PDA

View Full Version : Gbenga Obasanjo's full disclosure offers benefits



katampe
Jan 15, 2008, 07:50 AM
There have been insinuations that Gbenga rubbished our culture, acted irresponsibly, disgraced his family, and breached the trust of his wife when he made public, the full facts of his divorce in court proceedings. But I will argue that Gbenga‘s full disclosure that his father had sex with his wife and that his father-in-law sexually abused his daughter is more beneficial than detrimental to our society.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PREAMBLE

Lord Mansfield said, ‘as absolute certainty is seldom obtainable in human affairs, reason requires that men form their opinion of the truth on the superior number of probabilities on one side or the other. Based on the above premise, I wish to argue that benefits to the society have superior number of probabilities; as such Gbenga Obasanjo's full disclosure have merits and he is right to have gone to town.

Also, I implore spectators and participants to let reason reign throughout and at the end of the debate.

In developing proposals for my argument, I shall explore and argue using the most appropriate definitions of culture, the nature of society, responsibility, breach of trust and the rights of the public to know. Further down the road, I shall examine the claims of the opposing debater and look for ways to punch holes in his argument, like fallacious reasoning.

At the moment I will keep myself disciplined from looking at Ken’s argument, but in my next submission I shall respond to some of his claims.

I thank spectators and participants in advance and I wish to see you soon when I start to stoke the flames of reason at the crucible. I will be back with my submission in 24 hours.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anthony, please can you amend your comment and leave Ken's submission out, so we don't have an unwieldy amount of pages. I think it is cleaner if we quote only specific excerpts that we wish to respond or comment on. Just a thought . I thank you in advance.

Mulan and Lizmoses, I have hearkened to your calls. Please remember I am the David taking on Gladiator Ken :biggrin:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ADVERTISEMENT FOR MODERATORS , PLEASE APPLY HEREIN!

I am open to anyone that is interested.

Kenn
Jan 16, 2008, 12:55 AM
Fellow debaters and denizens of The Crucible,

I wish to oppose the motion that Gbenga Obasanjo’s full disclosure offers benefits to society. I wish to show that while it is morally upright to expose anyone who’s done what Obasanjo is alleged to have done, in this particular case of Gbenga doing it, there is no benefit whatsoever for society.

First, we must recognise that the well-being of society is maintained and enhanced by actions that protect family. While it’s okay to expose or report crimes, even in a family situation, it depends on the kind of ‘crime’ we are talking about and whether such exposure enhances or degrades the family in the eyes of the world. For instance, if Gbenga was telling us how much of a thief his father is, that will help society and enhance his personal and family moral status, because ordinary people would likely see that in spite of Olusegun Obasanjo, there is a moral core to the family that pushed a son to look beyond his emotional attachment to his father, especially where such a father has betrayed the trust of society and fellow citizens. Thus, while we would sympathize with such an evidently dysfunctional family, we are bound to respect Gbenga for having the moral courage to present himself as a law-abiding citizen ready to expose crime wherever, even in his own home, for the good of society. But what does society gain by a son exposing the supposed adulterous and incestuous acts of his father and father-in-law when the woman supposedly involved is his own wife?

Secondly, we need to recognise that these claims by Gbenga are contained in a court document and are yet to pass through evidential scrutiny. Fairness demands that we wait and see how the court handles it before passing judgment or before assuming it has any benefit for society. For all we know, Gbenga may have a grudge and could have said these things to get back at his father and wife. Gbenga probably feel that his father did not do enough for him while he was in power as he surrounded himself with the Ribadus, Soludos, Rufai and Ezekwesilis of this world – people who are of Gbenga’s generation and educational status – while keeping Gbenga at arms length. We saw part of that frustration in Gbenga’s widely-reported interview with Omoyele Sowore where he lashed out at people like Rufai and Jimi Lawal for being the corruption kingpins. Indeed, his problem with his wife has been public knowledge for quite a while. It is not the first time they’ve gone to court. The question is if this indeed is true, why didn’t Gbenga say these before now? Why is he suddenly saying these things only after his father no longer occupies a position to dispense prebendal favours to him? Gbenga talks about his wife sleeping with his father because she’s greedy for contract, but could it be that it is Gbenga himself now smarting from the fact that his father can no longer give him those juicy contracts now that he’s no longer in power?

Thirdly, we must see that what Gbenga has done is to again strike a low blow against our national image. Of course, Obasanjo is Gbenga’s father; but for the rest of society, he was our President. As President, in or out of office, he represents something in the minds of citizens and the world and there is something about Nigeria as a nation that will always attach to him. What Gbenga has done is to attack our collective national and political sensibilities by ‘revealing’ that the man we chose to lead our nation and make life and death decisions about our future is a lecherous, disgraceful and possibly deranged devil with no conscience. What we are immediately invited to ponder on is this: If he’s capable of doing this to his own son, who knows what he must have done to other Nigerians? Thus, rather than help society in anyway, this engenders acute cynicism and disrespect for the person of the president and the institution of the presidency. These, of course, cannot be good for society.

Finally, we must ask what moral standing Gbenga has to accuse his father, Moji and his father-in-law of anything when he himself is known to be a no mean cad and philanderer. While the father was at the helms of affairs, they all over-indulged themselves on all sorts of shameful frivolities; after all, such over-indulgence was being criminally paid for by the tax-paying public. But now that the tap is closed and the trough no longer full to the brim, Gbenga suddenly remembers he has a moral obligation and a grudge or two against his father, Moji and Moji’s father. Gbenga has proved that possibly like his father he has the morality of an alley cat. Society won’t be joining him in the gutter; we’d rather puke!

So, to conclude, Gbenga’s action does not benefit society in anyway because apart from not protecting the family, which is the building block of society, it is a one-sided and unproven allegation made in court papers that are yet to be verified or tested in evidence. On the larger political level, what he’s done has engendered unhealthy cynicism about our elected leaders and their sanity and humanity. Gbenga indeed has no moral right to question his father, Moji or Moji’s father because when all is said and done, they’re all birds of a feather.

The only way Gbenga would have helped society was to honourably leave the marriage without fanfare and if indeed he has evidence of the things he claimed, present this evidence before his family and village elders (if he must expose this) and leave it at that. If OBJ needed to be exposed publicly over a matter like this, it should not be by his son.

Fellow debaters, I hope with the above points, I’ve been able to show that Gbenga Obasanjo’s act of accusing his father of sleeping with his wife or his father in law of sleeping with his daughter is not for the good of society.



Thank you.

Myne Whitman
Jan 16, 2008, 02:35 PM
Kenn1 / Katampe,

I would like to apply as a moderator to the debate as an understudy to SLB who has volunteered to moderate the first 3 debates. Involving him will also help in the quick removal of any off topic posts since he is a board moderator.

Cheers.

katampe
Jan 16, 2008, 03:39 PM
Mulan,

I consent to your application as a moderator.

Shoko,

I don't have privileges to move my post as Ken requested. Kindly effect the necessary adjustments. I thank you.

Myne Whitman
Jan 16, 2008, 03:54 PM
Kenn / Katampe,

Thanks for the honour.

I believe this would be an interesting experience

I will contact SLB for the necessary adjustments

Thanks...

Myne Whitman
Jan 16, 2008, 04:28 PM
Kenn/ Katampe,

Before we go on, I would like to thank the board moderators for a prompt response to my request. Next is for you guys to modify your respective posts accordingly removing the messages to each other and to third parties.

Kenn,

since you have already put up your thesis first, I would leave your post as is and you as the opposer of the debate. Topic;

Gbenga Obasanjo‘s full disclosure that his father and father-in-law both had sex with his wife is more beneficial than detrimental to our society.

Katampe,

Hope to see your thesis and reply soon.

Ground rules.

1. Debaters must reply to posts from the opposition within 24 hrs

2. The debate will last until the debaters have run out of points or until 10 days whichever comes first

3. Grandstanding is allowed but no namecalling, obnoxious or off topic posts.

I will make up some more as we go along. This moderator business is getting to my head:D:biggrin:

Good luck Guys...

Kenn
Jan 16, 2008, 05:09 PM
Mulan! You are too much!

Ehen! Now, we're talking!

Perfect thread, perfect sequence!

Now, we wait for Katampe!:biggrin:

katampe
Jan 17, 2008, 06:47 AM
Gbenga Obasanjo's raises a conflict that arises for kids with fathers and father-in-laws like Olusegun Obasanjo and Alex Onbanjo. His decision to reveal his father, Olusegun slept with his wife and that his father-in-law sexually abused his daughter raises these key issues that I will address:

1. Breach of cultural practices.
2. Breach of trust
3. Societal responsibility/ Public rights to full disclosure


Breach of Cultural practices

The main argument of people with opposing view to Gbenga's action is contrary to our culture. But I will argue that when a culture has no inherent mechanism to address the lived reality of a people substantially, then this argument becomes a porous one. The reverence for culture notwithstanding, his decision to take the issue to court and make it public fixes the loop-hole in our culture. If it fixes it, then it is the best interest of Gbenga and the society.

We know our culture confers enormous privileges on our elders. It is the reason they enjoy so much respect without giving back commensurate accountability. It was not for nothing that Wole Soyinka said his generation was a wasted one. Take the case of Olusegun and Alex that have both abused their privileges as elders, and there is no mechanism to disciple them in our culture, rather we are expected to pat them in the back for having huge libidos. What a travesty of justice!

The culture as it is has encouraged an unending orgy of moral misdemeanours. The respected institutions within our culture have rewarded these men, under scrutiny for moral turpitude, at different times as custodians of the same culture they denigrate. The reason I call them custodians is because they hold chieftaincy titles.

It would appear the qualification for chieftaincy titles for each is unbridled moral malfeasance. They have risen from being ordinary people to people that hold prestigious titles, it would appear there was no consideration for their moral standing in the community before this titles. If there is anything to be said here, it is that it reveals our cultural institutions reward bad citizens.
It seems what was taken into consideration was their fame, wealth and power. This lack of censorship highlights the deep problem in our society. It diminishes us all, if left to continue.

The reason why this is important is because it is not an isolated incident; we have seen similar cases and this pattern of misconduct in the past. The late Moshood Abiola comes to mind, he slept with the wife of an Oba , a trusted friend and confidant . The tragedy in this case was an Oba was rubbished and the institution desecrated. In this instance our reverence for culture was duped in a flagrant fashion, and there was no remorse.
Gbenga ‘s action shows there are some people that will not take the issue lightly . The action seems to say there is no hiding place for sinners, especially people that abuse our trust and loyalty. It doesn't matter whether they are parents, partners, friends, or wives. The culture can no longer provide a canopy for such blatant practices. When we seek to fix these weaknesses outside the cultural framework, the culture would also seek to bring itself up to date with the practices of modern times of risks being extinct. It is time to shine the on darkness.

It is certain that the more we see misbehaviours like this brought out in the open the more people hiding under culture caution themselves and equally we would see less incidents of this nature when there are no more rewards for moral turpitude, especially for people in high places.

Societal responsibility and pUblic rights to know

Full disclosure is a societal responsibility; it is the preserve of men of honour and integrity. Gbenga has shown that he is a man of integrity and he looks beyond personal gains. We all know how powerful his father is, but for him to confront his father and disclose to the general public what ails him and his family, I believe it is something to be applauded.
Remember Olikoye Ransome Kuti ? He performed his own similar duty when it was discovered that his brother, Fela had HIV AIDS – he went to the public.

Public has the right to know .The practice of sweeping things under the carpet with the hope that it will just go away is akin to a fire fighting technique that tackles a fire incident without provision for prevention, contingency planning and disaster recovery.

In fire fighting we focus not only on putting fire out, we focus also on prevention: it involves installation of water sprinklers in our building, using the right materials for our building, and strategic positioning of water feeders in case fire happens. Not only that, there is contingency planning, where fire drills for occupants of a building are held to enable them develop skills for emergency situations, sometimes it involve plans that show the exits in the building, or areas where occupants need to congregate to be counted when fire strikes. And finally, disaster recovery, this involves insurance laws that covers unforeseen expenses in the event of fire.

What I have just described highlights a complex but demanding rules and procedures that tackles issues not only when it happens , but prevents it , plans for it and salvages the left overs and reinstates when the incident occurs. Culture can't do this, it is no government, and it is no judiciary.

We found this problem in the Vatican and the sexual molestation of kids in Catholic churches by priests. The system instead of prevention, sought to put the fire out. It accounted for why the cycle of orgies where continuously repeated. It demands the complex web of support that only the society can make possible through its institutions.

This is where full disclosure offers us an opportunity to develop our case laws and document issues that arise, to enable us have a wealth of data to fashion solutions that addresses the uniqueness of these issue holistically. This can only become possible when we don't have the culturists bombarding our consciousness on what culture specifies like the cultural Pharisees, but rather focusing and making decisions on what is right.

It makes sense to have water sprinklers spraying ice or water on the libidos of the Obasanjos when they are burning with desire , it also offers us ways to prevent the abuse of children when laws that offer penalties and laws, that fully address these issues, and seeks to discourage criminal and moral misdemeanours. Disaster recovery will enable us to put these children in stable homes where they can be showered with healthy love that they require.

Also, take the case of the catholic priests that instead of dealing with the priests in their churches when they were sexually molesting young boys the Vatican chose to deal with the issue secretly protecting the image of the church and discounting the impact of the acts on the people that were abused. Some of us have been treated to the moving details of how those acts impacted the lives of the kids.

Breach of trust

There have been arguments about breach of trust which touches on importance of keeping confidence, while I concede that keeping confidence is important, it should also be weighed against unhealthy and indecent practices. In this case, Moji broke her marital trust when she slept with someone outside her marital home. The issue is made worse when the person in question is the father of the husband. In this case, she disrespected her home, her children and her family.

I will argue that breach of trust can only arise where there is mutual reciprocity. In this particular case, there was nothing of such. Instead what we have seen is a bitch on heat.
As a parting shot, I will argue the only thing constant in life is change. Gbenga has embraced change and it has its risks: a new future without a father that sired him, and new future that he has to face line alone without a wife that he once loved. In all these, we should remember that he wasn't the one that was sinned against Mojisola, Obasanjo, or Mojisola's father. Rather, we should put this issue in context of a man that his father cheated his mum , and went further to cheat on his son.

It is this same man that has cheated the society of the right to know his immoral escapades that ought to have been the subject of public record , so that when we make decisions about who to elect or vote for into the position of leadership , we have records to consult and not after voting them in they become our burden and they continue to disgrace and rubbish the confidence we reposed in them.

In closing,I will argue that the hundred pound gorilla in the room has one leg steeped in ancient cultural practices and another steeped in modern times. It is what stares us in the face and needs to be dealt with.

The idea that old men can behave irresponsibly, whether they are fathers , uncles, or presidents and not be held accountable raises doubt about our commitment to an egalitarian society and calls to question our cries for change. If things must change, then we must adopt new strategies that would produce change.

It makes no sense to encourage cultural canopies for men and women without character that push children into the world that end up duplicating their pathologies. Social responsibility means having access to information on such incidents so that adequate social policy can be put in place that addresses and strengthen areas where culture may have certain weaknesses .

There should be a threshold that defines when certain acts should be kept as family secrets
It shortchanges the society when we provide cultural canopies for men and women without character who push children into the world that later end up duplicating their parents social pathologies. Social responsibility means having access to information on such incidents so we can have a database in order that an adequate social policy can be put in place that addresses and strengthen areas where culture may have certain weaknesses .

There should be a threshold that defines when certain acts should be kept as family secrets in the interest of the public since kids from immoral dalliances if not nurtured , raised through disaster recovery stand the risk of visiting on the larger society problems created in their childhoods and perpetuated by the culture of silence.

I thank you.

Myne Whitman
Jan 17, 2008, 01:51 PM
Katampe,
Thanks for your timely submission. I will summarise your arguments as follows;

Breach of Cultural practices - The subsisting culture is porous since it has no inherent mechanism to address the lived reality of the people substantially. Gbenga's decision to take the issue to court and make it public therefore fixes some loop-holes in our culture.

Culture confers enormous privileges on our elders while lacking the mechanism for commensurate accountability and discipline. The cultural institutions, it seems, only takes into consideration fame, wealth and power thereby rewarding bad citizens as custodians.

Gbenga ‘s action seems to say that culture can no longer provide a canopy for such blatant practices, whether the perpetrators are parents, partners, friends, or wives. By seeking to fix these weaknesses outside the cultural framework, the culture would also seek to bring itself up to date with the practices of modern times.

Societal responsibility and public rights to know - Full disclosure is a societal responsibility; the public has the right to know. Gbenga has shown that he is a man of integrity and he looks beyond personal gains and irrespective of how powerful his father is.

Sweeping things under the carpet is akin to inadequate fire fighting techniques. There needs to be a procedure that tackles issues not only when it happens , but prevents it , plans for it and salvages the left overs. This is a complex web of support that only the society can make possible through its institutions.

Full disclosure offers ways to prevent the abuse of children with laws that seeks to discourage criminal and moral misdemeanours and which offer penalties to culprits . It will also make it possible that children who are victims are put in stable homes where they can be showered with healthy love that they require.

Breach of trust - While keeping confidence is important, it should also be weighed against unhealthy and indecent practices. Moji broke her marital trust when she slept with someone outside her marital home, in this case, the father of her husband.

Trust can only be breached where there is mutual reciprocity which was missing in this particular case. Gbenga wasn’t the one that sinned against Mojisola, Obasanjo, or Mojisola’s father. Rather, we should put this issue in context of a man that his father cheated his mum , and went further to cheat on his son.

Keeping quiet would have had the society cheated of their right to know the moral ability of Obasanjo to lead. This ought to be in public record so that when voting decisions are about to be made, there are records to consult. If this is not done irresponsible leaders become our burden and they continue to breach the trust reposed in them.

Myne Whitman
Jan 17, 2008, 02:25 PM
Esteemed audience,

While we await Kenn’s response, the moderator will now accept questions or comments based on Katampe’s closing remarks,

1. It would be beneficial for the society to remove cultural canopies from men and women without character who sometimes emerge as model parents or leaders. For a better egalitarian society, new strategies that would produce change must be adopted.

2. It would be beneficial for the society to have access to information on such incidents so we can have a database in order that an adequate social policy can be put in place that addresses and strengthen areas where culture may have certain weaknesses .

3. In the interest of the public, there should be a threshold that defines when certain acts should be kept as family secrets. This is because victims stand the risk of visiting on the larger society problems created by their trauma and perpetuated by the culture of silence.

Gentle Angel
Jan 17, 2008, 02:54 PM
Katampe,

What I have just described highlights a complex but demanding rules and procedures that tackles issues not only when it happens , but prevents it , plans for it and salvages the left overs and reinstates when the incident occurs. Culture can’t do this, it is no government, and it is no judiciary.

You say there are loopholes in the culture which gbenga’s action seems to have plugged, but I do not see it as such. It may look like in this case, culture has failed but fact is no one knows how far he pursued justice culturally.

My question is, are you denying that there are usually inbuilt governance or judicial channels in culture?

Kenn
Jan 18, 2008, 03:40 AM
Madame Moderator, fellow debaters and esteemed visitors to The Crucible, I salute you for your patience. Indeed, Madame Moderator, not only that you were patient enough, like everyone else, to read through the rambling ‘speech' of my opponent (no insult intended), but you even tried to make a purse out of his sow's ear with that brilliant summing up you did. Unfortunately, your best efforts, Madame Moderator, cannot even make good what is innately a bad argument. So, what exactly is my opponent's problem? Well, I'll tell you – it is the problem of focus. My opponent can't see the forest for the trees and he's now lost in his own self-created jungle. We need to rescue him!

I suppose the proper place to start this deconstruction is in definition. Madame Moderator has helped frame the proposition so well that I had to applaud her. Below is that proposition:

Gbenga Obasanjo‘s full disclosure that his father and father-in-law both had sex with his wife is more beneficial than detrimental to our society.

Esteemed Ladies and Gentlemen, it is obvious that the keywords here are "beneficial" and "detrimental". Please, I crave your indulgence to delve into the dictionary for a proper definition of these words, so that we know what we're dealing with and what is actually expected of my opponent and my good self in this debate. The Collins English Dictionary defines benefit as (1) something that improves or promotes and (2) advantage or sake. The adjective beneficial is correspondingly defined as "helpful or advantageous". It is instructive that the Latin word beneficium from which these are derived simply means kindness. Then there is detriment. This is defined as disadvantage or damage. Detrimental is simply the adjective – something disadvantageous or damaging. Again, the Latin word, detrimentum from which these are derived means "a rubbing off".

So, fellow debaters, where is that thing that improves or promotes society in the supposed revelations of Gbenga Obasanjo? Where is that advantage it bestows on society? Where is the goodness? From where I'm sitting I see none! What Katampe has done is to dredge up all sorts of bric-a-brac issues that are neither here nor there, cobbling them together with the aim of passing them off as convincing ideas. In fact, we could very well call what he has done a debating sleight of hand. But, of course, discerning minds can see through such grandstanding and deploy the proverbial pin to his overblown balloon! I can only wish him safe landing as I take apart his thesis.

Now, people, isn't the notion of Gbenga Obasanjo as a cultural revolutionary laughable? Maybe, it's in the Obasanjo family genes to portray Yoruba culture in the wrong light, because, if I recall, his father was the one who once told the world we were going to use juju to fight apartheid! Yes, at a time when the civilized world and everyone genuinely concerned were addressing the apartheid question with serious intellectual effort, Aremu thought the witches and wizards of his native Owu would do the job. Today, his son, the cultural-warrior-extraordinaire is telling us (through Katampe) that our culture is porous, leaky, inadequate and downright criminal! Katampe is arguing that ancient Yoruba culture has no mechanism to address "the lived reality" of the Yoruba people substantially and for that reason, Gbenga, the culture warrior, this very intelligent and far-seeing young man, has fixed that "loop-hole" by running to court! This act is what Katampe calls benefit to society!

First, do we have to tell Katampe that there was a Yoruba culture of adjudication before the white man came with his "received common law" and court system? Do we have to tell him that this system is alive and well in our various communities despite our seeming acceptance of western culture? If what Gbenga said is true, it is called ewọ in Yoruba - that is abomination. The culture prescribes what has to be done when someone commits abomination. Not even a king can commit abomination and go scot-free, because it is not only a defilement of the person, but also of the land! Unlike in the whiteman's court where you can bribe your way through, culture has no room for bribery. You pay the price for any action that defiles the land. But there are time-tested procedures to follow. Though we do not know if Gbenga went through these traditional means, if he did, he should have divulged the outcome equally in the court papers. Of course, the fact that he isn't in good terms with his old man is public knowledge and, naturally, you would expect family members and well-wishers to attempt to broker peace between father and son. But, it's another matter if a son accuses his old man of sleeping with his wife, mother of his children to whom the old man is grandfather!

Frankly, it is not the culture that failed Gbenga, but Gbenga that failed the culture. The true test is patience. He didn't have it. Not only that, one could see from his actions a calculated attempt to make personal financial gains and to deploy the worst form of lies and blackmail to achieve his ends. Obviously, Gbenga wants us to believe that these things happened when his dad was in power as President, yet for the past five years at least the stories have made the rounds about the troubles in his marriage and his attempts to seek divorce. At one point, we were told that this same father helped talk him out of it. Now, if these things are true, why didn't Gbenga say it before now - since it is obvious the marriage has been on the rocks for quite a while? Why wait until his father has left office before putting out that information?

The answer may lie in Gbenga's desperation. He has fallen out of favour with his father; he is about to lose a chunk of the illicit money he made through his father's influence in a messy divorce; he does not have many people to turn to since most of those he'd have liked to go to are his father's friends and those who are no longer his father's friends, like Orji Kalu, have too much on their plates for now. So, what can he do? He came up with this wild script to blackmail his own father and Moji's father to make more money on one hand and keep the one he has on the other. Gbenga knows very well that his father will never join issues with him in public and he would naturally prevail on Moji's father not to join issues with him as well. Gbenga knows his father, like most fathers, would always be thinking of how to save his first son from more disgrace and would therefore do anything just so he doesn't continue to disgrace himself and the family name in public. The young man is holding his father over a barrel because he knows that parental love will always be there no matter what he does. The proof of this will be seen when the case is withdrawn from court with Gbenga happily proclaiming he's back together with his wife and is now a good son to his father.

The only language Gbenga knows is money and this is nothing but a shakedown. Obviously, he has some destructive secrets about his father, but it certainly is not anything to do with sexual depravity. But he knows such outrageous claims would serve notice to his father that he can divulge anything. It's a coded message from a wayward son to a wayward father. It has nothing to do with the inadequacy of culture, but more to do with the effects of wealth and power on a totally dysfunctional family. Gbenga is a tragic, shameless and public expression of that dysfunction. There can be no benefit to society in seeing a father taken through hell by his own first son, especially a father with the profile of Obasanjo. It's not impossible that there are some oedipal elements in Obasanjo's relationship with his son, but no society benefits from watching a family self-destruct this way, no matter who they are. Yes, there are lessons to be learnt by society from all this, but, as I've said, I can't see any benefit.

In discussing what he termed social responsibility and public right to know, Katampe again missed the point of this debate entirely. What we have here is one party in a divorce suit yet to be adjudicated in a proper court of law making claims that are yet to be verified or put to evidential test. Yet, Katampe has canonised Gbenga as St Truth to the extent that he wants every Nigerian to now recite his claims as gospel. Where is the social responsibility in jungle justice or mob trial? Why can't Katampe and his mob wait until the court determines the veracity or otherwise of these claims before they install Obasanjo and Moji's father's heads on pikes? Now, supposing Obasanjo had been the one that ran to court to say bad things about his son, would the moral police here be zealously condemning Gbenga (before the court determines the veracity of the claims) as they're condemning his father now? No, they won't! They will jump out here and declare Obasanjo an agba'ya, a shameless old fool picking a fight with his son in public! Social responsibility demands a level of equity and justice, yet they'll never grant these because they know no better! Social responsibility means mob action is unacceptable, but they won't listen, because they love playing to the gallery! When allegations are made in a court of law, social responsibility demands that we wait and see how the court goes about determining the truth or otherwise in those allegations before we pass judgment. There is no benefit to society in listening to one side of a case and jumping to conclusions, especially when it is still under adjudication in the courts.

As for public right to know, again, I say Katampe does not understand this. Indeed, what does he mean by public right to know - public right to know what exactly? Would Katampe in the name of "full disclosures", "honour" and "integrity" come out here and tell us all the lurid details of what goes on in his own home? Of course, public right to know is necessarily conditional, because people do have a right to privacy. Certainly, no one here is against the press doing their job. I do not have a quarrel with the newspapers publishing the stories. Yes, it is our right to know and members of the fourth estate are doing their duty informing us; so where is the problem? Does the fact that they're informing us what is going on now mean that we cannot use our heads? Does it mean we cannot decipher anymore when something is just an unproven allegation? Does it now mean we should begin to mass around Obasanjo's house with rakes, axes, hammers and stones? Indeed, the detrimental effect of this disclosure can be seen in the way and manner this is being presently discussed nationally. An evil genie has been let out the bottle and no one can put it back again! Read the commentaries and you can see most of our countrymen and women have grown more cynical and distrusting; most of us are worried that our children would read this and wonder what kind of adults we are – especially as we seem to be putting people who sleep with their sons' wives in the highest position. Some husbands are worried that their wives who have had anything to do with or around Obasanjo in a public, official or private capacity are tainted. How can such all-round tragic consequences be considered beneficial to society?

Lastly, my opponent discussed what he called breach of trust. Here he took the sickening liberty to lambaste Moji, who, even without proof yet tendered or allegations against her confirmed, was painted in the worst possible light. Katampe has already concluded she broke marital trust! He conveniently forgot the well-reported philandering ways of Gbenga and declared there's no mutual reciprocity of trust! The same man who accused our culture of being too hard on the young ones while giving too much leeway to elders didn't recognize how that same culture has been hard on our women and how difficult it must be for Moji in the circumstances. Indeed, putting on his sexist garb, he declared: "what we have seen is a bitch on heat"! In the end, it has to be the fault of the woman! Isn't that highly predictable?

Madame Moderator, fellow debaters and wise visitors to The Crucible, my aim here was to come and debate issues, not read miles and miles of assumptions, untruths, half-truths and emotive verbiage masquerading as reason. The question we need to ask, whether or not we believe whatever Gbenga said, is whether there are any benefits in these disclosures to the larger society. The resounding answer is "NO!" for the simple reason that none of the points raised by the Proposer here brings any kind of advantage or gain to the society. Of course, there are lessons to be learnt and more lessons to be learnt when it's all resolved one way or the other; but we don't necessarily learn lessons from what benefits us. A child who learns to fend for himself after his father suddenly dies cannot claim tomorrow that his father's death is beneficial. Yes, he learnt a lesson that possibly helped him latter in life, but the experience has no benefit! Yes, we are all learning something here, not least the fact that when you live a life where you have less time for the children but more time for ladies pants, you'll reap what you sow in the form of a dysfunctional family in the future, even if you have all the gold of Croesus. As fathers, mothers, wives, sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, uncles, cousins, most of us are actually deeply saddened by this shameful development in the Obasanjo household (irrespective of what we think of the man or the family politically). No one sees any benefits in the exposure. But we're sure imbibing the lessons. Our people say you don't rejoice at the calamity of others; you learn from it so as not to be a victim tomorrow.

If my opponent is returning here, I expect him to tell us exactly the benefits he sees in these so-called revelations by Gbenga. If anyone has seen these, they have to point them out to me, because, as I said, from where I'm sitting, I see no benefits to society, only lessons to be learnt.

Madame Moderator, fellow debaters and you wonderful people visiting The Crucible, I thank you all for this opportunity to state the case of the Opposition.

Myne Whitman
Jan 18, 2008, 07:10 AM
This related comment on another thread has been brought to my attention. And I believe it would be of interest to our esteemed audience and the quality of our debate...


Originally Posted by WaleAkin

Hello Katampe,


Remember Olikoye Ransome Kuti ? He performed his own similar duty when it was discovered that his brother, Fela had HIV AIDS – he went to the public.

Prof Olikoye Ransome-Kuti gave a press interview when his brother, Fela Anikulapo-Kuti died and it was at that interview that the cause of death was made public- The former never released the info while his Brother was still alive!

Kindly correct this pls!

Cheers,
Wale Akin

ps - the comment has been modified to fit our rules of engagement.

Myne Whitman
Jan 18, 2008, 07:16 AM
All,

The summary of the response by the opposition would be ready soon while we wait the reply by the proposition. Thanks for staying with us and the floor is open for questions and comments to either debater.

Rules of Engagement with the esteemed Audience

1. Comments and questions are allowed on the main debate thread

2. The audience may only take sides or reply to the debaters on the related thread

3. Debaters reserve the right to answer to comments or questions from the audience

4. Comments or questions should be from debaters points but not input value judgments to them based on these positions.

_______________________________________________

The opposition viewpoint can be summarised as follows;

Katampe said that our culture is porous, leaky, inadequate and downright criminal! He argued that Gbenga fixed a "loop-hole" by running to court since ancient Yoruba culture has no mechanism to address "the lived reality" of the Yoruba people substantially and for that reason this is a benefit to society!

Response: The Yoruba culture of adjudication existed before the white man came with his "received common law" (court system) and is alive and well in our various communities. If what Gbenga said is true, it is called ewọ in Yoruba - that is abomination. The culture prescribes what has to be done when someone commits abomination, because it is not only a defilement of the person, but also of the land! But there are time-tested procedures to follow. Though we do not know if Gbenga went through these traditional means, if he did, he should have divulged the outcome equally in the court papers.

The notion of Gbenga Obasanjo as a cultural revolutionary is laughable. One can see from his actions a calculated attempt to make personal financial gains and to deploy the worst form of lies and blackmail to achieve his ends. This has nothing to do with the inadequacy of culture and frankly, it is not the culture that failed Gbenga, but Gbenga that failed the culture. There can be no benefit to society in seeing a father taken through hell by his own first son, especially a father with the profile of Obasanjo.

Katampe canonised Gbenga as St Truth in discussing what he termed social responsibility and public right to know to the extent that he wants every Nigerian to recite his claims as gospel.

Response: What we have here is one party in a pending divorce suit making claims that are yet to be verified or put to evidential test. Where is the social responsibility in jungle justice or mob trial? Katampe and his mob should wait until the court determines the veracity or otherwise of these claims. Social responsibility demands a level of equity and justice, it means mob action is unacceptable! There is no benefit to society in listening to one side of a case and jumping to conclusions, especially when it is still under adjudication in the courts.

As for public right to know, this is necessarily conditional because people do have a right to privacy. Certainly, no one here is against the press doing their job. However, does the fact that this is in the newspapers mean we cannot decipher when something is just an unproven allegation? Indeed, the detrimental effect of this disclosure can be seen in the way and manner this is being presently discussed nationally. The commentaries show that our countrymen and women have grown more cynical and distrusting. How can such all-round tragic consequences be considered beneficial to society?

Katampe in discussing breach of trust, took the sickening liberty to lambaste Moji, who, even without proof, was painted in the worst possible light. Indeed, putting on his sexist garb, he inferred that it has to be the fault of the woman and concluded that she broke marital trust!

Response: There has also been well-reported philandering ways of Gbenga and so there's no mutual reciprocity of trust!

The same culture accused of being too hard on the young ones while giving too much leeway to elders is the same that can also be hard on our women and one should recognise that must be difficult for Moji in this circumstances.

katampe
Jan 18, 2008, 07:19 AM
Esteem Villagers,

I thank you once again for your patience and contributions so far on this thread.
So far some people would be asking how we came to this sorry pass in our nationhood, why did we wait so long to achieve equality for all men (old and young), and why did we allow odious cultural practices to mute reason and disenfranchise the powerless and people without voice?

Still I see some relief in the comments of some villagers and the corresponding thank you buttons they got for expressing the mind of many. Nevertheless, I have decided to take an opinion sample that represents the universe of villagers. Many have voiced their opinion, many have spoken, many have rejoiced, and I hear from the grapevine that some business minded village feminists have been travelling and collating data from soft sells to partner with other NGO business entrepreneurs to open more branches in the nooks and crannies of Nigeria . It is a new day courtesy of Gbenga , we can be sure some chunky FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) in form of AIDS would flow into the country.

But the let me digress a bit from the immediate beneficiaries and quickly show some sample comments from the universe of our female feminists , we shall hear the voices of Soul Balladeer, we shall also hear from the Village Parrot , and the village Pepeiye to round up on the new day that Gbenga has heralded.

While I was passing the square, I overhead the Soul balladeer, say:


And for this, I am extremely grateful to Gbenga. He has done more in just one response to a divorce petition than all the groups that have been trying to get this issue on the national agenda have done for years.

And I also kept watch and noticed that, the Village Parrot was moving from dormot to dormot saying:

.
.. I am very glad that Gbenga spoke up and continues to sing like a canary because at least he has gotten the conversation on incest, rape, child abuse, pedophilia and sex abuse in the Nigerian society, especially in what we consider elite families, going on whole other level... even that is a small victory for those voiceless victims who have had to bear the brunt of the, shame, stigma, emotional and physical abuse of these acts silently and without any recourse or outlet for many years now...

Yet, the interesting comments and mood of the village was felt more in the resounding receptions that they were accorded, I noticed there were thank you messages l for rallying the village to join the national conversation

Interestingly this tontitirin man called debater Ken that I thought would have retired his Michael Jackson trousers has come again, but this time he has added a white glove. But what can I say; if you haven’t gotten the message you will end up in Bahrain, or better still Okija very soon.

This time I have decided to consult with one of our late founding fathers, but what better way to invoke their spirit but through their writings. The late Nnamdi Azikwe once said:


fear causes the African to become superstitious, to believe in ghosts, in witches, in wizards, in palmistry, in horoscopy, in mesmerism, in physiognomy, in fact, in all the 'unknowables' which have chained mankind to mental slavery for ages.

Not done, I interrogated Okey Ndibe, and where his spirit cried out and asked in his essay :


What does this rise in unbecoming superstition portend? Do enlightened Nigerians fully recognise the woeful meaning of a nation whose citizens are steeped in exuberant ignorance? What is the source of this anachronistic blight threatening to consign Nigeria to an irrational template? How may we calculate the cost of this submission to a crazed doctrine? It seems clear to me that a nation pays a grave price when its people abandon their minds to certain atavistic notions, infantile bugaboos and crass make-beliefs.:


Still further, I marched forward to another illustrious son, Banjo Odutola esq, and he gave his own spin to Ndibe’s essay when he said that :


Okey Ndibe in: “Of God and Ungodly Deeds” that demonstrated how even our young people and societal mores are constructs of Voodoo, Spiritism, Cultism, and Abracadabra beliefs. Even University students no longer believe in logic, reason, hard work and excellence. Doctors seek the Shrines to conceive children; civil servants seek them for promotions; politicians for power; spinsters and housewives to find and retain husbands; professionals for success – pecuniary and otherwise.

The sound of the voices from one to generation to another says it all here, there is fire on the mountain if we let archaic practices and not reason rule our lives. The marriage that was consummated in church ought not to have ended up being resolved in the shrine of “ewo,” masquerades and Sigidi as advocated by my friend, Ken

There is consuming evidence that reason means abandoning old way of thinking , and dumping odious cultural practices. While In Okey’s bit, it might be said that the central thesis in is argument was the uncritical thinking among our youths , he still feeds our discussion in the sense that he advocates for a need for us to be discerning , and wear our thinking caps in order that we can challenge ourselves and not be passive consumers of everything thrown in our way.

I have stated this explanations as a context for examining Ken’s counter argument that has no edifying and logical moments in them , rather he has shot bullets of disjointed logic to further arguments for an obnoxious cultural practice without benefit, that enables a father crave his son’s wife, and another father that crave his daughter. In it he has tried to argue that going to court has not been beneficial.

But here I have decided to itemise his tortuous logic in the order that he has gambled and garbled in this debate with these few excerpts :


Now, people, isn’t the notion of Gbenga Obasanjo as a cultural revolutionary laughable? Maybe, it’s in the Obasanjo family genes to portray Yoruba culture in the wrong light, because, if I recall, his father was the one who once told the world we were going to use juju to fight apartheid! Yes, at a time when the civilized world and everyone genuinely concerned were addressing the apartheid question with serious intellectual effort, Aremu thought the witches and wizards of his native Owu would do the job. Today, his son, the cultural-warrior-extraordinaire is telling us (through Katampe) that our culture is porous, leaky, inadequate and downright criminal! Katampe is arguing that ancient Yoruba culture has no mechanism to address “the lived reality” of the Yoruba people substantially and for that reason, Gbenga, the culture warrior, this very intelligent and far-seeing young man, has fixed that “loop-hole” by running to court! This act is what Katampe calls benefit to society!

Isn’t it interested that he argues against Obasanjo’s decision to use juju to fight apartheid, while at the same time he pushes for Gbenga to adopt his father’s cultural world view.

As if in a trance he goes further to say:


Frankly, it is not the culture that failed Gbenga, but Gbenga that failed the culture. The true test is patience. He didn’t have it. Not only that, one could see from his actions a calculated attempt to make personal financial gains and to deploy the worst form of lies and blackmail to achieve his ends. Obviously, Gbenga wants us to believe that these things happened when his dad was in power as President, yet for the past five years at least the stories have made the rounds about the troubles in his marriage and his attempts to seek divorce. At one point, we were told that this same father helped talk him out of it. Now, if these things are true, why didn’t Gbenga say it before now - since it is obvious the marriage has been on the rocks for quite a while? Why wait until his father has left office before putting out that information?

In this quoted instance he has become a dibia , a soothsayer and psychologist because he sees Gbenga’’s mind and has determined his actions . Please villager isn’t it time to invoke Bill Clinton here, and say, “Give me a break!
:
And the dibia is not done and he keeps seeing ghosts everywhere:


The answer may lie in Gbenga’s desperation. He has fallen out of favour with his father; he is about to lose a chunk of the illicit money he made through his father’s influence in a messy divorce; he does not have many people to turn to since most of those he’d have liked to go to are his father’s friends and those who are no longer his father’s friends, like Orji Kalu, have too much on their plates for now. So, what can he do? He came up with this wild script to blackmail his own father and Moji’s father to make more money on one hand and keep the one he has on the other

Interesting to note that sometimes the dibia is not sure when he says “may.” For the benefit of villagers, I wouldn’t like this man to waste our time, we have a country to build and let us hear the voice of Village Pepeiye that said , it look[s ]like in this case, culture has failed… “and I concur.

Is Gbenga not justified for abandoning what has failed to seek relief where justice is blind

If we are to remember the song of Soul balladeer, we are indeed, “extremely grateful to Gbenga for this new day that he has ushered in. And I am also grateful that we have shed mental slavery and the conversation on the hidden secrets in Nigerian society has been blown open. Isn't it a new day?

I thank you and celebrate with you my people.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Madame moderator (Mulan),

I commend your efforts. The summary of my previous post was better than the original and I couldn't have wished for a better summary. I thank you for showing serious commitment.

nero africanus
Jan 18, 2008, 09:44 AM
i have questions for the debaters

1. is our culture porous and lacking in the mechanism to address an abomination or are these mechanisms simply not applied?

2. full disclosure, from what is it derived , is it just a derivative of western culture which then makes it a benefit in itself or is it a derivative from the fact there will be benefit in the disclosure itself ?

3. is there any chance that this debate is battling what has as yet been unstated "the ever present battle between traditional culture and western culture"?

4. can western justice systems and approaches really stand side by side with traditional culture, approaches and justice system without conflict?

5. is it possible to give respect to elders , kings and other symbols of authority without fully applying the checks that underpine these values?

for instance , if we give respect to monarchs can we force them to commit suicide when they err?

6. can we drag an adulterous wife through the streets and have kids humiliate her and pour sand on her as our traditional justice system demands?

can we send a father who has defiled the land on exile?

in traditional culture of most lands , obj and gbenga's wife will be ostracised for defiling the land in other lands gbenga's wife will be sent back to her father's house , in others still they will be executed?

7. seeing how difficult it is to apply any of these checks , can we then seriously be talking about respect of elders and authority when there is simply no safeguard from abuse ?

8. finally is there a chance that this dilemma presented itself because the traditional institutions and western institutions are weak?

Kenn
Jan 18, 2008, 09:44 AM
Madame Moderator, fellow debaters and our ever-patient audience, it would seem that my opponent is running out of ideas! Otherwise, why would he engage in such cut and paste sophistry as we've witnessed here? Did anyone notice that the man still can't come up with one real benefit of Gbenga's action to society? What he's now reduced to is the desperate and selective conscription of the thoughts of Azikiwe, Ndibe and co to serve his predetermined non-intellectual ends, while claiming (and still keeping a straight face!) that Gbenga is already attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) to Nigeria because of his supposedly taboo-breaking revelations!

This only goes to prove my point that this man is heavily invested in mob justice. His forte is playing to the gallery without substance. He's so consumed by emotions over this matter that he does not realise that even if there are benefits, it's too early to see them. He cannot realize that it's against the norms of any culture, be it western, Yoruba, Nigerian or Mongolian , to condemn people based on a one-sided allegation yet to be proven or tested by evidence. His investment in false hope is burying him in quick sand, but he thinks he's in heaven!

Those who seek reasons why we are where we are as a nation need look no further than examine the Katampe-mentality – the Kill-Them-Before-We-Hear-Them mentality! Yes, we must save our country, but first we must talk sense into the heads of the Katampes in power, in the universities, in motor-parks, in every nook and cranny of our nation and in Diaspora.

Fellow debaters and esteemed visitors to The Crucible, I say seek your Katampe today and save him from himself. Saving him to save our nation is a task that must be done!


Thank you!

Kenn
Jan 18, 2008, 09:49 AM
Nero,

Interesting questions you’ve raised there! Thank you! I’ll love to address them, but that will wait. I’ve got to join the rat race in the meantime.:lol:

Once again, thanks!

Kenn
Jan 19, 2008, 12:04 AM
Nero Africanus,


>>>1. is our culture porous and lacking in the mechanism to address an abomination or are these mechanisms simply not applied?<<<


A culture is a people's way of life – it is naturally programmed to address every aspect of the life they're living. Its porosity or solidity is therefore relative to the people's experience or the vision of its early progenitors. For instance, we've heard of cultures where the husband gives out the wife to a visitor as a mark of respect and hospitality and we have cultures in Nigeria where the son inherits the father's wives (apart from his own mother) on the death of the patriarch. As an outsider, you may frown at these cultures; but the truth is it's more a social than moral question.

However, there's a near-universal opprobrium attached to the idea of a father sleeping with his son's wife. For the Yoruba, Igbo, Edo, Urhobo, Tiv, Birom, Ezon, Ukwani, Hausa, Kanuri, Efik, Fulani and indeed any of the Nigerian sub-cultures, sleeping with your son's wife is an abomination. The question ironically is how much ‘western' culture has done to undermine our traditional cultures, to the extent that things that used to be abomination in days gone by are now seen as ‘modern' or acceptable. So, those who blame our culture for not having mechanisms to apply in certain situations should probably be blaming western culture for blunting those once-effective mechanisms.




>>>2. full disclosure, from what is it derived , is it just a derivative of western culture which then makes it a benefit in itself or is it a derivative from the fact there will be benefit in the disclosure itself ?<<<


Of course, there's benefit in disclosures, depending on what is being disclosed. For instance, in our national fight against corruption, we would clearly benefit from the activities of whistleblowers or confessions of accomplices. Part of the reason some of us are advocating for the passage of the Freedom of Information Bill is to make it possible for such disclosures to have legal backing. But family issues are quite different. Even in the western world, the right to privacy exists. As far as something is not criminal, you're not under any obligation to divulge, even if it's considered immoral. And in certain situations, even when criminal, you aren't obliged to divulge, e.g. where the relationship is one of marriage, since the man and the woman are regarded as one in law.

In the case we're dealing with here, it is Gbenga's right and choice to divulge what he thinks is useful in his divorce case. No one would charge him for perjury if he refuses to disclose this, since it is supposedly a personal injury to him, not the state. But the fact that he stated these in court papers (which are public documents) should not immediately confer on it the status of truth. Gbenga is Obasanjo's first son who does not have a good relationship with his old man, who has a grudge against him, his wife and his wife's family and who has pecuniary reasons to make claims he may not be able to back up, but which may be intended to influence the court's decision in his favour. At any rate, whether Gbenga's claims are true or not, it has no benefit to society, even if it is clear that it is detrimental to the status and well-being of his father and family.





>>>3. is there any chance that this debate is battling what has as yet been unstated "the ever present battle between traditional culture and western culture"?<<<


The battle will always be there – today or tomorrow; but information and enlightenment are the keys to navigating the minefield. A discerning person should not be slave to a repugnant culture or tradition, just as he should not be slave to useless and self-destroying foreign ideas. There's a limit to which we can blame colonialism for our woes, because we aren't the only people ever colonized. Britain, France, China, United States and India were once colonized, but they aren't dwelling on it. The tragedy is not colonialism or the imposition of western culture; the tragedy is our leadership and our people's inability or unwillingness to be positively dynamic.





>>>4. can western justice systems and approaches really stand side by side with traditional culture, approaches and justice system without conflict?<<<


Colonialism is a fact of history and it has its consequences in our culture. There need not be conflict if we had visionary leaderships capable of synthesizing the necessary things. As much as we shouldn't be reinventing the wheel, we need to separate the wheat from the chaff. It's not rocket science. At any rate, even now, traditional cultural approaches do stand side by side with western judicial system in the form of customary and Sharia dispensations. And, outside these, there are well-grounded traditional adjudicatory procedures and systems prevalent in certain cultures and still employed today in settlement of disputes in rural areas of the country.





>>>5. is it possible to give respect to elders , kings and other symbols of authority without fully applying the checks that underpine these values?<<<


What checks are you speaking about? Giving respect to elders, even in traditional cultures, is not a one-way street. Elders are expected to earn the respect by exemplary conduct. The village fool or drunk earns no respect from anyone, even if he's Methuselah.





>>>>for instance , if we give respect to monarchs can we force them to commit suicide when they err?<<<


Of course, this used to happen with the most powerful monarch in Yorubaland, the Alafin of Oyo. In a complex web of checks and balances between the Oyo Mesi (led by the Bashorun), the Ogboni and Aare Ona Kankanfo, it was the practice that the Aare could demand the Alafin's head in a calabash where he's perceived to have erred. Indeed, the most notable of that cultural exchange recorded in history is Aare Afonja versus Alafin Aole.

Obviously, today, it's a new nation with a new grundnorm. But being monarch does not exclude or excuse anyone from criminal liability where they're found or suspected to have committed offences against the law. The problem in Nigeria is that the ‘Nigerian factor' of big men operating a separate ‘law' from the rest of society favours these monarchs, especially the so-called first class ones. At that level, of course, it isn't a cultural thing, but a socio-political condition engendered by bad governance. Though, I must add that the traditional institution in our country has always collaborated with all sorts of criminal leaderships that have lorded it over Nigeria – from the colonial to the present times.





>>>6. can we drag an adulterous wife through the streets and have kids humiliate her and pour sand on her as our traditional justice system demands?<<<


I suppose it's still possible to go through required rituals, depending on the culture you're referring to. But, of course, the intrusion of modernity makes it quite obvious that the ‘status' of the person (as expressed in the offender's political and economic power) may push it beyond traditional jurisprudence. And, of course, there's the fairness and equality question – can we drag an adulterous husband through the streets and have kids humiliate him and pour sand on him? There are clearly repugnant and unjust practices that certain cultures permit; but man is not made for culture, but culture for man. It is the duty of man to enlighten himself on what is good and what is bad at all times – that's the only way human beings or races make progress. Nothing is cast in stone.




>>>can we send a father who has defiled the land on exile?<<<


Yes, they still do it. I've heard of many 'Lagosians' who, along with their families, cannot go back to their villages because they've been banished for committing one traditional infraction or the other.




>>>in traditional culture of most lands , obj and gbenga's wife will be ostracised for defiling the land in other lands gbenga's wife will be sent back to her father's house , in others still they will be executed?<<<


This is the 21st century, Nero!:lol: They all would have their day in court. And that is the right thing.




>>>7. seeing how difficult it is to apply any of these checks , can we then seriously be talking about respect of elders and authority when there is simply no safeguard from abuse ?<<<


No one will arrest you if you do not respect your elder, but your conduct towards those older than you may define your values better in a place like Nigeria or under any of its sub-cultures. For the whiteman, age has got nothing to do with it. They think nothing of calling their parents by their first names or treating them like strangers once they've left home. Different cultures have different ways of evaluating what is respectful conduct. Some do it from the perspective of reason, others by sheer sentiments. When it's the latter, you get all sorts of false modesty and pretensions. You get young men lying flat in prostration, while wielding the knife to stab you when you aren't looking.




>>>8. finally is there a chance that this dilemma presented itself because the traditional institutions and western institutions are weak?<<<


There is no dilemma. The case will be heard and a verdict would be reached and the court would give reasons for its decision, including determining whether allegations contained in court papers are true. Our institutions are as weak or as strong as we want them to be whatever their nomenclatures.



CHEERS!

katampe
Jan 19, 2008, 10:05 PM
Nero,

thanks for your contribution to the debate, you raised interesting questions. I have inserted my comments below:


[quote=nero africanus;4294981178]i have questions for the debaters

1. is our culture porous and lacking in the mechanism to address an abomination or are these mechanisms simply not applied?

If we assume that there are mechanisms that are within our culture that address abomination, still I will argue have outlived their usefulness. Changing societal context that is the product of economy, science , and technology has made this mechanisms obsolete. The ubiquity for instance of mobile phones, internet and cable has wrought serious impact on the ways even Africans see the world that applying these mechanisms can sometimes raise world condemnation about the solution.

It is another matter when you make an argument whether the world and its members that have a different culture have the right to do criticize another culture . It still hasn't stopped the influence and rampaging influence of western ideas. It is something that I believe is hard to fight against and win. But if we don't consider this argument, then the ability of our culture to deal with these issues becomes extremely difficult, since implementation of any social rules out to have the larger consent of the people



2. full disclosure, from what is it derived , is it just a derivative of western culture which then makes it a benefit in itself or is it a derivative from the fact there will be benefit in the disclosure itself ?

Full disclosure holds many benefits in every sphere of human life not just western culture. Take for instance in medicine, the practice of making cures and methods available to the public. It helps people refine methods and apply the cures. So also has the generation of ideas and the building of the database of works of earlier humans or important philosophers helped advance the modern world.

At each stage of life, people must engage in a social conversation , I believe incidents like these promote that social experience. And in the end, we all better for it , because we are availed the collective insight of many people , not that of a few , and more importantly insights that take the moment into account.

If you ask me , secrecy has affected our ability in many areas, take for instance the medical field , certain diseases continues to occur in families, I remember someone mentioning the possibility that Osu could have been a result of people within that lineage having certain medical problems that the society does not covet. Hence, the mechanism of discrimination or seclusion to eradicate that abnormality.

If we make things more open , it hastens our ability to observe a pattern. And believe me ability to make inferences from those patterns sometimes can change the way we see the world. This is one area where culture has failed us tremendously.

katampe
Jan 19, 2008, 10:16 PM
Katampe,


You say there are loopholes in the culture which gbenga's action seems to have plugged, but I do not see it as such. It may look like in this case, culture has failed but fact is no one knows how far he pursued justice culturally.

My question is, are you denying that there are usually inbuilt governance or judicial channels in culture?

I am pushing the argument that culture needs to be reviewed and brought up to date with out social reality.It shouldn't be static and should be adopted them based on the experiences of past times. It needs to be constantly reworked.

The other thing, when one says plugged, it does not mean plugged per se , but rather it means favouring the courts instead of the cultural institutions.It can be likened to another kind of voting for its ouster by not using it.

Dewdrops
Jun 23, 2008, 12:53 PM
So much for "African Values"! And Africans will point fingers at other cultures when they are no better.

Like such revelations are new and shocking?

Oh please!

More to confess I say!