Follow Us on Google
Do we really want a country that should be known as Nigeria? I ask this question on a general note in the first instance, because political science lessons have proved over time that the people do have overwhelming role to play in the making of a country and then a nation.
England we know today wasn›t what it was at inception, a group of traditionalists took over the reins of power and authority and established a very obnoxious system in that country. It was a reign of few for the good of themselves. «King was God». His word was law. Republicanism didn›t begin as philosophy of state administration, it started as a philosophy of privilege in power administration for very lucky few who could muscle their way into hallowed points of state administration. Might under this circumstance became right. Reign of terror would always choke and it indeed made life very miserable. Movement to America by British people in particular wasn’t essentially about a particular interest, not political or economic. It was a move precipitated in the main by a desire to escape authoritarianism at home. The phenomenon precipitated a push for change by the people. King Henry lost his life in the most horrendous way; with it went the power of the monarch and eradication of republicanism as a power cast system.
When you hear Americans and Western Europeans hold high the policy of freedom and liberalism it came from experiences most of their forebears had in various European countries, which forced them to migrate to the New World which was to later be more popularly known as America. It was the people acting as collective who insisted America must toe the path of liberalism else a new variant of republicanism was already taking shape. It was the people who brought change in France after they had about five failed republics.
Russian and Chinese revolutions are too recent to receive detailed mention in this small space but it is very important to recall the Russian revolution was a workers uprising. By the time it took shape, sense returned to the leadership class. China›s revolution under Mao Tsetung was a peasant revolution. Before, the China we know today was like us in nearly all ramifications: leadership inertia, visionlessness, lack of national goal, parasitic elite class, very idle rich class men and women without productive engagement yet had stupendous wealth, made so by their unholy collaboration with portfolio foreign investors and state capture. We call them comprado bourgeoisies.
You can now understand when I ask the question if we as citizens truly desire a country to go by the name Nigeria. If the people truly want a country they could be very proud of, if they truly want it what we have seen of our developmental trajectory won›t be allowed to run for so long. Driving on reverse gear won›t be tolerated. No one gets to his destination running backwards. Never! We talk and criticise, but love doing so from the safe confines of our parlors, beer joints and very limited platforms. Individual reformist efforts good and necessary as they are, produce little results. Truth is that it leaves momentary heroes and heroines vulnerable. Citizens hardly don’t want to feel the heat, they love life and want to be alive to enjoy. So, the abnormal overtime becomes the normal and very much acceptable.
In the course of time, people embrace tragedy and see nothing wrong with it. Think of how human life has been so cheapened in the country to the point the life of a cow has become far more valuable. As we speak, activism is dead and buried in our space. When we saw it thrive in our space was when external forces created relevant organs and non-profit organizations , sponsored and urged them on and this was during the era of military in government. The sponsors’ desire to push the frontiers of “democracy” propelled their actions. Now we have pseudo-democracy in place with distortions that must go with it, given how we do our things, western countries are satisfied. We ought to know their concern is stability in the space, not political development and stability. These are different things if you know. They don’t want our economic emancipation. Gaining economic independence will hurt them fatally. This is a critical point they know, which we don’t know.
Economic development would produce a big loss to them, so naturally they shouldn›t be interested and they are not. By the way, foreign interest and interjections have never developed another country anywhere. This is the big lesson of history. Those who point to South Korea, Taiwan miss the hidden but salient points. Those were satellite points created by western countries to try to halt the march of socialism and communism. Even then the locals were sensible to understand they have to take over and they did. So perceptive citizenry has a big role in making of a country.
Now, how about the leadership class? Do they want a country called Nigeria? Nothing in their behaviour suggests they want it and eagerly too. Our experience with them has been one of no seriousness, sloganeering and double speak, parroting one good ideal in public and when the chips are down and real actions are required, men and women with power begin to do something else, pronouncements and actions entirely different from the right pathway to sound and sustainable development of society into a country and then nationhood.
The military stepped into civil governance on claims that our union was under threat. They highlighted ethnicity, religion, corruption and no vision as some of the threats they discovered. They branded themselves «messiahs» but ironically they turned out to be destroyers of all that the people saw as good. They called our entity federal republic of Nigeria but it was only in name but not in substance. The military officials like the civilians they supplanted, were driven by the same factors they made so fuss over. The first casualty of their inglorious adventure into the public space was the concept and provision of federalism. They foisted unitarism which is still with us till now. If it ended at this point perhaps the mess could be endurable. But still motivated by narrow objectives, they went a step further to undertake the bastardisation of the political architecture agreed by all before the union could become real.
What they came out with aligned with negative supremacy fights that have always bedeviled the society even before the thought of a union was muted. The prescriptions the military autocrats left us with are still hurting the march to proper development till today. Former Head of State, General Jacob Jack Yakubu Gowon who had to do away with the first two of his names so as to situate properly declared three Rs ( Reconciliation, Rehabilitation,and Reconstruction) at the end of the Civil War. He had funds to show example but his administration still left the whole of old Eastern region unattended to, no road, power and no industrialisation. Eastern region remains sour sight even now. Discrimination against the area is a national policy.
When some of us see people like General Abdulsalami Abubakar and Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida tell us “national unity is non-negotiable” and that they are working for national cohesion, you look at the way the nation was balkanised in their time in office and the content of the constitution they got people to author for us, you can’t but wonder. The knowledge of cause and effect is a generally acknowledged truth today. You cannot continue to sow the wind and not expect the whirlwind.
When Abubakar Abdulsalami, Bishop Mathew Kuka and the rest prance over the place calling for peace and harmonious relationship among the different components, themselves and of course all of us ought to know the simple fact that vision, justice , equity and fairness are vital factors if we must have a country everyone can call theirs. We cannot tolerate the kind of ethnic and religious jingoism we saw under the leadership of Mohammadu Buhari just to pick from the latest of bad examples in leadership and not have a society on the precipice. The society must under some roastings on the furnace. Contradictions unsettle the equilibriums.
President Bola Tinubu has just mounted the saddle of leadership , like others before him, he has harped on unity; there is a point to note, for some of us that each successive leader would begin all their speeches and official addresses with unity is an indication we have not done at all those things that can foster sense of oneness. If indeed we worked on cohesion and truly desire to build a great country, some things we do won’t happen. The leadership recruitment process would receive far greater respect. We would understand the place of competent and effective leadership in raising great citizens and building up a country with abundance. Our political parties would see sense in instituting proper internal democracy. Our general election would be fair, credible and very transparent. On no account would any citizen come under any inhibition not to discharge civic responsibility of going to the poll to vote his or her choice. The people and not the courts would have the power to decide who their leaders would be.
It is an abominable act for leaders to mouth a right ideal or desire, to tell the rest of us ordinary folks what should be and then only to act differently when it should matter most. It is definitely an unacceptable behavior and shouldn›t be condoned. One of the refreshing features President Tinubu has brought to bear on the political stage in the past few weeks is consultation. It has brought out the difference between civilianized mind and control and command orientation. During the Sallah Tinubu visited some prominent traditional rulers in his Yoruba political base. While he was on this, his vice,Kassim Shetima was on another visit to Sultan of Sokoto.
Superficially nothing is wrong with those visits especially when we know politicians must go round looking for support. Some of us, the small group of critical citizens imagine what the nation building efforts could benefit from if for instance our President had began this kind of visit with a move to South South, North Central, South East or Even the core North.
Think about it. Countries and nations don›t happen by happenstance, they come from deliberate decisions, moves and then hardwork of citizens under the guidance of a perceptive leadership class. Under the headship of an individual who understands what the mission for the moment is. Ineffective leadership has done us lots of demages. This is point we must understand and take to heart. This is very important, when we sow contradictions it ought to very clear to us that harm must follow.
