By Tope Lanre Bello
The human world manifests the same reality and will not seek our permission to celebrate itself in the magnificence of its endless varieties. Civility is a sensible attribute in this kind of world we have; narrowness of heart and mind is not – Chinua Achebe, 1996.
Achebe’s speech quoted above is a call to reject the notion of universality of experience. More than twenty years after the late Nigeria’s most celebrated novelist delivered the speech, a lot has changed to alter our perception of the reality of the world – most importantly, Information Communication Technology.
ICT has greatly enhanced globalisation and the idea of the world as a global village is increasingly becoming daring. The internet has enriched our appreciation of differences in cultures and beliefs. Unlike Alexander, the Great who erroneously believed he had conquered the whole world while in actual fact, the farthest he had got was India; our generation cannot afford to bask in such ignorance because of the enormous pool of information, facilitated by technology, available at our disposal.
The world is now in our palm. We cannot feign ignorance to the fact that there are around eight billion human beings in the world with several differing cultural backgrounds and experiences which have informed their beliefs, aspirations and worldview.
Yet, despite the foregoing, most people still live lives, think and act as if the physical and social spaces they interact with are the whole world. When confronted with seemingly improbable arguments or points of view, they are prone to easily, even promptly, say ‘nay’.
A Yoruba proverb says ‘he that has not got to another father’s farm will cheerfully boast that his father has the largest farm in the universe.’ This is the danger of a ‘single story, ‘borrowing from the title of Adichie’s famous speech. Had Adichie’s roommate been told by another American that English was the official language of Nigeria, she might have argued and said nay to a fact.
I had been taught in Government class and at other platforms that the United States practised the presidential system of government and that the presidential system emphasises separation of power. I was therefore shocked the day my friend (name withheld) told me that the Vice President of the USA is also the president of the US Senate. I called him all sorts of nasty names ranging from ‘fool’ to ‘moron’ because as I thought then, the United States of America was the symbol of the democratic world. I was so sure of my correctness that I did not even bother to check the internet. The argument took place in 2015 and so, such arguments had already become needless because of the internet. I later checked: I was wrong; he was right.
Notwithstanding the massive evidence available to our generation, many people have still not been able to comprehend the fact that the world is large and that universality of experience is a mirage. It is for this purpose that many are always quick to say ‘nay’ or counter an argument that they deem improbable. They seem not to be aware that the world is vast and that experiences differ. The lethal dimension of this “narrowness of heart,” using Achebe’s words, is what Nobel Laureate Soyinka attacks as “if you do not accept that I’m right, I have a right to kill you”.
Narrowness of mind-set is mostly evident in the display of religiosity and this is a universal phenomenon, perhaps the only reality that is universal (besides death, of course!). From the Pharisees’ prejudice (in the Christian Bible) to the persecution of the earliest Christians to the Inquisition to Jihad to Crusades to modern day fundamentalism, what we have is the sentiment of extreme sense of rightness (of self) and wrongness (of the other).
The most unfortunate dimension to these extremisms is the underlying notion of ‘I am right and I have a right to kill you if you do not share my view.’ And the question is how many lives have been lost to this barbarity? Yet, there are more than eight billion people in this world with differing religious views. The human world will not seek our permission to celebrate itself in the magnificence of its endless varieties, said Achebe. Our duty as a human race is to join in the celebration of the varieties of our reality. After all, do the English people not say variety is the spice of life?
My argument is that we must not be too quick to discountenance another’s opinion, position or belief. The fact that the ‘self’ is right does not mean the ‘other’ is wrong. Sometimes, and, in fact, more often than not, reality is multifaceted. An Igbo proverb says, “when one thing stands, there is another thing standing beside it.” So rather than saying the ‘other’ is wrong, the most correct statement would be ‘I am right; you may be right as well.’ I do not, in any way, advocate that every proposition is correct.
What I advocate is a little bit of hesitation before writing off an argument, a belief, an opinion or position. A little bit of research will make enormous sense. Everybody deserves the benefit of the doubt. In the case of metaphysical discourses, the best course to take is to celebrate our differences, creating for ourselves, therefore, unity in diversity
*Bello is a social commentator and literary critic. The article was first published on his blog in 2019.
Tobi Idowu 