The apartheid era (1948-1994) in South Africa stands as a stark reminder of how religious texts can be distorted to justify oppression and racial supremacy. During this period, the Bible was frequently misinterpreted to validate social hierarchies, reinforce white supremacy, and marginalize non-white populations. This misreading was not isolated incidents but part of a broader pattern in history where sacred texts have been weaponized to serve political and ideological interests. This study examines the ways in which biblical narratives, particularly those concerning the so-called ‘curse of Ham’ and the concept of a ‘chosen people,’ were manipulated to legitimize apartheid policies. By exploring these distorted interpretations through historical and hermeneutical analysis, this paper aims to uncover the ideological framework that sustained apartheid’s injustices. Understanding these misuses of religion is vital not only for addressing the past but also for ensuring that similar distortions do not gain traction in contemporary societies.
The history of religion reveals a recurring tendency to manipulate sacred texts for selfish and exclusionary purposes, often to subjugate marginalized groups. This was evident during South Africa’s apartheid era, where distorted interpretations of the Bible played a significant role in justifying racial discrimination. Understanding this misuse through precise historical and hermeneutical analysis is crucial to preventing similar trends in the future.
Apartheid, a formalized system of racial segregation, officially ended around 1990. However, the ideological roots of apartheid were sown long before. The first Europeans to arrive in South Africa were the Portuguese, landing at the Cape of Good Hope in 1488. In 1652, permanent settlers led by the Dutch East India Company established a colony in the region. French and German settlers later joined them, collectively forming the ‘Afrikaner’ identity. By 1779, European settlers had spread widely across South Africa, though they now make up less than 10% of the total population.
The Reformed Church played a pivotal role in shaping apartheid ideology. In 1829, the Dutch Reformed Church issued a declaration in Belhar, Netherlands, containing elements that laid the groundwork for racial discrimination. However, even earlier, in 1618, the Reformed Church had begun promoting the concept of being God’s ‘chosen people,’ which fostered racial and communal superiority. (1)
Economic developments further intensified racial divides. The discovery of diamonds in Kimberley (1870) and gold in 1886 attracted more European settlers, predominantly British. This influx heightened tensions between British newcomers and established Afrikaner settlers, culminating in the Anglo-Boer Wars (1880–1881 and 1899–1902). The British ultimately triumphed, annexing various territories and establishing the Union of South Africa in 1910, where political power was monopolized by the white minority.
In 1912, the African National Congress (ANC) was formed to combat racial discrimination and advocate for black political representation. Despite these efforts, the ruling government continued to enforce laws that marginalized black citizens. The rise of the white National Party in 1948 marked a turning point, as apartheid policies became deeply institutionalized.
Key apartheid legislation included:
1. Population Registration Act (1950, Act No. 30): Mandated racial classification of all citizens.
2. Group Areas Act (1950, Act No. 41): Segregated residential areas based on race.
3. Suppression of Communism Act (1950, Act No. 44): Criminalized opposition movements under the pretext of combating communism.
4. Separate Representation of Voters Act (1951, Act No. 51): Removed black citizens from the general electoral roll.
5. Bantu Education Act (1953, Act No. 47): Introduced a restrictive, inferior curriculum for black students.
6. Natives Resettlement Act (1956, Act No. 64): Denied blacks entry into designated white areas, even if they had previously lived there.
In 1960, South Africa witnessed the Sharpeville Massacre, where police killed 69 unarmed protesters and injured 180 others. This event prompted the government to ban the ANC and Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), imprisoning leaders like Nelson Mandela. Nelson Mandela spent 27 years in prison for his fight against apartheid in South Africa. In response, both movements initiated armed resistance.
By 1961, South Africa had declared itself a republic, severing its ties with the British Commonwealth. The apartheid system remained entrenched, with increasingly oppressive amendments introduced in 1984 to further consolidate white supremacy.
Religious distortions played a central role in perpetuating apartheid. Misguided interpretations of biblical texts sought to legitimize racial segregation as divinely ordained. By selectively invoking concepts such as the ‘curse of Ham’ and the notion of ‘divine election,’ apartheid ideologues attempted to justify systemic injustice. Such distortions underscore the need for vigilance against similar manipulations of religious teachings in contemporary society.
Racial Discrimination in Textbooks
Apartheid-era textbooks were deliberately crafted to reinforce white supremacy by emphasizing racial differences and promoting the superiority of whites over non-whites. (2)
A 1983 study by J.M. Dupree analysed 50 South African textbooks and identified recurring themes that perpetuated racist ideology:
• Whites are inherently superior to blacks.
• The legal dominance of whites is both natural and necessary.
• Afrikaners possess a unique covenant with God.
• Afrikaners are portrayed as the true and rightful owners of South Africa.
• The Afrikaner people are depicted as a ‘Boer’ (peasant) nation, reinforcing nationalist sentiments.
Studies confirm that South Africa endured decades of systematic brainwashing and pseudo-indoctrination through its educational materials.
In 1973, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution declaring apartheid a crime against humanity. (3) However, several nations refused to endorse this resolution, including Canada, the United States, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, Britain, Australia, and New Zealand.
The resilience of South African civil society between 1976 and 1985 forced the National Party to reconsider its stance. In 1986, the government initiated secret talks with Nelson Mandela. When F.W. de Klerk assumed the presidency in 1989, he lifted the bans on the ANC and PAC movements in September of that year. Two weeks later, Nelson Mandela was released from prison. By 1991, apartheid’s legislative pillars — the Group Areas Act, the Land Act, and the Population Registration Act — were repealed.
In April 1994, South Africa held its first non-racial general elections, which saw the ANC under Mandela’s leadership secure a decisive victory. Mandela was sworn in as President on May 10, 1994. During his five-year tenure, Mandela prioritized resolving social issues such as unemployment, housing shortages, and crime. He also established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, chaired by Archbishop Desmond Tutu, to address the injustices of the past. In December 1997, Thabo Mbeki succeeded Mandela and spearheaded economic reforms.
Remarkably, it was only in 1998 that the Dutch Reformed Church formally denounced apartheid as a fundamental evil.
Apartheid’s Historical Roots and Religious Justifications
Apartheid’s endurance was significantly bolstered by distorted religious justifications. The interpretation of religious texts is often shaped by the interpreter’s disposition. As the renowned Islamic scholar Khalid Abou El Fadl observed:
“If the interpreter is intolerant, hostile, and oppressive, the interpretation will be accordingly.” (4)
This insight applies to all major religious texts, including the Bible, the Gita, and the Quran. (5) The New Testament testifies that Jesus Christ delivered a sermon that rejected all forms of racial discrimination. (6) Yet, despite this, the Bible was manipulated to justify apartheid. A South African-Australian advertising director and novelist Bryce Courtenay highlights the example of how Christianity was twisted into a tool of terror during this dark period. (7)
It is important to recognize that apartheid did not originate solely with the Afrikaner National Party’s rise to power in 1948. Rather, apartheid institutionalized and expanded pre-existing racial ideologies that had long influenced South African society. (8)
The Dutch Reformed Church had embraced the concept of a ‘community of the chosen’ as early as 1652, reinforcing exclusionary racial ideas. The Old Testament’s concept of the ‘curse of Ham’ was historically misinterpreted to justify the enslavement of the Canaanites. This interpretation claimed that the word ‘Ham’ was linked to the Hebrew term for black and hot. Church fathers such as Origen argued that ‘Ham’ symbolized all black people. (9) Figures like Eutychius of Alexandria and John Philippus, along with American slave traders, further misapplied the ‘curse of Ham’ to rationalize the enslavement of black people. (10)
Even St. Jerome perpetuated racial bias by suggesting that the souls of black people were as dark as their skin. Biblical scholars have also noted that the New Testament book of Philemon was interpreted both to support and oppose slavery. (11)
Although slavery was generally accepted throughout the first 18 centuries of Christianity, early Christian values also encouraged the emancipation of slaves as a virtuous act. The Essenes, a Jewish sect, openly opposed slavery, indicating that anti-slavery sentiment was present in both Judeo-Christian traditions and Islam.
However, influential Christian figures reinforced pro-slavery ideologies. Saint Augustine regarded slavery as a divine institution intended to uphold social order. (12) John Chrysostom, a revered figure in both the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches, insisted that obedience to one’s master was akin to obedience to God, reinforcing a submissive stance for enslaved people.
In the United States, groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and adherents of Christian Reconstructionism have continued to misuse religious texts to justify slavery. The interpretation that the black skin of certain populations resulted from Noah’s curse on Ham’s son Canaan (Genesis 9:18, 25; 10:6) was widespread in medieval Christian thought. Additionally, some linked the identity of Ham’s son Cush (Genesis 10:6) with Ethiopia, reinforcing racial hierarchies.
During the apartheid era, South African whites distorted biblical narratives to promote racial segregation and oppression. The genocidal command against the Amalekites (1 Samuel 15:3) was misappropriated to justify violence against black communities. Another frequently cited verse was Joshua 9:21:
‘The elders said, “Let them be hewers of wood and drawers of water for the people of Israel; and they shall be the chiefs of the people of Israel. The community accepted it.”‘
This misinterpretation was exploited to justify denying black South Africans education, political rights, and equal status, despite blacks constituting roughly 90% of the population at the time.
The mainstream Christian view emphasized that the separation between Jews and Gentiles ceased with the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Key biblical texts supporting this inclusive vision include Genesis 12:1, Ephesians 2:14, Galatians 3:28, and Colossians 3:11.
Christian Zionism and Religious Justifications for Apartheid
As a result of the work of a small group of Christian Zionists, the notion that the Jewish people’s status as the ‘chosen people’ would endure eternally gained traction in Britain and America during the early 19th century. This belief formed the ideological foundation for the connection between Jewish and Christian Zionists. Notably, this same ‘chosen people’ concept was adapted to justify apartheid policies in South Africa.
However, it is incorrect to assume that Christianity uniformly endorsed slavery in the past. Prominent figures like William Wilberforce (1759–1833), a committed Bible believer, played a significant role in the abolitionist movement. Wilberforce campaigned tirelessly for 50 years to end slavery. Inspired by 1 Timothy 1:10, he categorized slave traders alongside murderers, adulterers, liars, and other wrongdoers.
The biblical account of Noah’s curse has also been misused to justify racial oppression. The story describes Noah becoming drunk and cursing the next generation:
“Now Noah was naked in his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father naked, and told his two brothers who were outside. Then Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it across their shoulders and went backward and covered their father’s nakedness. They had their faces turned away, so that they did not see their father’s nakedness. When Noah awoke from his drunkenness, he knew what his younger son had done to him. And he said, ‘Cursed be Canaan; he will be a slave to his brothers.'” (Genesis 9:22-26)
This story seemingly contradicts other biblical references to Noah, who is described as a righteous man, blameless in his generation, and one who walked in God’s ways (Genesis 6:9). Ezekiel 14:14-20 further affirms Noah’s righteousness alongside Daniel and Job. Consequently, some Bible scholars argue that the ‘curse of Noah’ narrative may have been a later Israelite attempt to justify the conquest and subjugation of the Canaanites.
Apartheid ideologues also selectively misinterpreted other biblical texts to rationalize racial segregation. For instance:
• “Come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord.” (2 Corinthians 6:17)
• The Tower of Babel account, where God scattered people by confusing their language (Genesis 11:6-8).
Proponents of apartheid exploited these passages to argue that racial separation was divinely ordained. (13)
The Role of Scientific Racism
Scientific racism played a significant role in legitimizing apartheid. Until the mid-20th century, many scientists promoted racist theories as mainstream science. The renowned German biologist Sir Arthur Keith claimed that Hitler’s actions were an attempt to apply social Darwinism — the idea that only the fittest survive — to human society. (14)
Although pro-racist biological theories existed before 1859, Stephen Jay Gould, a prominent philosopher of biology, observed that Darwin’s Origin of Species significantly accelerated their acceptance. (15)
By the sixteenth century, white Europeans increasingly encountered various peoples who differed from them. With the advancement of powerful military technologies, Europeans rapidly subjugated and enslaved indigenous populations, asserting their dominance through mass murder and violence. However, overcoming the moral resistance within their own conscience to commit such atrocities posed a significant challenge. To justify their actions and mitigate this internal conflict, colonialists constructed the ideology of racism. This system of racial superiority served three primary purposes: to justify colonial rule and slavery, to suppress dissent within their own societies, and to instil a sense of inferiority in colonized populations.
Religious misinterpretation played a crucial role in this process. Biblical texts, particularly Genesis 9:24-25, were distorted to suggest that Noah’s curse was responsible for the existence of black people. Some claimed that God had originally created all people as white and that blackness resulted from Noah’s curse. Christian missionaries became philosophical interpreters of colonial rule, promoting the notion that slavery and colonialism were not acts of brutal economic exploitation but rather sacred missions to “civilize” so-called uncivilized peoples.
Religious campaigns to Christianize enslaved populations were widespread. Ironically, as many African slaves converted to Christianity, it increasingly became a moral imperative to emancipate them. Despite this, European imperialists manipulated the idea of whiteness to signify intellectual, moral, and social superiority. This concept was famously described by Rudyard Kipling as the “white man’s burden,” reinforcing the belief that white Europeans were destined to guide supposedly inferior races.
The profound influence of science in Western societies following the Renaissance further cemented these racial ideologies. Since scientific ideas were gaining authority, challenging such notions was equated with ignorance. This environment fostered the spread of racist theories in the early 19th century, embedding racial superiority into scientific discourse.
Racism soon became one of the unquestioned foundations of scientific progress. The rise of Darwinian theory intensified this trend. Many biologists interpreted Darwin’s ideas as supporting racial hierarchies. Even before Darwin, anthropology and psychology had already promoted theories suggesting the intellectual superiority of white people. Consequently, colonization, the slave trade, and imperial atrocities received widespread justification under the guise of scientific evidence.
Darwin himself inadvertently contributed to these racial interpretations. Darwinists argued that intelligence—the key factor distinguishing humans from non-humans—varied significantly between racial groups. According to this interpretation, if intelligence were ranked hierarchically, white people would occupy the highest position. This ideology became known as social Darwinism, which emerged as the dominant biological framework for understanding racial differences.
Psychology had already begun developing methods to measure intelligence. In 1904, the first intelligence test chart was published. However, these studies gained considerable traction during World War I when Harvard University professor Robert Yerkes was commissioned to create an intelligence test for military applicants. Yerkes’ test was administered to 1.75 million people. Based on the results, Yerkes and his colleagues concluded the following:
1. The average American had a mental age of only 13 years, which they attributed to racial mixing, particularly with African Americans.
2. Immigrants from Northern Europe were considered more intelligent, while those from Southern Europe and Slavic populations in Eastern Europe were deemed less intelligent.
3. African Americans were placed at the bottom of the intelligence scale.
These flawed conclusions further reinforced racial prejudice and shaped discriminatory social policies for decades.
Critique of Intelligence Testing and Racial Bias
Stephen J. Gould, a renowned Harvard biologist, conducted an in-depth analysis of Yerkes’ calculations and highlighted several flaws. Gould identified major shortcomings in Yerkes’ methods, including poor testing conditions, ineffective administration, and the problematic introduction of written tests for illiterate participants. He concluded that Yerkes’ findings were racially motivated and prejudiced.
American psychologist Arthur Jensen argued that 80% of intelligence, as measured by intelligence tests, is hereditary, claiming that black individuals scored 15 points lower than white individuals. This controversial argument was expanded upon in a subsequent paper. (16) Jensen’s assertion misleadingly suggested that black individuals were one-fifth less intelligent than whites. In truth, intelligence testing cannot be as precise as measuring height or weight. Factors such as training and experience significantly impact test results, meaning individuals with better education and exposure naturally perform better.
Modern studies on intelligence tests have consistently debunked any inherent link between race and intelligence. A 1976 study published in American Psychologist refuted claims connecting intelligence to race. In a study involving 101 black children adopted by white families, the children achieved above-average educational outcomes. Researchers attributed their improved performance to enhanced material conditions. (17) Moreover, black children adopted earlier in life by white families scored higher on average, reinforcing the role of social and environmental factors in educational achievement. Given America’s history of racism, it is telling that the performance gap is so narrow, underscoring how historical and social inequalities have contributed to educational disadvantages faced by black children.
A study on this subject illustrates the dangers of linking science to racial discrimination. Alarmingly, as recently as 2002, British academic Professor Geoffrey Sampson claimed in the British Parliament that white people were inherently more intelligent than black people. In reality, such claims ignore the complex web of social injustices, systemic neglect, and entrenched poverty that perpetuate disadvantages among marginalized communities. This vicious cycle of discrimination has historically impacted not only black people in America but also Dalit, backward, and Muslim communities in India.
Islam and Racism
The fundamental principle of the Islamic value system is justice. Islam does not envision all people belonging to a single community or ethnic group but instead emphasizes justice and equality of opportunity for all. Islam rejects artificial divisions created by narrow nationalism, communalism, racism, Zionism, and imperialism. It upholds the vision of humanity as one united people. The Quran declares that true superiority lies not in race or ethnicity but in piety and submission to God:
“O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of God is the most righteous of you.” (Quran 49:13)
The Prophet made clear the Islamic desire to uphold the brotherhood of mankind in the Farewell Speech: “O mankind, your Lord is one. You are the offspring of one father. There is no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab, nor of a non-Arab over an Arab. There is no superiority of a black over a white, nor a white over a black. The true basis of greatness is devotion to God” (Bukhari 667). These teachings reflect Islam’s firm rejection of social hierarchy and racial superiority.
The Quran envisions a socio-economic order based on equality (7:137, 6:132, 17:26). God has provided humanity with the resources they need (2:29, 31:20, 16:12-14). Wealthy individuals are obligated to spend their surplus, after meeting their own needs, for the welfare of society’s vulnerable members (107:1-3, 104:1-9, 51:19, 63:7, 68:24, 2:177).
Islam emphasizes the unity of mankind (21:92, 2:213). While humans are created from matter (6:2), they are a special creation of God (15:28-29). The Quran affirms that all people are descendants of Adam (15:29), with a collective mission to act as God’s appointed representatives, promoting justice and restoring brotherhood (3:110). Islam firmly rejects all forms of narrow-mindedness.
The Quran further denounces ideas of blood superiority and inherited glory. The principles of one parent, one human race, and one Creator are core Quranic themes (4:1, 10:19, 49:13). The diversity of human languages and skin colours is described as a sign of God’s creative power (30:22). The Quran also rejects the notion that any group has special favour or privilege before God (5:18, 2:80).
Hendrik Verwoerd (1901-1966), the architect of apartheid, became Prime Minister of South Africa (1959-1966) after studying genetics and psychology influenced by German racial ideologies. Evolutionary Nazism claimed that humans originated in Africa and that black people were at the lowest evolutionary level. Ironically, Nazism emerged from a country recognized for its scientific achievements, with Germans winning one-third of the Nobel Prizes in science by that time.
However, after 1950, psychological and genetic research established conclusively that there is no difference in intellectual capabilities between races. It was revealed that differences in skin colour, eye shape, and other traits are the result of biological variation of only 0.012%, and that organ transplants between people of different races are possible. Despite this, a small number of scientists have continued to promote scientific racism.
Another disturbing reality is the lack of recognition in mainstream Western media regarding the racial dimensions of Israel’s actions against Palestinians. In 1948, at the time of Israel’s formation, Jews owned only 7% of Palestine’s land yet were allocated nearly half of it in the Declaration of the State. With the support of American and British imperialism, Israel seized most of the remaining Palestinian territory.
Israel’s discriminatory policies echo apartheid-like restrictions. Palestinians are subjected to invasive checks at Israeli checkpoints, face employment discrimination, endure unequal access to water resources and basic amenities, and are frequently arrested or tortured in prisons. Despite apartheid’s official end in South Africa, its shadow persists in Israel with the backing of American imperialism. Meanwhile, the Palestinian resistance to these injustices is often misrepresented as ‘terrorism’ by global media.
Bibliography and Notes
1. Kruger, J.C. Lest We Forget. Kempton Park: Bitouw (Pty) Ltd, 1984, p.5.
2. Van Der Merwe, C.D. Multicultural Education: Panacea to Racism in the 21st Century. Educational Practice, vol. 4, 2000, pp. 28-34.
3. Morton, Jeffrey S. The International Law Commission of the UN. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2000, p.27
4. Abou El-Fadl, Khalid. The Place of Tolerance in Islam: On Reading the Quran and Misreading it. Boston Review, 25 February 2002.
5. The Quran presents a clear moral framework that naturally leads to the abolition of slavery. It upholds the inherent dignity of all human beings, declaring that “We have honoured the children of Adam” (Quran 17:70), affirming that nobility is based solely on piety and moral conduct. The Quran also addresses the treatment of prisoners of war, stating that they should either be set free or ransomed (Quran 47:4), without any reference to enslaving captives — a significant departure from prevailing practices of the time. The Prophet Muhammad and his family actively demonstrated this ethical principle by liberating the slaves they had in their possession. Emancipation is repeatedly emphasized as a virtuous and transformative act. The Quran identifies the freeing of slaves as part of the “difficult path” that leads to moral elevation: “Do you know what the difficult path is? It is to free a slave” (Quran 90:11-12). Furthermore, the Quran commands slave owners to treat those under their care with compassion and respect, declaring: “You are relatives of one another” (Quran 4:25) and “Be kind to those under your control” (Quran 4:36). The Quran integrates the emancipation of slaves into key social and spiritual practices. The obligation of zakat (charitable giving) includes provisions for freeing slaves (Quran 9:60). Additionally, manumission is prescribed as an expiation for several sins, underscoring its moral significance (Quran 4:92; 5:89; 58:3). The Quran draws a powerful analogy between liberating a slave and restoring a lost life (Quran 4:92). Marriage reforms further advanced the cause of emancipation. The Quran permits the marriage of enslaved individuals to free persons (Quran 24:32-33) and emphasizes that a believing slave woman is superior to a free polytheist woman (Quran 2:221). The Quran unequivocally condemns the enslavement of the Israelites under Pharaoh’s tyranny (Quran 28:4) and portrays the purchase and liberation of slaves as a hallmark of piety (Quran 2:177). Despite the Quran’s clear ethical direction, some medieval-classical Muslim interpretations mistakenly upheld slavery as an enduring social order. Consequently, slavery persisted in certain Muslim societies long after it had been morally delegitimized by the Quranic vision. It was only in the 20th century that countries such as Saudi Arabia (1962), Oman and Yemen (1970), and Mauritania (1981) formally abolished slavery. The prolonged presence of slavery in some Muslim societies reflects a failure to embody the Quran’s transformative spirit — a spirit that unequivocally promotes justice, equality, and human dignity.
6. The Holy Bible. See for example: Matthew 5:44; Luke 10:26-28, 10:29, 10:30, 10:34, 10:36, 10:37; John 3:16; Matthew 25:31-45.
7. Courtenay, Bryce. The Power of One. New York: Ballantine, 1996, p.105
8. Ramstuz, Mark. Christian Ethics and US Foreign Policy. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987, p.9.
9. Goldenberg, D.M. The Curse of Ham. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003, p.141
10. Haynes, S.R. Noah’s Curse. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002; Felder, C.I.T. Race, Racism, and the Biblical Narrative. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2002, p.8.
11. Cheever, George B. God Against Slavery. Cincinnati: American Reform Tract and Book Society, 1857, p.140.
12. Pagels, Elaine. Adam, Eve, and the Serpent. New York: Random House, 1988, p.114.
13. Daniel-Rops, Henri. Cathedral and Crusade. New York: Doubleday Image, 1957, p.263.
14. Keith, Sir Arthur. Evolution and Ethics. New York: Putnam, 1947, p.230.
15. Gould, Stephen Jay. Ontogeny and Phylogeny. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press, 1977, p.127-128.
16. Jensen, A.R. Straight Talk About Mental Tests. New York: MacMillan, 1981.
17. Scarr, S., and Weinberg, R.A. “IQ Test Performance of Black Children Adopted by White Families.” American Psychologist, vol. 31, 1976, pp. 726-739.
V.A. Mohamad Ashrof is an independent Indian scholar specializing in Islamic humanism. With a deep commitment to advancing Quranic hermeneutics that prioritize human well-being, peace, and progress, his work aims to foster a just society, encourage critical thinking, and promote inclusive discourse and peaceful coexistence. He is dedicated to creating pathways for meaningful social change and intellectual growth through his scholarship. He can be reached at [email protected]
