Towards a NuMoraliti by Tadei MacAgu

 

To start with, there is no society that thrives without a set of rules. These rules, often referred to as mores, define how a group of people choose to associate. And this communal effort at developing mutual coexistence is often needful, since the absence thereof is a precursor to anarchy. But the preponderance of imposed sets of rules on others should be questioned and scrutinized, especially when such standards are crafted by some to subdue others. This effort at using mores to control others has been established as “morality” – loosely defined as the principle establishing rightness and wrongness.

It is about time that morality as it is should be set for disruption in its traditional form. This is not a call for anarchy, as reflected in Postmodernist or Dadaist experimentations. This is more of a scrutiny of how power serves the purpose of some over others. It is not unexpected for some to argue that such thinking as this has been expressed in feminist and Marxist ideologies. While such argument may, on the surface, appear genuine, the argument is hurriedly handicapped by the fact that one class of people seek to usurp power from the rival group only to begin a regime of moralistic incarceration of the minority!

Morality is more of a hypocritical stance concocted by those who use laws and restrictions to subdue others. In modern times, as we have seen on social media, in fashion and expressive arts, there is a conscious effort to question morality, especially the one masterminded by institutions – religion, philosophy and a social system that celebrates discrimination and prejudices.

There is a need for a new morality, which is referred to as NuMoraliti. This is a system of behavior where acceptability is mutually defined and not imposed by some larger than life figures. This peer-to-peer definition of what is acceptable can be likened to what happens with bitcoin transactions. NuMoraliti asks these questions: “Who determines whom and how to love?”, “Who defines how to behave, speak, dress or what is socially acceptable?”, “Who establishes what sexual relationship should be?”, “Who stipulates how faith should be practiced?”, etc. These questions are endless. NuMoraliti draws attention to how moralistic determinism is used to exclude, subdue, oppress and repress humanity. In a way, it is the imposition of the will of the powerful over others.

In the last few years, there has been a significant shift in public taste and expression. The losers, of course, have been those sworn to protect a legacy of decaying morality. It is not difficult to find that institutions that enforce morality have the highest rate of perversion, “immorality”, and inhumane treatment of others. As an alternative, NuMoraliti gives life and freedom to suppressed inhibition and promotes expression of personal preference. When espoused in literature and art, it celebrates the breakdown of structured thinking, canned thematology, and promotes experimental forms and gives liberty to expressions – including sexist, anarchist, vulgar and asocial language use. For certain, it is the celebration of everything that is suppressed, repressed, oppressed, characterized as taboos, and condemned by presumptuous religiosity, morality and societal conformity.

It is important to note that the word “immorality” has not been used (except once to show public reaction to religious hypocrisy). The reason for this conscious effort not to use the word is because it is a tool fashioned to dehumanize and demonize others in favor of a set of imposed values. This archaic representation of the free spirit is rejected. To buttress this, let us look at how “immorality” is adjudged differently: if a priest “lusts” after a body other than his, it is considered as a human weakness which needs penance. However, if it is a prostitute who fucks as a way of survival, she is treated as an anathema. So, the priest has a human flaw, while the prostitute is an aberration – like in Scarlet Letter? While we argue that both priest and prostitute have expressed their humanity, hitherto condemned by a pretentiously superficially sanctimonious society, it is a grave hypocrisy for society to explain a religious misbehavior as a human weakness and condemns another who has embraced that weakness without fear or shame.

 

Tadei MacAgu is an emerging voice, rising above the noise of complacent norms. He questions established values and proffers alternative insights into popular views

No Comments

Leave a Comment