OF SOCIETY AND OPINION LEADERS
In every society, there is one form of prejudice or the other. Different societies have different names for one prejudicial attitude or the other. In societies where members share the same skin colour or similar facial features, attitudes perceived as prejudicial or intolerant will most likely be linked to ethnicity or interpreted as tribalism. In societies where skin colours and facial features are characterized by diversity, the same attitude will most likely be linked to racial differences. Different names, yet the same attitude underlies them. Whether the word used is 'ethnicity', 'racism' ,'tribalism', the underlying theme most likely will be considered as prejudice.
Regardless of what vocabulary is used, or in which society it is applied, prejudice is found in all places where human beings exist. Every society tends to consider whatever form of prejudice that is found in it as peculiar. But in reality, no society has a peculiar form of prejudice. This brings to mind an old adage: if one has not stepped out of one's premises, one tends to perceive one's farmyard as the biggest. It seems unnecessary to compare forms of prejudice in societies. Prejudice is abstract - it may manifest itself in different forms but it can not be measured in magnitude. Hence, one may not consider the level of prejudice in any society as being higher compared to others.
As much as one may not disagree with the notion that prejudice and discrimination do exist in societies where there are diverse groups of people, one may not disagree with the notion that doctrines and teachings do uphold ideals that are capable of accentuating the group differences in a society. In most cases, such tenets that are conducive to dissension among groups are neither in the best interest of the society nor are they genuinely beneficial to advancing the cause of groups of people deemed target of prejudice and discrimination. Some school of thoughts believe that individuals who advocate ideologies capable of emphasizing and reinforcing differences among groups often do so for ulterior motives. It is no secret that ideals capable of underlining group differences are often used as a vehicle for advancing individual cause or ambition.
More often than not, our eardrums are besieged with views and opinions of individuals who wants others to think that their comments or actions are motivated by patriotic, or nationalistic, or democratic ideals. More often than not our retinas are characterized by images of individuals who want others to believe they are speaking or acting in the interest of the society. It is a common knowledge that the goals of such individuals are not always as noble as often portrayed. It is an open secret that many a times, wolves do clothe themselves in the garment of sheep in an attempt to accomplish missions that are not quite in the interest of the society. It is an open secret that many a times, darkness does put on an appearance of light in attempt to throw unsuspecting folks off the track. Experience have taught many to be skeptical of the motives of individuals who champion opinions that assume somehow extreme stand on principles that accentuate disunity and separation among diverse groups in the society.
It is not unusual for individuals to besiege the minds of others with all sorts of 'truths' and appealing ideals. Test all spirits to know which one is true, is a well-known saying that is derived from the scriptures. But is such note of caution meant exclusively for folks in religious circle? Guess not.
The time comes and now is for opinion leaders with new vision to spring forth in this generation. No one is condemning individuals who have pioneered opinions in the past. Why condemn or blame them. Come to think of it, they most likely spoke out of their experience. Here is an undeniable fact: as one generation pass and another follows, and as the society undergoes transformations, opinion leaders will rise. They, like their predecessors, will base their opinions on one philosophy or the other. Just as it is important for the society to exercise caution as regards the kind of opinion they swallow hook, line and sinker, of equal importance is the need for opinion leaders to watch the kind of philosophy they subscribe to.
Most ideals sound graceful to the ears. However, not all ideals are of benefit to humanity in general, and the society in particular. Most ideals seem sympathetic to the cause of the oppressed, yet, not all are conducive to peaceful co-existence in the society. Most ideals have a large following. Yet, not all promote co-existence among members of the diverse communities that exist in the society; in fact, some ideals promote and accentuate exactly the opposite. Such ideals can be considered as a relic. They have served the purpose they were intended to serve in their hey-days. They have served purposes ranging from raising awareness of acts of discrimination and intolerance to gaining respect for 'historically disadvantaged' groups. Indeed, they have served a significant purpose that makes their place in history worthwhile. Despite all these, the time has come for a new vision.
The attitude of the society is changing. And the pioneers of such changes are the emerging opinion leaders. Opinion leaders who will champion ideals that point out the fact that though we are diverse, that does not mean every perceived unfair treatment should be instantly linked to whatever differences exist in the society. Opinion leaders who will uphold philosophies that makes it clear that expressions of prejudice or appearance of intolerance is an integral part of human nature (not intended to be glamourized though) that is not limited to group or ancestral identification. Opinion leaders who will stress the fact that all expressions of prejudice or appearance of intolerance may not necessarily have an ancestral undertone. Rather, they are an integral yet reprehensible aspects of human existence. Opinion leaders who will spread doctrines stating that group identification or ancestry may not necessarily be the explanation behind all treatments deemed unacceptable, rather, the explanation may be that human beings are simply proving to be human. Opinion leaders who will share with others that these things do happen because one is affiliated to the human race, and not necessarily because of any other affiliation whatsoever. Opinion leaders who will open the eyes of others to the fact that it is human to offend each other not because of affiliation to any group of people, rather, because you and I belong to the human race.
Opinion leaders who will not attempt to advance their own cause by giving every (or almost every) expression of love or hate dubious interpretations or explanation that will underline our adversity and differences. Opinion leaders who will not attempt to advance personal causes under the guise of advancing the cause of the oppressed or the underprivileged. Opinion leaders who will not reduce themselves to opportunists who accentuate and capitalize on differences among diverse groups in the society. Opinion leaders who gives the issue of relations among diverse groups a reasonable approach (as against assuming a bigot stance). Opinion leaders who will not speak out of sheer anger and frustration. Rather, individuals who will speak from an enlightened, intelligent, and rationale perspective. Opinion leaders with propensity to discuss issues pertaining to diversity from standpoints that are in better accord with reality. Opinion leaders who address issues based on objective and balanced convictions. Opinion leaders who will avoid polarizing every trivial day-to-day event that are an integral aspects of human existence. Opinion leaders who will think less of the cheers and accolades they will gain by polarizing and aggravating issues relating to diversity; rather, individuals who will endeavour to risk being misunderstood and jeered at in an attempt to uphold philosophies that will not accentuate the differences among diverse groups in the society.
Opinion leaders who allude less to the misdeeds of past generations; rather, individuals who prepare the mind of others for the possible better future we all have ahead of us. Opinion leaders who will downplay doctrines that explain events of the present by alluding to the misdeeds and injuries of the past; rather, individuals who will teach and encourage others to divert attention from the past and focus on the future. Opinion leaders whose words and actions will give others genuine and renewed hope for the future. Opinion leaders whose perception of the future envisages every member of the society regardless of group identifications. Opinion leaders who use their words and actions to foster the intermingling of all people regardless of group differences. Opinion leaders whose words and actions will strengthen the hands of many into activities consistent with progress. Opinion leaders whose words and activities will neither dampen the morale of others nor foster a pessimistic attitude / downtrodden mentality in others. Opinion leaders whose ideals downplays whining based on misdeeds and injuries of the past; rather; individuals whose words and actions will gear others into positive, meaningful actions due to the glorious hope of the future. Opinion leaders who in an attempt to secure their own future and fortune will not use the differences and diversity in the society as tools of manipulating the emotion of the people.
Opinion leaders who will not attempt to cunningly polarize issues pertaining to Divinity as means of advancing their own cause; for just as there is only one race (human race, that is), there is only one Divinity - God of all. Opinion leaders whose notion of family is not based on dissension between rival groups. Rather, individuals whose idea of family is based on the origin of mankind as established in the Garden of Eden - that is, all have the same origin regardless of the geographical root or ancestry. Opinion leaders who will not be apt to advocate the establishment of factions as a response to perceived acts of injustice; for even though such ideals may seem right and sounds favourable, they have proved to be rocking chairs. And what about rocking chairs? They keep people moving, but they get them nowhere.
Opinion leaders must be careful about the kind of doctrine, philosophy, ideology or ideal that they teach, advocate and exemplify. The reason behind this note of caution is not far-fetched. Opinion leaders play a significant role in shaping the thoughts and opinions of members of the society. They have considerable influence on how members of the society view things and themselves. They play a significant role in determining the mentality and perception of members of the society and how they relate with themselves.
Opinion leaders should avoid speaking out of sheer anger and frustration. It is easier said than done though. Emotions and experience can prove so overwhelming that utterances may be made on the spur of the moment; utterances that had not been passed through the sieve of thought and reason. It is very important for opinion leaders to sift their own thoughts and opinion on issues. Ideals, philosophies, doctrines, and ideologies are like knowledge - they all seem interesting and sounds good; but not all bears relevance to truth and reality. Opinion leaders should be willing to sift whatever ideals their opinions are based on before it hits the eardrums of their listeners. It is human to demonstrate bigot tendencies. But then, opinion leaders need to exercise an appreciable degree of restraint.
Opinion leaders are human beings like anyone else. Hence, neither are they expected to be perfect about the views they express nor are they expected to be flawless at all times. Rather, pioneers of opinions in the society should be willing to develop a propensity for getting their views across not only before they are sifted but also after they are sifted. In other words, for instance, an opinion that can be considered as out of tune with reality may be advanced to the public; once such opinion is sifted and refined, it is comely to keep the public abreast of such refinement.
Several factors do underlie opinions expressed. These factors include psychological orientation, degree of exposure, level of knowledge, level of understanding of life, maturity, etc. These are variable factors. In other words, these factors do change with time, and as they change, opinions and perceptions change as well. Proper adjustment needs to be made to opinions, especially, adjustments that foster norms of good relationship among all members of the society regardless of group identification.
God bless.
Yours
'Kunle O. Majek'
H I A F E M
Of impact, quality and excellence
That's the Spirit!
P.S.: I believe the Lord has used this piece to bless you. Why not share with others.
To return to HIAFEM HomePage, click here.
