Adichie
is this compelling piece has tackled the emergence of Donald Trump and
the manner in which Americans have treated the outgoing President Barack
Obama.
Award-winning writer, Chimamanda Adichie
Nigerian writer, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie has written an indebt
article expressing her anger at how Americans treated President Barack
Obama while installing a controversial figure like Donald Trump as
President.
Below is the full article published by the New Yorker.
America has always been aspirational to me. Even when I chafed at
its hypocrisies, it somehow always seemed sure, a nation that knew what
it was doing, refreshingly free of that anything-can-happen existential
uncertainty so familiar to developing nations. But no longer. The
election of Donald Trump has flattened the poetry in America’s founding
philosophy: the country born from an idea of freedom is to be governed
by an unstable, stubbornly uninformed, authoritarian demagogue. And in
response to this there are people living in visceral fear, people
anxiously trying to discern policy from bluster, and people kowtowing as
though to a new king. Things that were recently pushed to the corners
of America’s political space—overt racism, glaring misogyny,
anti-intellectualism—are once again creeping to the center.
Now is the time to resist the slightest extension in the boundaries
of what is right and just. Now is the time to speak up and to wear as a
badge of honor the opprobrium of bigots. Now is the time to confront
the weak core at the heart of America’s addiction to optimism; it allows
too little room for resilience, and too much for fragility. Hazy
visions of “healing” and “not becoming the hate we hate” sound
dangerously like appeasement. The responsibility to forge unity belongs
not to the denigrated but to the denigrators. The premise for empathy
has to be equal humanity; it is an injustice to demand that the maligned
identify with those who question their humanity.
America loves winners, but victory does not absolve. Victory,
especially a slender one decided by a few thousand votes in a handful of
states, does not guarantee respect. Nobody automatically deserves
deference on ascending to the leadership of any country. American
journalists know this only too well when reporting on foreign
leaders—their default mode with Africans, for instance, is nearly always
barely concealed disdain. President Obama endured disrespect from all
quarters. By far the most egregious insult directed toward him, the
racist movement tamely termed “birtherism,” was championed by Trump.
Yet, a day after the election, I heard a journalist on the radio
speak of the vitriol between Obama and Trump. No, the vitriol was
Trump’s. Now is the time to burn false equivalencies forever. Pretending
that both sides of an issue are equal when they are not is not
“balanced” journalism; it is a fairy tale—and, unlike most fairy tales, a
disingenuous one.
Now is the time to refuse the blurring of memory. Each mention of
“gridlock” under Obama must be wrought in truth: that “gridlock” was a
deliberate and systematic refusal of the Republican Congress to work
with him. Now is the time to call things what they actually are, because
language can illuminate truth as much as it can obfuscate it. Now is
the time to forge new words. “Alt-right” is benign. “White-supremacist
right” is more accurate.
Now is the time to talk about what we are actually talking about.
“Climate contrarian” obfuscates. “Climate-change denier” does not. And
because climate change is scientific fact, not opinion, this matters.
Now is the time to discard that carefulness that too closely
resembles a lack of conviction. The election is not a “simple racism
story,” because no racism story is ever a “simple” racism story, in
which grinning evil people wearing white burn crosses in yards. A racism
story is complicated, but it is still a racism story, and it is worth
parsing. Now is not the time to tiptoe around historical references.
Recalling Nazism is not extreme; it is the astute response of those who
know that history gives both context and warning.
Now is the time to recalibrate the default assumptions of American
political discourse. Identity politics is not the sole preserve of
minority voters. This election is a reminder that identity politics in
America is a white invention: it was the basis of segregation. The
denial of civil rights to black Americans had at its core the idea that a
black American should not be allowed to vote because that black
American was not white. The endless questioning, before the election of
Obama, about America’s “readiness” for a black President was a reaction
to white identity politics. Yet “identity politics” has come to be
associated with minorities, and often with a patronizing undercurrent,
as though to refer to nonwhite people motivated by an irrational herd
instinct. White Americans have practiced identity politics since the
inception of America, but it is now laid bare, impossible to evade.
Now is the time for the media, on the left and right, to educate
and inform. To be nimble and alert, clear-eyed and skeptical, active
rather than reactive. To make clear choices about what truly matters.
Now is the time to put the idea of the “liberal bubble” to rest.
The reality of American tribalism is that different groups all live in
bubbles. Now is the time to acknowledge the ways in which Democrats have
condescended to the white working class—and to acknowledge that Trump
condescends to it by selling it fantasies. Now is the time to remember
that there are working-class Americans who are not white and who have
suffered the same deprivations and are equally worthy of news profiles.
Now is the time to remember that “women” does not equal white women.
“Women” must mean all women.
Now is the time to elevate the art of questioning. Is the only
valid resentment in America that of white males? If we are to be
sympathetic to the idea that economic anxieties lead to questionable
decisions, does this apply to all groups? Who exactly are the élite?
Now is the time to frame the questions differently. If everything
remained the same, and Hillary Clinton were a man, would she still
engender an overheated, outsized hostility? Would a woman who behaved
exactly like Trump be elected? Now is the time to stop suggesting that
sexism was absent in the election because white women did not
overwhelmingly vote for Clinton. Misogyny is not the sole preserve of
men.
The case for women is not that they are inherently better or more
moral. It is that they are half of humanity and should have the same
opportunities—and be judged according to the same standards—as the other
half. Clinton was expected to be perfect, according to contradictory
standards, in an election that became a referendum on her likability.
Now is the time to ask why America is far behind many other
countries (see: Rwanda) in its representation of women in politics. Now
is the time to explore mainstream attitudes toward women’s ambition, to
ponder to what extent the ordinary political calculations that all
politicians make translate as moral failures when we see them in women.
Clinton’s careful calibration was read as deviousness. But would a male
politician who is carefully calibrated—Mitt Romney, for example—merely
read as carefully calibrated?
Now is the time to be precise about the meanings of words. Trump
saying “They let you do it” about assaulting women does not imply
consent, because consent is what happens before an act.
Now is the time to remember that, in a wave of dark populism
sweeping the West, there are alternative forms. Bernie Sanders’s message
did not scapegoat the vulnerable. Obama rode a populist wave before his
first election, one marked by a remarkable inclusiveness. Now is the
time to counter lies with facts, repeatedly and unflaggingly, while also
proclaiming the greater truths: of our equal humanity, of decency, of
compassion. Every precious ideal must be reiterated, every obvious
argument made, because an ugly idea left unchallenged begins to turn the
color of normal. It does not have to be like this.
-Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie has published three novels, including “Americanah,” which is being made into a ï¬�lm.
No comments:
Post a Comment