that comes to generally influence how people come to view life. At first sight, we think a particular thing may go wrong (probability) and all of a sudden, we are afraid, then, personifying it (certainty). Personal fears are compounded by social influence. Society gives false image to certain structures and things and so this false belief is what comes to influence the slant of our fear. This kind of fear may lead to delusion if taken to some extreme. However, personal fears have more positive sides than negative.
There is still another kind of fear which is closely mixed with deep respect. This is the kind we give to authorities or people who are our superiors for the sake of their position, and sometimes not because we necessarily want to accord them such but merely because of what they are capable of influencing in us positively or negatively. This kind of fear is one many have argued usually regulates morality, religion, civil and religious authorities and arguably, God. The point which is not far-fetched here is that such respect or loyalty factored by fear is not authentic and so merely skin-deep and a deception. This kind of fear is more pathological than rational. It is one that leaves a person less himself. It is a product of infantile mentality. This can better be called infantile fear.
Infantile fear is one that guides the obedience of regulations when a person may not be convinced of the meaning or true value. He may merely obey the law and once he observes the regulation or law loses its grip, he does away with the law. The direct understanding is that this law was not hitherto borne from a deep conviction of the law but because of the end we want to achieve which we may be convinced of. Similarly, many people believe in God and obey certain moral laws because they believe they want to gain heaven and never want to suffer the damnation of eternal punishment. Infantile fear generally does not bear good fruits. It does not bear good fruits because; the actions were deceptive or feigned. This kind of fear is a power inhibitor. We limit ourselves by such fear; we cease to become or develop with this kind of fear. Man is a process being and infantile fear inhibits this process. This approach to life, religion, God and even death yields repressive results. This kind of fear makes us approach those things with the lenses of illusion and delusion. This is the kind of fear that is unhealthy.
Once an infantile fear is discovered, it behooves on us to see the reason why we feigned obeisance and see how it could be corrected. If I go to mass because I don’t want to be queried of religious negligence or poor spirituality and just perfunctorily attend, then, I may just not get the graces due to the Holy mass. I may just be losing at both ends: not resting well and not gaining the graces of mass. While I may end up getting a pass for a good spirituality, I would not be able to live this out. Infantile fear stunts our rationality and challenges us to be authentic. Fear could only be conquered if we are able to look with a proverbial third-eye that we are afraid of. A deep pry would just reveal that we are yet to know what we want. And unless, we get at the spirit of a thing, that thing may just only gain for us surface value. Such fears continue to remain False Evidence Appearing Real and only in our eyes. While personal fear not too far taken could be healthy, infantile fear; fear borne out of feigned obeisance is unhealthy. And while both are in our eyes: the former could be beheld and the latter repudiated.
IKHIANOSIME, Frankl
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)