Prayers of a Godless Man - II

All hail! October comes bearing gifts.

I earlier this evening joined the Makerere Debating Union (https://www.facebook.com/Makerere-Debating-Union-185436114825668/timeline/) in its weekly Mak-Debate-Forum, where the young debators were ratiocinating over the recent contentious Constitutional-Court injunction on Special Interest Groups’ representation in the convocation of the Uganda National Parliament.

Discourse steadily mounted to a crescendo of impassioned opinions advanced by each subsequent speaker, with positions ranging from the more moderate need to revisit statutory provisions on affirmative action for Women, the ability of Youth to contest open parliamentary seats, the inherent allegiance of Army legislators to the incumbent party; to more extremist stances like comparisons between MPs and the legendary ‘barking dogs without teeth’ summed up by proposals to have Parliament altogether dissolved and the veiled dictatorship presiding over the country unmasked for what it truly is!

As for myself, I had a few seconds to weigh-in briefly at the end of day’s business, with my extempore comments enjoining a broadening of debate to look at the functionality of the Nation-State as a model of government premised on Westminster democracy; on the historical imbalances tied to gender and age world-over, as well as the existence of patriarchy, patronage and paternalism as toppings to Africa’s democratic cake.

The sitting ended with a round of personal introductions from attendees, of whom the last was a lean and dusky young-man clad in a fully-buttoned black Mao-suit, complete with an air of disarming solemnity, who duly named himself Joseph Gonza Okello (https://www.facebook.com/josephgonza.okelloorsino?fref=ts), presently running the Union’s Office of Public Speech.

Okello went ahead to declare himself a ‘Cosmopolitan citizen of the earth’, whose ‘calling’ in life was to give justice to the world’s minorities and end humanity’s vale of tears.

He tacitly, though categorically, criticized those that’d introduced themselves as belonging to particular ethnicities and nationalities, calling on all to abandon such ‘narrow’ labels and embrace man’s universal identity. He also invited anyone that’d like to continue the conversation for a tête-à-tête afterward.

As was the case, I had some extra-time on my hands and saw no reason not to engage this self-proclaimed ‘universalist’ in a ‘friendly parley’ …

I walked up to him;

‘Bwana Gonza, thanks for the good work you fellows are doing …’

He peered at me quizzically, suspiciously ...

‘Oh – you mean as the Debate Union Council …’

‘Sure, as an action team, you lads and lasses are quite on top of things …’

‘Haha. Lads and lasses. But kind of you to say so …,’ he laughed lightly.

‘Aside of that, Gonza, I was intrigued by your introduction of self …’

‘Oh, you mean as a cosmopolitan …?’

‘Precisely. What the heck do you mean by that?’

‘Hehe … I see you are shocked …’

‘What does cosmopolitan mean?’

‘It means someone without bounds, without limits …’

‘Limits to what …? To morals … To wealth…’

‘Without limits to the human experience. I feel that by defining ourselves in a narrow sense; as Itesot, as Ugandans, as Africans, we miss out a lot on life …’

‘So Gonza, you are Itesot …’

‘No. I am cosmopolitan. By the way, I am not a consequentialist. I don’t merely dislike tribal enclaves for the direct divisive impact they impute. I am more concerned about the fullness of human experience they cheat us out of …’

‘But I mean, you are born ethnically Itesot …’

‘No. I am born a human being …’

‘Fine. We all are. But what language did you learn to speak first?’

‘Atesot.’

‘So Atesot is your mother tongue ...?’

‘Yes. But that doesn’t mean I should limit myself to it …’

‘I agree. But if Atesot is your mother-tongue, then Itesot is your mother-culture …’

‘Not necessarily …’

‘No, not necessarily. But essentially, it should be. There are normative values unique to the Itesot culture that you still hold today …’

‘No. The values I was taught are universal. Love, kindness, friendship … they apply to all cultures.’

‘Yes. They apply to all. But with a nuanced element of the Itesot cultural experience …’

‘No. No nuances. Give me an example of a nuance …’

‘Ahhhh … I can’t point out any particular one…’

‘You see …’

‘Yes. I admit you have me there … So, you think all men must abandon their subjective identities?’

‘Yes. I am a student of Ethics and Humanities; we call that ethno-centrism … The late Obote also pointed out that the danger with a focus on ethnicity is national atomization …’

‘Is it a bad thing to acknowledge my culture or nation of birth …?’

‘Not necessarily. But you ran the risk of alienating others.’

‘Isn’t the risk assumed? Not all ethno-centric people are hateful of non-clansmen …’

‘The risk is in not knowing where to stop. Nations break into tribes. Tribes into clans, clans into families … the ripple-effect is endless. It’s best to shift focus from these sub-units to what we all have in common – humanity!’

‘So humanity is what we have in common ...?’

‘Yes. We are all children of God …’

‘Which God …?’

‘What do you mean, which God …?’

‘What is your faith?’

‘I am a Christian. Born-again.’

‘So you are going to heaven?’

‘Yes. I can confidently say so, Manzi.’

‘Are Buddhists going to heaven …?’

‘What do they believe?’

‘Excuse me. Are Muslims going to heaven?’

‘If they accept Jesus Christ …’

‘And if not ...’

‘They still have a chance to repent …’

‘But if not …’

‘Then they go to hell.’

‘That’s surprising coming from a self-proclaimed cosmopolitan …’

‘What do you mean? By the way, Manzi, what are you? Where do you stand in this debate? Are you a Muslim? ’

‘Does it matter? I don’t think it does. And I mean, for someone who accuses others of ethnic discrimination to practice religious discrimination is surprising …it’s hypocritical of you to say a section of humanity is bound for eternal damnation …’

‘That’s a fallacy of absurdity, Manzi …’

‘What the heck …’

‘Yes it is. Anyway – I lead a Christian fellowship, and I make it a point not to preach about hell.’

‘But your not preaching about it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist …biblically speaking …’

‘But context … perspective is important …’

‘Fine. Now Gonza, you said you dislike divisions. That all humans must unite …?’

‘Yes. That much is true.’

‘Isn’t that a division in itself …?’

‘No – all humans. All people on earth!’

‘Yes, I understand. But humans don’t have the earth to themselves …’

‘In what sense …’

‘What about animals? Why should it be okay to mistreat animals?’

‘I didn’t say we should mistreat them …’

‘Are you vegetarian?’

‘No.’

‘So you mistreat animals …’

‘I eat. Not mistreat …’

‘Isn’t eating something the greatest form of mistreatment …it means I have subjugated its right to exist to my own …’

‘Now you are being equivocal …’

‘What the heck …’

‘Yes. But you man. Where do you stand? Are you an animalist?’

‘I didn’t say I was. I am simply trying to point out your position’s weakness …’

At this point, Gonza turns to the small crowd of on-lookers that seem to have been intently following the exchange …

‘You see this Manzi guy, he knows my position. But he’s deliberately refusing to tell me where he stands so I can’t attack him …’

I reply, ‘But I’m not the one who made a claim to begin with …’

‘What do you mean …?’

‘You claimed to be cosmopolitan. I am simply subjecting that claim to scrutiny …’

‘But for you, where do you stand?’

‘Gonza, look at me as a friend. Someone trying to help you strengthen your convictions …’

‘So …you think we shouldn’t eat animals …?’

‘No. We shouldn’t … why should our love stop at our species? Why can’t animals share in our love?’

‘Because animals can’t think rationally …’

‘Can a madman think rationally? Does it mean we shouldn’t treat him as an equal?’

‘Not really. But he’s human, unlike the lower animals …’

‘So, you discriminate against the lower animals …you’re specieist …humanist …’

‘That’s nature’s, sorry, God's design … every species for itself …’

‘Why, because we look different?’

‘Yes. And think different etc etc …’

‘Don’t white men look different from the black? Some even say they think different …’

‘You can’t prove that. It’s a stereotype …’

‘How sure are you that cows don’t think like humans?’

‘Be serious. It’s obvious … humans are morally superior …’

‘No it’s not. Actually cows may be our moral superiors. For one, they don’t go to war and slaughter each-other by the thousands …’

‘Oh, now I think I know your stand. You believe in moral subjectivity!’

‘No. How?’

‘The idea of I have my morality, and you have your morality …but we are both equal …’

‘How is that related to cows …?’

‘Not cows. Human morality is determinate; animal morality is indeterminate. They are incompatible, but constitute moral equivalence …’

‘What the heck … Anyway, that’s not my stand …’

‘Yes it is. Now I can attack you properly …’

‘Go ahead …’

‘First, you animalists don’t realize you are shooting yourselves in the foot by arguing against humanism. If your concern is that we humanists shouldn’t discriminate against animals, why do you discriminate against plants …?’

‘In what way …’

‘By being vegetarian; you say it’s okay to eat plants, but not animals …if you really think life is sacred, you should eat stones and sand …’

‘Eh! Okay. I get your point. But you see, plants don’t have a fully developed nervous system …’

‘In what sense?’

‘Unlike a cow in an abattoir for instance, plants don’t suffer the agony of being harvested …they don’t squeal like pigs during slaughter…’

‘That’s because they don’t have mouths … maybe they cry out but we can't hear them ...’

‘But they also don't have brains and nerves and all the things that aid suffering …’

‘You can’t know for sure …’

‘No. One can’t know for sure … but also, when we eat plants, we usually harvest the non-living parts, the fruit and grain, which also helps with pollination of the plant as well ...’

'Really?'

'Indeed. If I eat the fruit of a papaya plant, it grows another. But if I eat the liver of a goat, it can't grow another. Also, I have to kill the goat to get to its liver, but I don't have to kill a crop to reach its fruit ...'

'So ... plant life is less sacred because it can't suffer as much, eh? Are you saying it's okay to eat a paralyzed person because they can't feel the pain ... '

'No - all life is equally sacred. But the threshold of suffering is worth regarding ... and cannibalism is quite complicated ...'

'That's a fallacy of complex-question ...'

'What in hell ...'

'Anyhow, if I drink a cow's milk, I am not killing the cow ... am I?'

'No, you aren't; but lactating mammals usually have infants. By drinking a cow's milk, you are starving the calf ...'

'But plants also store reserve nourishment in their fruits ...'

'That's a possibility. But Gonza, what I'm driving at is that while you criticize people for being tribal or nationalist, you succumb to the same sectarianism by being humanist ...'

'You are also animalist ...'

'Sort of ... but at least we can say plants suffer less ...and if we are talking about minorities, animal-life is a drop in the ocean compared to the profundity of plant-life on the planet ...'

'But all life is sacred ...'

'Yes, all life is sacrosanct ...'

While some of us are still saying grace ...

The Gonzas of this world will be motoring the dirt track to paradise on sporty wheels ...

*Okello Gonza, as I later discovered, is a passionate, albeit fledgling playwright and poet. We’ve agreed to continue the discourse on ''cosmopolitanism'' and exchange notes on literary expressionism. Hopefully, there’ll be more common-waters chartered in the latter field than the former has allowed, heretofore.