Are we just savages driving escalades and BMWs in our so-called real world?

Destruction in Gaza, Palestine. Photo: Euromedmonitor.org

 

"For Sowell, therefore, you must take cues from history. If you cannot find a historical precedent, then stop looking for that kind of a world."

The west's fervent and uncritical support of Israel even when Israel commits a genocide makes me think about human equality.

Is equality a mirage?

Given the persecution of the Jewish people in Europe in the last 2000 years, I feel saddened by the fact that those who know what means to be hated and persecuted by simply being who they are, now premise peace and co-existence on bombs.

I teach young people. I do research on young people. In these activities, my aim is to work toward a better world, a world in which everyone would feel respected, a world in which what fails you is your inability.

That is the world I want to leave behind for my children and the youth I teach. This world is yet to be realized.

But there are conservative thinkers like Thomas Sowell (see: Social Justice Fallacies, Intellectuals and Society, Intellectuals and Race), John McWhorter (Woke Racism) and Coleman Hughes (End of Race Politics) who think differently.

They either say such a world is already here, or they believe it is an impossible world. A utopia of Saint Thomas More variety. Meaning a search for a just and equal world is fantastical, a childish wish. They want us to live according to what the world throws at us. In other words, we must live in the real world and accept things as they are.

Violence. Military brutality. Military invasion. Genocides. Murders of civilians. Wars. Economic equality.

Photo: Palestinian Return Centre

Within this framework, Israel is said to be adapting to a world it cannot change. Israeli genocidal destruction of Gaza is, by this account, a response to a real world Israel did not create.

This is a world in which equality is a pipe dream.

For instance, equality is a natural impossibility for Thomas Sowell. We shouldn't dream of a world that is not and has never been. Pssst: Sowell uses history to make his point. He makes this point in Black Rednecks and White Liberals and Conquest and Culture.

For Sowell, therefore, you must take cues from history. If you cannot find a historical precedent, then stop looking for that kind of a world.

As such, for the Sowells, the Hughes, and the McWhorters of the world, racism is, largely, a passé.

To be realistic, they are right or wrong based on one's ideological camp. You will find their supporters and haters in boat loads. Sowell puts this well in Intellectuals and Society:

“The coincidence of real world challenge and intellectual challenge, which [H. G] Wells and others have tended to treat as almost axiomatic, depends on the initial assumptions of one’s social vision.”

To Sowell, the left forces their vision (as the anointed – McWhorter would call them “The Elect” and Hughes would call them “Neo-racist”) on the rest of us. Conservative intellectuals, according to Sowells, remain faithful to the facts of the real world.

But here is where they seem naive. They think their assessments are simply objective. That they write about facts, common sense, and the real world.

Here is Sowell again:

Is Stephen Par Kuol writing his political obituary?

From left: Mr. Stephen Par Kuol, Dr. Riek Machar & President Salva Kiir

I like Stephen Par Kuol. Not doubt. I have watched him over the years as minister in Jonglei State, as a member of SPLM-in-Opposition, and as a minister responsible for peace in the central government. His interviews about leadership and the prospects for peace in South Sudan were level-headed. 

Today, however, I think Par is on the wrong side of history. But this is not because he's replaced Dr. Riek Machar (provisionally he says). That's not it. He's wrong, I believe, because he's committing the same historical-political sins Dr. Riek Machar has committed.

Even when Riek Machar knew President despises him with a visceral intensity, he still believed, somehow, that Kiir will implement the peace agreement with him. 

Like Riek, Par believes he's doing the right. Dr. Riek has consistently believed he was doing the right thing in the manner he dealt with President Kiir as a reluctant peace partner. We know what it has got him into. 

Par is unwittingly playing into President Kiir's agenda to dismantle SPLM-IO, the only formidable political opposition to his SPLM. in South Sudan.

He's also playing into the hands of Nuer elite inside and outside SPLM, who feel overshadowed by Riek Machar for more than three decades. They want out of Riek's shadows. Nuer leadership in South Sudan has become synonymous with Riek Machar. These Nuer elite resent that. 

For these Nuer elite discrediting Dr. Riek Machar is welcome news. It provides anyone of them a fruitful opportunity to rise above the crown as the political voice of the Nuer nation. 

For President Kiir, the emergence of Par provides him with political arsenals to make Riek Machar completely irrelevant on the South Sudan's political scene. 

Kiir has resisted Dr. Riek Machar's reintegration into the SPLM since 2003. But political consensus in the SPLM and the wise counsel drowned out his opposition. Kiir also tried from as early as 2008 to remove Dr. Riek Macahr from the SPLM. He failed. 

He tried in 2013 and 2016 to get rid of Riek either from the face of the earth or at least from South Sudan's political scene. Again, he failed. 

From February 2025, the White Army unwittingly came to President Kiir's rescue. They played into Kiir's plans. The attack on SSPDF in Nasir by the White Army, whose instigation we still don't know, provided President Kiir with a golden opportunity to banish Riek Machar from politics in South Sudan once and for all.

So, Stephen Par Kuol is the unwitting ally in the conspiratorial detention of Dr. Riek Machar. Unless of course Par is part of the conspiracy. After all, he may become the SPLM-IO chairperson and the First Vice President of South Sudan. Until elections of course. After that, Par's SPLM-IO becomes irrelevant as a political tool.

While Par may bask in the spotlight now as the recognized leader of the SPLM-IO, he fails to see that President Kiir is not only trying to destroy Dr. Riek Machar politically. He is also trying to destroy SPLM-IO. Why does Par think Kiir would support a party that will compete with him in an election? Kiir is only supporting Par because of Dr. Riek Machar. Once Dr. Riek is gone from the political scene, something we know will be next to impossible, President Kiir and his SPLM will come after the remaining vestiges of SPLM-IO. 

Kiir's problem is not Riek Machar per se. No. Not really! Kiir's resentment comes from the political threat Riek causes to the political dynastic Kiir and Jieeng elite want to establish. Par should therefore watch out. 

Meaning Stephen Par risks writing his own political obituary. Kiir's SPLM will not want to create a strong rival opposition. They have already closed down SPLM-IO offices in some states. 

Riek's support base will never forgive Par. Nuer who feel let down or targeted by the government of South Sudan will always regard Par as a quisling, a turncoat. 

Now, what is Par's end game? Turning against other members of SPLM-IO, like Nathaniel Oyet, does not make for a strong, united party? It fractures and weakens the party. If he's saying he is an interim chairperson until Dr. Riek is released, then he is not acting like it. Cozying up to President Kiir who arrested his boss does not show Par is interested in having Dr. Riek released. 

If he is planning to be the SPLM-IO flag-bearer in December next year, then he'll have started his political life with a deception SPLM-IO base will resent. 

It is time for Mr. Stephen Par Kuol to be explicit and stop obfuscating political actions. He cannot say he's interested in having Dr. Riek Machar released and then cozy up to those who have his boss under detention. 

__

Kuir ë Garang (PhD) is the editor of TPR.