Harvesting Organs and Futures

The case of a Nigerian senator who has been arrested and charged in the UK with trafficking a person with intent to harvest body parts has reverberated across U.K. and Nigerian newsrooms and social media. It appears to be a gruesome instance of abuse of power and exploitation of a vulnerable and deprived person. There are claims the senator enticed the victim with promises of a better life in the U.K. but secretly planned to use him as an organ donor for the senator’s unwell daughter. A different claim is that the victim was being paid to come to the U.K. as donor but was not a match and has made the accusations to avoid being sent back to Nigeria. It is possible that one, or even both of these accounts are true but we will find out in due course. 

Nigeria actually has a murky history of abductions and organ harvesting. Of recent there have been unconfirmed reports of wealthy people engaging criminal gangs to abduct, murder and harvest organs for their use. However, Nigeria’s history of this goes back to ancient times predating colonialism. Certain tribes were known to abduct people to be used in sacrifices or ritualistic offerings to gods. These practices were outlawed and phased out with the coming of colonialism and Christianity. However, there have continued to be cases and allegations of people killed, or body parts harvested as part of wealth rituals. These murderous and inhumane practices appear to be living on in a different guise  

Poverty has reached extreme levels in Nigeria. It is estimated that approximately seventy percent of the population live below the breadline. Not only are people chronically impoverished but they receive absolutely no direct support from the government by way of welfare or social benefits. Under these circumstances it is very likely that a considerable number of people would be coerced into making organ donations for payment. It is tragic that the very people responsible for raiding public coffers and neglecting public services are the same ones likely to be the beneficiaries and instigators of crimes involving organ harvesting.

As a result of mismanagement and corruption by current and successive governments and legislators in Nigeria healthcare in the country is worse than it was thirty years ago. The current Nigerian president is notorious for frequently traveling abroad to seek healthcare during his tenure. A lot of Nigerians often travel to countries like India or Turkey for critical healthcare. Nigeria is not on course to achieve any of its Sustainable Development health goals; and the WHO estimate life expectancy amongst Nigerians to be around fifty years. Less than ten percent of the national budget is spent on health. Health facilities are rundown and most rural areas have almost no access to proper healthcare. Healthcare in Nigeria is a regional lottery subject to political whim. The richest with the lower needs get the most and best healthcare while the poorest with the greatest needs get little or nothing. The NHIS is a programme that reinforces inequality and does nothing to provide access to universal healthcare.

It’s indicative of the collapse of government, political, judicial, law enforcement and health systems in Nigeria that it has taken an arrest abroad to bring these matters to the surface. It is still unlikely that very much will be done to address it. However, we are reaching the point where we can’t keep covering our nakedness with sacking and cry out hope. Our very present and futures are being harvested right before our eyes. The rot has set in and it may be too late to stop it.

Roe v Wade: Back to the Dark Ages

The leaked draft majority decision by USA Supreme Court typifies how the country still hasn’t been able to get over its dark history of oppression and exploitation. America brutalised and dehumanised Native Americans, Black slaves, and is continuing to do so to females. The idea that it’s ok for a person to kill another person who makes them feel threatened on their property but a woman cannot make a choice about whether or not to have a baby is perverse. 

If it is child abuse to have a child and not care for it; how can it be safe child welfare to be forced to have a child you cannot care for? There is no civilised society that should compel people to have a child just to satisfy a certain fundamentalist religious dogma. The notion that abortion should be outlawed for the benefit of society treats the idea of women making informed choices as a monstrous option. The judiciary cannot claim to be protecting society while making life needlessly difficult and painful for women.

Alito claims that the American constitution does not make any provision for the right to abortion. His implication being that the founding fathers would not have wanted to make it a right guaranteed under the law. However, when it was originally dreamt up the American constitution was intended to establish the presence and survival of Americans in North America. We know however that at the time of the writing of the constitution women were not deemed to be entitled to the privilege of all the rights within the constitution. Through the suffragette and civil rights movements it became clear that for the sake of fairness and reasonableness women should be entitled to full rights as American citizens. The right to choose what happens to their bodies is clearly one of those rights. The fact that it’s a choice unique to women and therefore not comprehended by the most men who have been in charge of legislation and judicial determination should not mean it should not exist. 

The idea that the right to abortion is not in keeping with American societal norms is just not tenable. America was visualised as a place where people could chart a brave new course. A place where there would be an equal entitlement for people who had been oppressed by the weight of imperialism. Banning abortion simply replaces imperialism with the conservative establishment. It serves little purpose and does just as much harm. 

Allowing individual states to decide whether or not to legalise abortion will pointlessly politicise an issue which should be a matter of personal choice. If anything, that would appear to set a course for society that might fatally undermine the American constitution. 

The Will to do Better

I’m no fan of showbiz awards shows. I think they lack integrity and very rarely reward excellence. However, they are highly regarded by people in the industries; and they do like to be recognised and honoured. At this year’s Oscars all Will Smith had to was dress up, get to the venue, smile and wave, sit his ass down, pick up his award, give a speech, smile and wave again, sit his ass down; smile and wave some more and then leave. Instead he sat down in 2022, and then decided to get up in the 1920s and play out the dated “he done wronged my woman” trope and be a knave. So now him deciding to play the fool has us all looking like chumps and debating whether it’s ok to assault another person over an “insult”. 

As a Black man I am part of a larger community that has had to acknowledge and address historical and endemic violence by Black men towards women, children and the community in general. Particularly physical and emotional violence towards women. While tackling violence is a work in progress I had hoped that within the Black community there was acceptance that the pattern of violence that we had been seeing was wrong and needed to stop. Reading a lot the reactions to the ‘Oscars slap’, it is clear the problem of violence by Black men is as big a problem as it has ever been. 

No one should expect celebrities to be role models and they have a right to conduct their lives free from presumption and undue expectations. However, actions have consequences and when a person chooses to slap another on live television in front of millions around the world then you can expect ‘the butterfly effect’ to come into play. I’m sure that it is likely that in the week following ‘the slap’ there will be probably around five homicides or attempted homicides where the perpetrator would have had Will Smith’s action in mind before committing the act. They are going to think that after Will Smith they can’t now be caught slipping; and need to show that they are not punks. It has been unfortunate to see so many people trying to normalise this type of behaviour as being necessary in defence of his wife. One would have hoped that such people would be able to distinguish between protecting and defending a person. 

No one can say exactly what went through Will Smith’s mind in the moments before he stepped on stage to commit that egregious act but we all know what probably shouldn’t have. Over the coming weeks I’m sure he will be presented with many opportunities to give his perspective on what happened. I can only hope that whatever explanation he gives is honest and responsible. 

Disunited Nations

The League of Nations was established after the first world war to enforce the agreements reached following the cessation of hostilities with Germany, while also creating a forum to cooperatively maintain a new global order. The League of Nations subsequently transformed into the United Nations at the end of the second world war. Its mission was still the same but its intention was more focused on maintaining and reinforcing a power dynamic that ensured that the super powers maintained control over global affairs. 

The setup of the United Nations mostly serves the interests of the permanent members. The basic intention is that if the super powers are kept happy then they would be less likely to go to war with each other culminating in another world war. However, this does not stop such super powers attacking other countries, or supporting internal conflicts or wars between other countries. In actual fact, permanent members have a veto that ultimately thwarts united action and silences smaller nations with concerns about their sovereignty. So it is clear that the United Nations has no ability to prevent war where a super power wishes it. It is also not able to guarantee global peace unless member countries choose to exercise restraint. 

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is not the first time a superpower or a superpower backed nation has unilaterally attacked another country. The Soviet Union attempted to invade Afghanistan, the U.K. waged a military campaign in the Falklands, the USA has attacked Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan, Israel bombed Iran, Saudi Arabia attacked Yemen, and Russia has invaded territory in Georgia and Crimea. While there may not have been universal support for all these action the United Nations was helpless to prevent or stop them. 

There is no doubt that the United Nations and its agencies do a lot of good work across the globe. Work which is underpinning well-being and development in many countries. However, it is clear that certain permanent  members have chosen to either ignore or circumvent the charter in order to attack other countries. As an organisation that was setup to stop wars and maintain peace its workings haven’t proven effective at doing this. 

Cat Flap

The case of a Black footballer in London who was filmed kicking and hitting his cat has once again raised the spectre of endemic racism in the British society. The footballer’s treatment of the cat was cowardly and abhorrent. There was no excuse for it. However, it has become the focus of extremely divisive and xenophobic rhetoric from quite a few people in the United Kingdom. The player has been rightly condemned but some comments have been so incendiary that it would not be unreasonable to be concerned about the personal safety of the player. A lot of the criticism has referenced the player being either Black or not British. The implication being that his race or ethnicity might be a factor in why he behaved poorly. The piling on has really taken on the tenor of a lynching. The amount of outright xenophobia and racist implications in some comments reinforces the notion that there is an endemic level of racism still in British society. 

Leap of Faith

 © Sony Pictures Animation Inc 

A leap of faith means believing that you are doing the right thing because you are making the absolute right choice. You move forward without guarantees or certainly of the outcome but you have insight that  you will achieve the aim you are shooting for. Our faith in God and religion is based on a justified true belief that there is a higher authority and Supreme Being that dictates human life. Religious belief often means that people commit to worship on the basis that God is real and right. They build up a faith that their belief in a religion is righteous and redeeming. This faith allows them to rever and worship their God knowing that there is a higher esoteric calling that they are accountable to. 

As individuals we often encounter situations where we have to decide on what decision to make while uncertain about the benefits or detriment involved. We end up trying to weigh up the advantages of taking a course of action against the risks that it might entail. However, the fact that we might not know what outcome will result; be it positive or negative, does not prevent us from deciding on which course of action to take. It’s at that point that we make a leap of faith that we will achieve the outcome desired, or at the very worst we will not suffer excessively should things not turn out as we hope. 

How we make decisions about what direction or actions we take is big part of what goes into setting up our mental health. There are two things that can have a particularly detrimental effect on our state of mind. One is, when being confronted with a choice, how we proceed and whether we go on to take action. The other thing is, how we respond to situations in which we are faced with conflicting options. Not acting positively in either of these situations may lead to significant anxiety and stress induced behaviour. 

Just as with our relationship with God the strongest personal relationships are rooted in faith. Faith in another person’s altruism. We open ourselves up and step into a circle of trust where we expect the best of each other. And even when there are questions we challenge each other to be better and reward our trust. And at times when we have doubts we take everything into consideration and explore the limits of our own faith. Ultimately, that faith instils a feeling of trust in individuals. It is this that goes on to form the bedrock of most relationships. 

Taking a leap of faith means putting aside any sense of doubt and preparing to commit to a course of action that we believe will deliver some anticipated benefits. It also represents a recognition that having given careful consideration to the circumstances that is most suitable option to choose. This is how human beings commit to a long term gain over any perceived short term risks. 

Lawfully Unjust

The trial of the ‘Kenosha killer’ was recently concluded in Wisconsin with non guilty verdicts on all counts. The jury largely accepted the self defence justification put forward by the defence. There are clearly mixed feelings about the verdict and how this verdict could have been reached. The arguments will rage on and a lot of people will remain outraged while others claim it was a just verdict given the circumstances. There have been views given about missteps by the prosecution and the Judge’s general approach to the case. The case may be concluded but ill feelings engendered by it will be with us for a very long time. 

It is impossible to look into this case and not see that it feeds into the whole issue of gun ownership and use in the United States. It is impossible to legitimise common gun ownership and enact ‘open carry’ laws, and not expect that guns will become a means of focusing minds on fears and anxieties. The more people are encouraged to possess weapons the more likely those weapons will replace reflection and restraint when people are confronted with threats and challenges. It becomes more plausible to imagine danger to life when oneself is possessed of the means to take a life. And the simple truth is that guns are made with the sole function of causing harm and ending life.

Whether it is acknowledged or not, the thing White people in America fear the most is Black people. And it doesn’t make any difference whether the Black are actually dangerous or not. There is an inbred fear and a perception of Black people as angry and volatile that automatically makes white people fear for their safety. This is borne out in everyday interactions and it is what underlies law enforcement’s lethal approach to policing Black communities. When you throw gun ownership and a militarised police force into the mix you end up with the legally permitted murder of Black people.