“No man who is corrupt, no man who condones corruption in others, can possibly do his duty by the community.”*
– President Theodore Roosevelt (b. 1858 – d. 1919)
In Yorùbá culture, respect for elders is regarded as a matter of course. It is given as an honour to age and expected requisite wisdom. It is a practice that is woven into our daily lives in all ramifications. But this could become a really deep and complex responsibility where the elderly breaches the conventional morals and values of the society.
As isolated above, respect for elders is often seen as a cultural or moral value, based on the idea that they have accumulated wisdom over the course of their lives. However, when an elder is corrupt or behaves in ways that harm others, or hurt the collective interest of the society, it can be challenging to navigate the idea of respect to such elders.
As an intellectual task, it could be viewed from contextual ramifications. Let’s examine the following:
*(i) Respect for their position or age:*
In many cultures, elders are revered simply because of their age or status. *But respect for someone’s position doesn’t necessarily mean approval of their actions.* If an elder is corrupt, you might respect them as a person, but you don’t have to condone or accept harmful behavior.
*(ii) Respect as a person:*
The idea of respect as a person focuses more on their humanity and dignity. Even corrupt elders still deserve basic respect as human beings, *but respect doesn’t mean ignoring harmful actions or enabling wrongdoing. If their actions are damaging, it might be necessary to speak out or act against them, while still acknowledging their humanity.*
*(iii) Moral accountability:*
*In cases where corruption causes harm or injustice, it becomes important to hold them accountable, regardless of their age or status.* You can challenge their behavior, question their decisions, and demand accountability—this doesn’t necessarily erase the respect due to their humanity, but it can reflect a more ethical stance on the situation.
It is self-evident throughout history that in every polity on the surface of the earth, there are always two contending forces – good and bad. It might be too simplistic to just grade the forces as “good” and “bad.” We could have them pictured as forces of “progress” and “retrogress.” Or “evil” and “virtue.” Or still, “light” and “darkness.”
In his January 27, 1961 lecture titled “Politics and Religion” delivered to the students of Adventist College of West Africa in Ilishan-Remo, the sage and the greatest Yorùbá son since Oduduwa, Chief Obafemi Oyeniyi Awolowo lent credence to this reality. His stance suggested the inevitability and inescapability of this reality.
The avatar, Chief Awolowo however, insisted that it is an eternal responsibility of those who want “progress” to ensure that the agents of “retrogress” (however defined) do not succeed for the collective happiness of the society to be realised.
This forces one to do a re-examination of the “Alápõtí Kan Concept” that one has become fond of since the days at the great University of Ife.
This concept derived its origin from a Yorùbá aphorism – *”Alápõtí kan kò kò kí ìlú tú.”* Literally, it translates to *He whose treasure is just a valise does not care if the town goes up in flames.*
“Alápõtí kan” is figuratively assumed to be wifeless, without children, without any landed property and would lose nothing if the town goes up in flames. This is because all his treasure is contained in the valise which he could pull with one hand and escape. Such a person’s “I don’t care attitude” could be understood if he behaves in violation of values and mortality that could sustain the stability, progress and peace of the polity.
The cause for the re-examination of this concept Alápõtí kan is that there are samples of those who are possessed of more than a valise, who should be invested in the stability and progress of the polity but are ethically challenged. Their values are variegated. Their morals are mottled. And they are people who have to be respected.
This highlights the complexity of using “respect” to approbate moral morass warranted by elderliness. Often this could be unwittingly. Or even unconsciously for obvious reasons that “respect” is a matter of course in our culture. For those who are congenitally “respectful”, it presents a dilemma. It is an infliction of embarrassment. It puts such well-meaning individuals in a quandary.
If one was not conscious of how such “respect” was invested, dispensed or bestowed, it would give wrong messages to the society-at-large. It would convey decent discombobulation of decency. It would be an exudation of ethical incertitude.
Hopefully, the way and manner “respect” is given, and to whom it is given, would help edify our polity at the end of the day.
Think about it.
© Remi Oyeyemi
February 8, 2026
