Many years ago, one of my friends, Abdullah Olaoluwa went for an interview at a popular bank in Lagos. He had applied for an entry-level position following an advertisement calling for suitable candidates from the public. For context, Abdullah graduated with a second-class lower division in Agricultural science from a second-generation University. Undaunted by his class of degree, armed with digital skills, and ambitious about proving doubters wrong, this young chap decided to launch his corporate career first with a BIG stop in the banking sector. Following the success of his application, he was called for a physical interview at the bank headquarters in Nigeria’s Center of Excellence. On the day of the interview, Abdullah arrived early, dressing as corporately as possible, and was ushered into the venue of the interview without further delay. What happened next left him traumatized.
Instead of diving into my friend’s credentials, competence, and capacity for the job, the interviewer, a middle-aged dark-skinned woman took a detour by probing his religious identity. It was the first time my friend witnessed a systemic and institutional religious bigotry. “Why did you grow a beard”, was the first shot fired at Abdullah and before he could hazard a guess, he was hit by another bullet: Among the most successful people on earth, how many of them grow beards? Is it Former President Olusegun Obasanjo, Tony Elumelu, Barrack Obama or who? He instantly froze in his chair. “I wished I could disappear from that moment or wished something drastic or tragic happen to end that nightmare”, he later recounted. “I leave my beard not because I am a deeply religious person”, he fumed, “I did it because I love the way it complements my outlook. Period”.
When the award-winning author, Chimamanda Adichie walked listeners through the danger of the single story in her 2009 TED talk, her message resonated with several groups of people: the marginalized and the oppressed. “The single story creates stereotypes”, Adichie argued “and the problem with stereotypes is not that they are untrue, but they are incomplete. They make one story become the only story”. The fact that we don’t get to read stories of institutional and systemic religious discrimination in Yoruba land does not invalidate their existence. While a single incident of institutional bigotry may not be sufficient enough to generalize, it opens the pandora box of further investigations, one that may ultimately unearth the acclaimed religious tolerance in the region. A careful look at various institutions like the Banking sector, education, health, media, etc leaves a trail akin to what Lillian Smith posited to be the “honor of white supremacy”.
Perhaps, the prevalence of religious bigotry and discrimination in the western region underscores a contradiction. Sadly, this bigotry has extended beyond the two dominant religions: various denominations and sects now filled offices with their members risking competence over cronyism. When a group of people holds enormous power in the society, the dominant group should be ready for pushback. The fact that bigots don’t see themselves as a menace to society undermines efforts to fix the rots. This cut across. Bigots don’t like being called bigots similar to racists who don’t see themselves in racial terms. Unfortunately, denial has made solving the problem a lot more challenging.
When people talk about tolerance, they forget it comes from a place of love, kindness, and understanding not from a place of ignorance, arrogance, and resistance. Tolerance is not about choosing for people what they can choose for themselves. It is not about speaking for others when they can speak for themselves. “There is no other way to say this other than the fact that sharia laws in a society like ours, whether in the North or South, isn’t always restricted to Muslims” was one of the feedbacks I received in my previous columns titled Fighting Religious Bigotry is dangerous “there are stories like I said, of advocates of Sharia extending the tenets of Sharia to non-Muslims. That should not be accepted under any circumstance. And because, from what we have seen, those who practice Sharia seem to have a problem with keeping their laws off non-Muslims, it’s reasonable for skeptics to resist”.
I love that feedback because it came from a place of respect and openness to learning. Although, I disagree with the fallacy of that false generalization. In fact, Muslims are already living based on some principles of Sharia. Avoiding the intake of alcohol, abstaining from pre- and extra-marital affairs, rejecting interest-based financial transactions and institutions, etc are made unacceptable by the Sharia not by the Nigerian constitution. Marriages, naming, and burial rites followed strict Islamic (Sharia) principles. As a people, we cannot move an inch towards societal progress unless we have an avenue where people of different faiths and beliefs can openly and respectfully discuss vital issues that pertain to their religion. A convenient place for bigots to hide their bigotry has always been to lump complex religious discourse around ethnicity. With the north and south dichotomy, it becomes difficult to separate bigotry from jingoism. Recall that in the column I cited earlier, I argued that Nigeria cannot be a truly diverse nation while it stifles the voices and choices of a significant part of its people. “Because we don’t talk to each other about issues that bother us in a polite, honest, and respectful manner, we risk letting brilliant thoughts get sidestepped and sandbagged on the altar of sentiments and prejudices”. In White Fragility, Robin DiAngelo opined that “Prejudice is pre-judgment about another person based on the social group to which that person belongs. Prejudice consists of thoughts and feelings, including stereotypes, attitudes and generalizations that are based on little or no experience and then are projected into everyone from that group”.
Like I noted earlier, the most convenient way to have uncomfortable conversation dismiss in Nigeria has always been to lump them around politics, ethnicity and religion. That the Sharia conversation has survived numerous brickbats means the usual dismissive tactic that was deployed against the Hijab and Islamic Banking conversation has suffered another major setback. Perhaps the same pattern of resistance that was used to oppose other Islamic-based practices and principles seems to have lost their mojo around Sharia. For me, this is the reality that opponents of Sharia must be prepared to confront and contend with: this conversation is not dying anytime soon. Are Yoruba Muslim marginalized? Openly, not so obvious but systemically, crystal clear. Apparently the same Sokoto that is accused of an expansionist agenda had a democratically elected governor of Yoruba descent in the 3rd Republic!
Think of that for a second. Was there an expansionist agenda by the Sokoto Caliphate in the past? Absolutely. Can the weakened caliphate succeed in hiding behind Sharia court to retake Yorubaland? Utter nonsense. This is not the 18th century. Here’s where it gets interesting: there are Muslims who have joined other hypocrites to underestimate the systemic discrimination on account of religion in the southwest. They have also called to question the leadership of the Sultan of Sokoto over religious matters. Here’s a response to that” A catholic Christian from Nigeria has no problem having a white male Pope in Rome as his spiritual and religious leader but a Muslim from the western Nigeria should fight the leadership of his fellow citizen tooth and nail because of ethnicity. Disgusting, isn’t it?
NB: The name Abdullah is asterisk to conceal his true identity but the story is real.
OYO101 is Muftau Gbadegesin’s opinion about issues affecting the Oyo state and is published every Saturday. He can be reached via @Upliftnuggets on X, muftaugbadegesin@gmail.com, and 09065176850.
