Sensitive Matters, Blood and the Right to Self-Defence

Crispin Oduobuk

"…If the word got out you killed him, then they killin' you back."

—Scarface of the rap group Geto Boys, on the song 'Geto Boys and Girls' featured on the 1996 album Resurrection

Ethnic jokes of any sort do not go down well in this corner. It is a very sensitive matter. Start any silly 'Calabar' jokes and there's a direct plea to stop. Persist and it's goodbye. Your correspondent simply doesn't play that. Don't want to be polite? Then be gone.

Friendships have been burnt by this—some even lost. Was a friend who used to insist that ethnic jokes don't mean anything, they're just fun. It's true there are people who feel that way. But that friendship is over now, though not necessarily on account of this misunderstanding.

Nonetheless the point here is: if a man tells you he doesn't joke over something, please do not joke with him on that matter. Respect his right to decide what is sensitive to him so that he too can respect your right to decide what is sensitive to you.

'Ibibio' not interchangeable with 'Calabar'

Primary example of concern to your correspondent in this context: if a man tells you he is Ibibio and not 'Calabar,' you ought to respect this distinction. There is something inherently disparaging about the way many people use the term 'Calabar.' The derogatory nature of this handle is, of course, lost on some on whom it is applied and there are those who even turn round and use it on themselves. But that does not ameliorate its negative status. It is wrong, it is wrong, it is wrong!

Even worse, it is arrogantly insensitive. And to those so-called comedians who now make it their stock-in-trade to disparage entire peoples, their ways, values and cultures, "shame on you!" is not enough reproach.

Perhaps this is where matters should be taken to a bloody level. Perhaps the next time someone disparages your people, whether you are Ibibio like this writer, or something else, you should attack the person and take his head off. Perhaps that would send a strong enough message that ethic chauvinism, or insensitivity in any sphere, is no longer tolerable in these times.

Tolerance, deterrence and self-defence

Without doubt, if people were to resort to the scenario above, all right thinking persons would condemn the practice in the strongest terms. Some would even advocate retaliation in order to send a clear message of deterrence and to encourage greater tolerance. For the most part, this is because it is a sacrilege in virtually all organised human communities to shed blood. And once blood has been shed, they are those who believe it can only be appeased by retaliatory bloodshed, thereby evoking an unending cycle of violence.

This leads directly to the matter of self-defence. It is simply in the nature of humans to want to live. As such, if Mr A comes under the erroneous impression that he has a right to kill Mr B for whatever reason, then Mr B, on the basis of that same convoluted logic, has as much right to kill Mr A in defence of his own life. This is hardly the stuff that progress is made of and no society gets anywhere by engaging in endless killings.

While the major concern of this writer in this essay is the matter of ethnic disparagements, it certainly will not be too far-fetched to link this to the recent reprehensible killings in Maiduguri and Onitsha. For the record, let it be abundantly clear that regardless of the murky situational complexities in the carnages that occurred in these two cities, the killings stand condemned in this corner. We make no advancements by resorting to these unwarranted examples of mayhem. In addition to the numerous calls for reconciliation and the enthronement of peace, let the point be stressed here that maintaining the peace, by force if need be, is a cardinal function of the state. If the state, through her law enforcement agencies, fails to enforce peace, then all our lives would continue to be in jeopardy.

Imperfect while still breathing and bleeding

Now in an interactive forum earlier on, someone asked if Scarface, to whom the opening quote in this article is attributed, is a hero to this writer. The answer to that, ironically, can be found in another song, a rock number titled 'These Days' by Bon Jovi. In the relevant portion, Jon Bon Jovi, leader of the group, screams: "Don't you know that all my heroes died?" To that your correspondent can only add that his heroes died ages before his birth.

The essence of the citation is simply that, on most days, one is a 'let bygones be bygones' type. But sometimes things get too much and then you have to let it rip. If that sounds inconsistent, well, what's to be said? While your correspondent is still breathing (with thanks to God); and still bleeding (no thanks to man), he'll never be perfect until he's sleeping for good.

As a final point, it has long been evident that we get nowhere by killing each other. We must find positive ways to coexist in peace while respecting the sensibilities of all.