Posts
Louis
Egbe Mbua
It entered into my mind
that certain individuals are heavily marked by destiny – good or bad; and that
the rise and fall of these remarkable people may have a bearing as to their
very existence and actions. The rise and fall (or fall and rise) of a man is as
old as the beginning of the times. What initiates this event has always been an
origination of animated debates, gossips and other explanations since the art
of conversation was invented when nobody was anybody.
The trick of the
matter, one should suppose, is to exemplify the case with those living at the
time, the contemporaries of the era. Others employ an historical rear view to
explain human destiny, dipping and diving -- into the past to conjure up the
future, to bring up light in areas of grey and darkness. However, it is only
when one is living the times of the day that one may be in a pole position of
undisputed strength and knowledge to investigate current events, and the fast
currents that drag the human race to their ultimate destination. Whether that
destination will be heaven or hell is dependent upon the point of definitive
departure, the manner and the force of personality of that individual in the
driving seat and, above all, the prime condition of the vehicle through which
that road is being circuitously navigated.
The way may be rough,
rugged and uninviting but if the man is destined to reach safely, then we may
agree that that individual is destined for a greater good – or bad. On the
other hand, if that person reaches a road block and is obstructed, do we
concede that he is doomed? And would one say that the entire vehicle is
destined for destruction? Let the reader follow the train of thought.
When Obama won the
American Presidency in November 2008, it was widely hailed as the event of the
century -- if not the millennium -- because it broke down the colour bar that
has benighted this world for half a millennium; the end of racism was here; and
that substance and talent have prevailed over superficiality and mediocrity.
The entire planet was a light, brimming with optimism. Pessimism had been
irrevocably destroyed, presumably. Or is it? However, recent events appear to
have dampened the euphoria of the prospecting world of Utopia. There are myriad
of reasons that may be put forward in relation to these strange occurrences.
President Obama’s background and his charting the landscape of the American
society to reach the pinnacle of power are well documented so one will not
belabour the reader on this known matter. The point of contention is whether
his path is running true to his chosen aim.
As a person, who lived
in the Federated West & East Cameroon States days, and is now living in the
UK, my experiences dictate that Obama’s health care reforms are one of the
greatest events in American history. Any
group of people who have signed up to be called a nation have the moral
responsibility to ensure that all are equally exposed to the benefits of that
nation. It is true that some are more gifted than others, and that others are stronger
in various spheres than others. However, it is futile to believe that those who
are less fortunate do not contribute to society. Contribution to society is not
only material as some may suppose. Consequently, that a person may not possess
material wealth does not mean that person does not bring his own gift to the
table. The simple act of exercising one’s right to vote for the right leader in
a free, credible, and fair election is on its own a great contribution; that
people bring forth human beings into the world may be considered more important
than having a million pounds and deliberately spending the entire lot or loot! On
their own! The rational for a national health care is to ensure that even those
who may not contribute materially may also have the opportunity to play their
part as destiny assigns.
At the same time,
societies differ in their philosophical outlook; and that each nation has a
beginning that defines their destination. But if we agree that there are
aspects that are universal in shaping our destiny then we may judge that, the
philosophy of a nation may not be always right as long as it violates these
universal norms. If America believes in individualism, survival of the fittest
in entrepreneurial skill, talent, and energy, that is fine only to a certain
limit because even if one is talented, it is clear that we may not reach our
destiny on our own without an added push from other individuals and the nation.
Therefore, if we accept that we achieve as a result of nationhood then it is
clear that those who one may consider as the low of the lows contributed in
their own ways. Thus, it is unwise to oppose a universal health system. It
seems, thus, to the writer that those who oppose the universal health care law
by the Obama regime have a sinister political agenda because the idea that only
individuals may achieve and as a result, can afford health care is false. On
this count, I believe Obama won. Although he may have paid a heavy price, he
will win in the long term for himself and the American people. With this
achievement, he has shaped his destiny and those of his people for a long time
to come; and that their future well-being is assured.
The troubling aspect in
the American scenario can be placed as a sign on the doors of a kind of modern
misunderstanding. There are those who have resigned as to refuse the acceptance
of a man of African origin occupying the White House. It takes about five
generations to come to term within a deeply institutionalised vice; another
five to realise the large moral fault that it creates; five more to rectify and
bridge the gaping obstacle. It is of importance that those destined to lead a
nation in these circumstances have a thorough understanding in this sphere.
That one may be voted President of a multiracial society does not remove this
hindrance or cancel out past and traumatic events. The evil of racism does not affect only the
oppressed in a negative way but has the intrinsic danger of warping the minds
of those who never felt the pangs of discrimination. A man who knows not
discrimination may be falsely led to believe that he has the birth right to
persecute those who had had the sad experience of exclusion.
This effect may not be
conscious or in-born but that one is shaped by what they have been brought up
to believe, and what they know from the past.
So, the natural instinct or intuition is that he challenges and opposes
a policy not on its merits but that the new order is presumed to be inferior to
his own thinking – a totally false assumption. Those who adhere to this view
cut across all sections of society, from the commoner to the King, from workers
to their leaders. At the top of the echelon, the exponents of this kind of
thought are hard to identify because they would want to protect their power. As
a result, they may not reveal their hand in an open manner but may use other
subtle means to undermine a noble undertaking of their imagined inferiority of
others. A man who turns up at a rally with a gun, pretending to fight for his
freedom against another man who says and practises freedom may actually be the
carrier of the views of those at the top and within the structures of power. It
follows that to shape one’s destiny; a speedy intuitive stock has to be taken
as to who is actually for freedom – irrespective of race – and who pretends to
be for freedom and the well-being of their nation. To chart the difficult path to one’s destiny
is not purely political as some might be led to believe-- seemingly. It is a
sum total of where you started, who you met on the way, which road one takes,
who they are and what you think of them when you reach your final destination
on a personal note.
There are two kinds of
destinations in this argument: One
destination that is borne out of personal ambition and the other resting on the
aspirations of a people. The former, if one attains it, is temporal, the latter
eternal. The following is that attaining the personal without achieving the universal
amounts to failure. Again, if one were to attain the universal without
attaining the personal, it poses a problem because how is one to attain the
universal without individual success? And which of the said aspirations comes
first? The answer is that one cannot extricate himself from both because one
cannot attain universality if one does not survive. The point is that to chart
a destiny, one must do both all at once, to keep a close look at your chosen destination;
and that of those you wish to lead; and that what good you wish for yourself
should be that same gains you should wish for the entire people. Since the
entire nation is on your radar screen, one should not be unscrupulous as to who
serves, or to reject who can play a part. Therefore, those who arrive safely at
their destination are individuals who may be able to know, by intuition, logic
or otherwise, as to what policies and principles are right; and to choose those
who know that what they do and where they are going is the right way.
No comments:
Post a Comment