KWENU: Our Culture, Our Future

Rejoinder to May’s MOE’s Memo

VICTOR AKPU

 Union, NJ

VAkpu@aol.com

[culled from African Market News]

August 2004

Dear Editor:

  First let me take this opportunity to thank you for your truly enlightening newspaper.

  I must confess that I am an avid reader of your newspaper, especially MOE’s Memo, and I usually agree with nearly all his commentary.

  However, on your May 2004 issue of MOE’s Memo [“What God has put asunder….”], I found myself arguing with his write-up particularly his statement that, “…in a communal cultural setup, I have argued that men and women should not normally and regularly meet.” He went on to state, “That’s a stipulation of my great ancestors and I think it is still valid….”

  My concern is centered on the statement attributed to our great ancestors and the concurrence to its validity in today’s world. Of course, there are many communal practices by our ancestors that remain valid by today’s standard. However, the framework of ideas provided by our ancestors should always undergo a litmus test in other to evaluate the needs for modification.

  I believe that we should not be threatened by diversity of opinion. In group meetings, as well as communal setups, Women should be encouraged to express their opinion even when it is contrary to our macho ideology. It is okay and should be welcome.

  Our great ancestors were not opportune to share the worldwide exposure and education that we enjoy today. There was a time when the means of transportation was by horse-pulled caravans, and there was also a time when only men were allowed to go to school in many families. But today, the door is open to all. We have cars, airplanes, and everyone is allowed to go to school, etc. Men alone do not have a monopoly of knowledge. I believe that knowledge is not knowledge until it is shared.

  In this ever-changing society, we should embrace change by being proactive and using it to our advantage. Including women in our communal cultural setup may spring innovations and new approaches to challenges. I am sure women can be good presidents just as well as men.

  What women need is society’s unconditional support. After all, there was a woman president for Igbo-USA in New Jersey, and she did just as good a job as her male counterparts. I believe the barrier has been broken and women should be encouraged to participate regularly in our communal cultural setup.

  As you know, there are many Nigerian organizations here in America. Each of these organizations has rules in the form of a constitution that guides it. Enforcing these rules without favoritism to those who seem to be swept up by their own sense of celebrity with bogus and meaningless titles (at least here in America) may ratify these concerns.

  Indeed, part of the confusion among our generation is time relevance. Some of our leaders have passed their time of relevance and fail to recognize it as we airbrush and validate their status as heroes, mentors, saints, etc.

  In reality, their leadership styles cannot stand the test of today’s leadership standards, both morally and ethically. Leaders have vision. Our current community leaders are enjoining a merry-go-round musical chair by passing the baton from one to another.

  While our attitude of service to the community is commendable, our elected officials have failed short in applying the rules and in practicing a fair policy across the board for everyone. Our elected officials have no benchmarks or yardsticks to measure their performances.

  Bottom-line: Men and women can coexist in a meeting setup. The fact is that we lack cohesiveness and group synergy.

  In my opinion, what MOE’s Memo of May seems to be promoting is a group-think syndrome, where everyone is happy and goes along singing “kumba ya ya, kumba ya.” This is a fallacy. The challenge of leadership is not with the people we get along but with our opposition.

        In our community organizations, where the elected official cannot reward or discipline its members, I have observed that our approach to opposition has always been to avoid, eliminate, or form another group. We need to learn the art of communication, where we focus on the dispute and not the person.

   I believe that we should strive for a mutually supportive process that can lead us beyond cliques and partisanship by setting shared goals. By streamlining the process and holding our elected and/or selected officials accountable, men and women can work together in regular, cultural meeting setups.

  Above all, we must elect and/or select leaders who have vision for the future. Conflicts within group setups should be perceived as good because it can be used as a learning experience.

  Although I do not profess to having the magic-wand solution to our social problems, I do know that the suggested solution of taking the path of least resistance to the problem is not the answer. After all, we achieve more when we are united.

  Thank you.

{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

 More on the matter: