In recent current events, Dr. Claudine Gay, Harvard University's first black president, stepped down from her position. A cursory glance at her statement will pass the message that her stepping down is for the sake of the university moving forward in peace, implicitly referencing the occurrences surrounding both her and the university as of late: allegations of Gay’s academic plagiarism, the campus protests regarding the Hamas Civil War (and her handling of it), and finally (and the straw that broke the camel’s back), accusations of antisemitism. One term that underpins this fracas of a period for the university is DEI, or Diversity Equity and Inclusion. A term once used as a white flag of peace and a symbol of forging past the ires of Black Lives Matter is now a weapon, a sword welded by the Republican Party and nationalists alike, stating this as America’s problem as a way to garner votes, a domino effect, if you will, of the past summer's June 29 Supreme Court decision on affirmative action which effectively ended race-conscious admissions practices in higher education and eroded 40 years of precedent . Notwithstanding the political tension surrounding this term, it is interesting to note how conservatives are pointedly trying to ‘roll back’ many tenets pushed forward by democratic principles, including DEI. In a recent article, they pointed to the hiring practices of these universities as a concern, stating that less conservatives were being hired. Other initiatives such as the student loan relief being blocked, and the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the Court ruling that the Constitution of the United States generally protected a right to have an abortion, provides more evidence of such a “roll back”. Even in the very circumstances surrounding the protests at Harvard, we are seeing that free speech, a core tenet of progressivism, is not really free. In the battle between conservatives and democrats in America, conservatives are putting their best foot forward and are commanding the turf, even behind the scenes. We are seeing a big push back against “modernism”, in favor of more conservative ideologies.
This is huge contrast to a recent occurrence in one of the countries in the Global South, Nigeria, the country where a recent BBC documentary exposes the abuse, rape, and cult-like practices of TB Joshua and his church. This documentary is said to be a product of 5 years of research, interviews, and investigation. While TB Joshua himself has died, it is still important to raise such matters as it speaks to the failed state of what is considered a fail-proof institution, the church (or religion in the Global South in general). While not much rage translated offline via systematic processes or parastatals, the documentary did spark discussions and raised awareness to the deleterious engagements of not only the pastor in question but other ordained ministers that use their title as a cloak for their vices. The documentary and such conversations give evidence of different demographics of Nigerians (albeit daresay mostly those in the diaspora) leaning more towards progressivism and democratic principles. Nigeria is a heavily conservative state, with politics divided mainly amongst religious lines. Seeing online discussions about other men of God and their alleged distasteful actions show that young people (at least) are balancing the religious fanaticism they were most likely born into with critical thinking as to what is right and wrong. Gone are those days in the Global South where a religious minister’s actions are defended or disputed without question; people are speaking up and there is an audience willing to listen. In Nigeria, in the battle between conservatives and progressives, progressives are slowly inching towards the goal post, even if it is just behind the scenes.
In the Global South, there's is a push towards modernism, while in the Global North there is a push back towards conservatism. Which is the best way to go? In the infamous words of Claudine Gay, context matters.
