April 6, 2010
As part of my own little contribution to resolving the ethno-religious conflagrations in parts of Nigeria, I once wrote an article, titled, ‘The Settlers Syndrome.’ In the piece, published in a number of newspapers, including Thisday, (June 17, 2004), I attempted to situate the issues of indigeneship and settlership as obtained in other climes with ours in Nigeria.
As part of my own little contribution to resolving the ethno-religious conflagrations in parts of Nigeria, I once wrote an article, titled, ‘The Settlers Syndrome.’ In the piece, published in a number of newspapers, including Thisday, (June 17, 2004), I attempted to situate the issues of indigeneship and settlership as obtained in other climes with ours in Nigeria.
I did not end the piece without admonishing that “a society that does not want to self-destruct” would always makes amends “where there are mistakes” and would not self-glorify whenever and wherever progress is recorded.
However, despite efforts at addressing fundamental issues which have remained only as a sad chapter in the history of Nigeria, it is embarrassing that ethno-religious and related crises have now reached an alarming in Nigeria state that pertinent questions on nationality can no longer be wished away. Not even with the recent ferocious mayhem in Jos, Plateau State, which left in its trail death of, especially, women and innocent children.
It is in view of this that Ropo Sekoni’s scholarly intervention on an issue as germane as the question of nationality is not only interesting but also timely. In a paper he presented at the 60th Birthday Lecture in honour of Olawale Oshun, National Chairman of Afenifere Renewal Group (ARG), Sekoni, professor, author, core federalist and columnist, traced Nigeria’s primary predicament as a nation-state to “the amalgamation of Nigeria in 1914” which “brought the multiple nations and nationalities in today’s Nigeria together into one country.” According to him, while “the postmodern age has deemed it fit to strengthen the politics of identity”, our thinkers and “those imposed on the country and the states by trustees of unitarism” have curiously maintained that “the 1999 constitution”, essentially, “is well-meaning and is capable of leading Nigeria from underdevelopment to development, if given to good leaders.” In his words, “this conviction is not surprising in a nation that has adopted the philosophy of miracles in secular matters.” He then cautioned: “if a Nigerian persona happens miraculously, Nigeria will be the first country of its kind in the world.”
While arguing that “Richard’s recommendation was primarily to assuage the feelings of the North”, consequent upon which “the principle of collective identity in the governing of Nigeria” among other implications, “has been wiped out and replaced only by what is now known as rotation of presidential powers”, the activist scholar canvassed a sincere approach to restructuring and true federalism, among others, as a way out of the quagmire in which the country is at present immersed.
On a serious note, one cannot agree any less with Sekoni that the inability of Nigeria to “encourage its citizens to add the privileges of Nigerian citizenship to that of the various ethnic nationalities to which they belong” has been primarily responsible for her being a nation adrift. Only Nigerians have to pray for Nigeria’s rescue from this dangerous abyss. It is demoralizing that, ninety-six years after Lord Lugard’s mendacious amalgamation as Nigeria of what used to be the Northern and Southern Protectorates; and fifty years after the independence of that false fusion, recurring events in the country have continued to put to test successive leaders’ capacity to protect the lives and property of Nigerians as enshrined in the Constitution.
Eleven years into our special kind of democracy, Nigerians still revel in a democracy without democrats. The people are hungry and angry but simply do not know how to sincerely liberate themselves from the shackles of the misgovernance that has completely taken over every facet of the country’s space. Unemployment seems to have come to stay with us and it is as if the gods are angry. Corruption and arson are now commonplace and the people are understandably too timid to take the bull by the horn. And, for those who think they know the way out, they either lack the sincerity of purpose or are grossly unprepared to confront the curious twists and the dangerous turns that have characterized governance in our clime. As such, Nigerians continue to live in a political jungle where “being law-abiding is a taboo; where decency is sinful”; and where sycophants “indulge in doctrinal heresy and personal hypocrisy” at “soothing the temperament” of those Adebayo Adejuwon rightly categorized as the “microwave generation whose God is mammon and whose end is shame.” John Ploughman calls them ‘Messrs Fair-weather!’
Agreed! All we benefited from the British colonialists amounted to nothing other than (mere) “colonial experiment.” But what conscious efforts have successive Nigerian leaders made at righting the wrongs of the colonialists? If one may ask: what is the difference between the ethno-religious crises that have become Nigeria’s middle name and the pogroms in Rwanda, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Kenya and East Timor? How do we define the crises that eventually led to the break-up of India, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia vis-à-vis ours that have been unnecessarily pitching brothers against brothers?
With regard to our own clime, have we as a people for once pondered why we lost track with the aspirations of the founding fathers of the Nigerian nation? Why on earth was it difficult for Nigeria’s pro-democracy groups to transform into credible political parties in 1999, after they had succeeded in sending the military back to the barracks? Why has the disarray in the progressive camp gone so disgustingly embarrassing that, these days, political vermin and economic self-servers not only take the camp for granted but also go many steps at further testing its will? Again, if, balkanization along ethnic or religious lines, as advised by Muammar Gaddafi; or, restructuring, as canvassed by civil society groups, is the way out, what then are we still waiting for? If neither option is viable, where then lies our hope as a nation and a people? In all honesty, how much is the life of a man worth and for what pittance can a man mortgage his conscience?
We are a nation in an irony of nationhood; a country in the tenterhook of inaccuracies and inconsistencies. We live in strange times, among strange countrymen, with strange people doing strange things. All in the name of patriotism, we conceal the truth about our nation and ourselves. When we are sick, we say we are strong. When we have no food on our table; and no money with which to fuel our stomach, all we say is: “we are filled.” When things, times and tides become unwell with the nation, for the dubious allusion to patriotism, we are enjoined to tell the world that the nation is at peace. When our national consciousness goes awry, we are always told to profess being “on course.”
When questions are asked about the waywardness of our leaders, in the name of patriotism, they expect us to either cover their ass or simply shut our traps. When our president goes gaga in running the affairs of our nation, our expression of patriotism should reside in the mortgage of our conscience and, consequently, the future of our children. When we demand to know the whereabouts of our president whose upkeep is being financed from our commonweal, they tag us ‘unpatriotic’ elements. Hence the reason why while other “countries are doing much better economically, socially, and technologically and are more united”, our own turf has only succeeded in becoming “free for political hoodlums who see in power an opportunity to achieve selfish motives” thereby denying its “nationalities the benefits of cultural democracy.”
On the issue of “unity in diversity”, maybe we need to ponder how much of national justice we can access by caressing ethnic diversity. As I have argued elsewhere, the greatness of a country is not resided in the smallness or otherwise of its population. Otherwise, countries like Germany or the United States of America would not have had any reasons to prosper in the first place. Similarly, our success as a nation is not entirely rested in our mineral resources. Economically prosperous countries like Japan, China and Israel should teach us some relevant lessons here. In any case, the practical truth is that our woes primarily stem from politics and relevance-seeking! The man who is already in power is not ready to leave office and the man who is eyeing it will want to use all means to access it. To achieve either, all forms of tricks, including arson, become the norm.
This is where we find ourselves in Nigeria. Without doubt, Nigeria’s democracy can be likened to a Molue Bus: thirty-five sitting, ninety five standing. On the part of the bus, capacity: anything, anyhow, anywhere; but, maintenance: zero! And, on the part of the drivers, decency, nil; decorum, zilch! Nigeria is now a country of the few who prefer serving their pockets, not the nation; and politicians who delight in enriching themselves blind without pondering the need to empower the populace. Politics in this part of the world refers to the best of crudity with, when it beckons, some measure of luck. Policy inconsistency and responsibility-shifting reign supreme here and all we do is glamourize the independentment of vaingloriousness.
At the centre of this leadership mess is a predatory leadership that thinks the best way to truly rescue a dying nation is for one sick man to rule from a sick bed. In our kitty is a theatric situation described by Richard Nwankwo as the “animalization of democracy”, where lily-livered presidency, a bogus-yet-incompetent cabinet and an ineffective and ‘take-a-bow-and-go’ legislature in characteristic ‘esprit de chop’ daily influence the life and direct the affairs of a false fusion. . In our very eyes, the president went sick and the whole country went sick with him. He traveled in search of medical succour and the affairs of our state traveled with him. Now, he is back but he is nowhere to be found and it is as if we are all in darkness. And, as if we are all babies, these elements continue to reel out names of presidents who, despite one ailment or the other, continued to rule but, so far, they have refused to, with the same fervour, mention names of leaders who followed the path of honour when their health began to fail them
Undeniably, at our fingertip is a political system which marginalizes the poor. Now, nobody is saying anything about the “6000 megawatts of lies” (apologies to Olusegun Adeniyi). Poverty is ravaging the land but nobody is on ground to assure us that, nationally, all will soon be well. Fuel crisis has become part of our daily delicacy and there is ample statistics to show that we have neither energy nor education. For God’s sake, where are we headed and what’s our mission? NEEDS has refused to meet our needs; SEEDS is constantly seeding us only among the comity of ‘resource curse’ nation states; and LEEDS has so far led us nowhere in terms of socio-economic self-reliance. Like Lord Lugard’s mistress, it’s now the turn of Turai to torment Nigerians. Added to this is a class of critics who always end up as culprits, leaving behind as victims the gullible masses.
In the words of Jide Osuntokun, “leadership is the most important element in building a nation in the evolving developing world.” Essentially, the simple difference between a leader and a ruler is that while the former shows the way, the latter merely prescribes the rules. So, while totally subscribing to Sekoni’s remedies for rescuing Nigeria from the woods, there is an urgent need to add that the project of reclaiming Nigeria from the firm grips of merciless ruthless leaders and attention-seekers must transcend platitudes or procrastinations. In my own humble submission, the quest for change is not only about change. More than that, it is about the type of change and how and where to access it. In other words, it is high time the progressives, rightly regarded as Change Agents, revisited the belief that mere soothing words, possibly with Obafemi Awolowo’s portrait are enough to win elections. After all, we are yet to be told that the Biblical Israelites adopted an “only prayer” approach in surmounting their enemies.
Besides, while taking cognizance of the events of 1914 and 1919 which led to the redrawing of the map of Europe and near Asia, we should also not forget in a hurry that Canada would probably have long gone along the lines of Ontario and Quebec but for the collective sincerity of purpose on the part of Canadians.
May God save us from ourselves!
Komolafe writes in from Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State([email protected])
ABIODUN KOMOLAFE,
020, OKENISA STRET,
PO BOX 153,
IJEBU-JESA, OSUN STATE.
I did not end the piece without admonishing that “a society that does not want to self-destruct” would always makes amends “where there are mistakes” and would not self-glorify whenever and wherever progress is recorded.
However, despite efforts at addressing fundamental issues which have remained only as a sad chapter in the history of Nigeria, it is embarrassing that ethno-religious and related crises have now reached an alarming in Nigeria state that pertinent questions on nationality can no longer be wished away. Not even with the recent ferocious mayhem in Jos, Plateau State, which left in its trail death of, especially, women and innocent children.
It is in view of this that Ropo Sekoni’s scholarly intervention on an issue as germane as the question of nationality is not only interesting but also timely. In a paper he presented at the 60th Birthday Lecture in honour of Olawale Oshun, National Chairman of Afenifere Renewal Group (ARG), Sekoni, professor, author, core federalist and columnist, traced Nigeria’s primary predicament as a nation-state to “the amalgamation of Nigeria in 1914” which “brought the multiple nations and nationalities in today’s Nigeria together into one country.” According to him, while “the postmodern age has deemed it fit to strengthen the politics of identity”, our thinkers and “those imposed on the country and the states by trustees of unitarism” have curiously maintained that “the 1999 constitution”, essentially, “is well-meaning and is capable of leading Nigeria from underdevelopment to development, if given to good leaders.” In his words, “this conviction is not surprising in a nation that has adopted the philosophy of miracles in secular matters.” He then cautioned: “if a Nigerian persona happens miraculously, Nigeria will be the first country of its kind in the world.”
While arguing that “Richard’s recommendation was primarily to assuage the feelings of the North”, consequent upon which “the principle of collective identity in the governing of Nigeria” among other implications, “has been wiped out and replaced only by what is now known as rotation of presidential powers”, the activist scholar canvassed a sincere approach to restructuring and true federalism, among others, as a way out of the quagmire in which the country is at present immersed.
On a serious note, one cannot agree any less with Sekoni that the inability of Nigeria to “encourage its citizens to add the privileges of Nigerian citizenship to that of the various ethnic nationalities to which they belong” has been primarily responsible for her being a nation adrift. Only Nigerians have to pray for Nigeria’s rescue from this dangerous abyss. It is demoralizing that, ninety-six years after Lord Lugard’s mendacious amalgamation as Nigeria of what used to be the Northern and Southern Protectorates; and fifty years after the independence of that false fusion, recurring events in the country have continued to put to test successive leaders’ capacity to protect the lives and property of Nigerians as enshrined in the Constitution.
Eleven years into our special kind of democracy, Nigerians still revel in a democracy without democrats. The people are hungry and angry but simply do not know how to sincerely liberate themselves from the shackles of the misgovernance that has completely taken over every facet of the country’s space. Unemployment seems to have come to stay with us and it is as if the gods are angry. Corruption and arson are now commonplace and the people are understandably too timid to take the bull by the horn. And, for those who think they know the way out, they either lack the sincerity of purpose or are grossly unprepared to confront the curious twists and the dangerous turns that have characterized governance in our clime. As such, Nigerians continue to live in a political jungle where “being law-abiding is a taboo; where decency is sinful”; and where sycophants “indulge in doctrinal heresy and personal hypocrisy” at “soothing the temperament” of those Adebayo Adejuwon rightly categorized as the “microwave generation whose God is mammon and whose end is shame.” John Ploughman calls them ‘Messrs Fair-weather!’
Agreed! All we benefited from the British colonialists amounted to nothing other than (mere) “colonial experiment.” But what conscious efforts have successive Nigerian leaders made at righting the wrongs of the colonialists? If one may ask: what is the difference between the ethno-religious crises that have become Nigeria’s middle name and the pogroms in Rwanda, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Kenya and East Timor? How do we define the crises that eventually led to the break-up of India, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia vis-à-vis ours that have been unnecessarily pitching brothers against brothers?
With regard to our own clime, have we as a people for once pondered why we lost track with the aspirations of the founding fathers of the Nigerian nation? Why on earth was it difficult for Nigeria’s pro-democracy groups to transform into credible political parties in 1999, after they had succeeded in sending the military back to the barracks? Why has the disarray in the progressive camp gone so disgustingly embarrassing that, these days, political vermin and economic self-servers not only take the camp for granted but also go many steps at further testing its will? Again, if, balkanization along ethnic or religious lines, as advised by Muammar Gaddafi; or, restructuring, as canvassed by civil society groups, is the way out, what then are we still waiting for? If neither option is viable, where then lies our hope as a nation and a people? In all honesty, how much is the life of a man worth and for what pittance can a man mortgage his conscience?
We are a nation in an irony of nationhood; a country in the tenterhook of inaccuracies and inconsistencies. We live in strange times, among strange countrymen, with strange people doing strange things. All in the name of patriotism, we conceal the truth about our nation and ourselves. When we are sick, we say we are strong. When we have no food on our table; and no money with which to fuel our stomach, all we say is: “we are filled.” When things, times and tides become unwell with the nation, for the dubious allusion to patriotism, we are enjoined to tell the world that the nation is at peace. When our national consciousness goes awry, we are always told to profess being “on course.”
When questions are asked about the waywardness of our leaders, in the name of patriotism, they expect us to either cover their ass or simply shut our traps. When our president goes gaga in running the affairs of our nation, our expression of patriotism should reside in the mortgage of our conscience and, consequently, the future of our children. When we demand to know the whereabouts of our president whose upkeep is being financed from our commonweal, they tag us ‘unpatriotic’ elements. Hence the reason why while other “countries are doing much better economically, socially, and technologically and are more united”, our own turf has only succeeded in becoming “free for political hoodlums who see in power an opportunity to achieve selfish motives” thereby denying its “nationalities the benefits of cultural democracy.”
On the issue of “unity in diversity”, maybe we need to ponder how much of national justice we can access by caressing ethnic diversity. As I have argued elsewhere, the greatness of a country is not resided in the smallness or otherwise of its population. Otherwise, countries like Germany or the United States of America would not have had any reasons to prosper in the first place. Similarly, our success as a nation is not entirely rested in our mineral resources. Economically prosperous countries like Japan, China and Israel should teach us some relevant lessons here. In any case, the practical truth is that our woes primarily stem from politics and relevance-seeking! The man who is already in power is not ready to leave office and the man who is eyeing it will want to use all means to access it. To achieve either, all forms of tricks, including arson, become the norm.
This is where we find ourselves in Nigeria. Without doubt, Nigeria’s democracy can be likened to a Molue Bus: thirty-five sitting, ninety five standing. On the part of the bus, capacity: anything, anyhow, anywhere; but, maintenance: zero! And, on the part of the drivers, decency, nil; decorum, zilch! Nigeria is now a country of the few who prefer serving their pockets, not the nation; and politicians who delight in enriching themselves blind without pondering the need to empower the populace. Politics in this part of the world refers to the best of crudity with, when it beckons, some measure of luck. Policy inconsistency and responsibility-shifting reign supreme here and all we do is glamourize the independentment of vaingloriousness.
At the centre of this leadership mess is a predatory leadership that thinks the best way to truly rescue a dying nation is for one sick man to rule from a sick bed. In our kitty is a theatric situation described by Richard Nwankwo as the “animalization of democracy”, where lily-livered presidency, a bogus-yet-incompetent cabinet and an ineffective and ‘take-a-bow-and-go’ legislature in characteristic ‘esprit de chop’ daily influence the life and direct the affairs of a false fusion. . In our very eyes, the president went sick and the whole country went sick with him. He traveled in search of medical succour and the affairs of our state traveled with him. Now, he is back but he is nowhere to be found and it is as if we are all in darkness. And, as if we are all babies, these elements continue to reel out names of presidents who, despite one ailment or the other, continued to rule but, so far, they have refused to, with the same fervour, mention names of leaders who followed the path of honour when their health began to fail them
Undeniably, at our fingertip is a political system which marginalizes the poor. Now, nobody is saying anything about the “6000 megawatts of lies” (apologies to Olusegun Adeniyi). Poverty is ravaging the land but nobody is on ground to assure us that, nationally, all will soon be well. Fuel crisis has become part of our daily delicacy and there is ample statistics to show that we have neither energy nor education. For God’s sake, where are we headed and what’s our mission? NEEDS has refused to meet our needs; SEEDS is constantly seeding us only among the comity of ‘resource curse’ nation states; and LEEDS has so far led us nowhere in terms of socio-economic self-reliance. Like Lord Lugard’s mistress, it’s now the turn of Turai to torment Nigerians. Added to this is a class of critics who always end up as culprits, leaving behind as victims the gullible masses.
In the words of Jide Osuntokun, “leadership is the most important element in building a nation in the evolving developing world.” Essentially, the simple difference between a leader and a ruler is that while the former shows the way, the latter merely prescribes the rules. So, while totally subscribing to Sekoni’s remedies for rescuing Nigeria from the woods, there is an urgent need to add that the project of reclaiming Nigeria from the firm grips of merciless ruthless leaders and attention-seekers must transcend platitudes or procrastinations. In my own humble submission, the quest for change is not only about change. More than that, it is about the type of change and how and where to access it. In other words, it is high time the progressives, rightly regarded as Change Agents, revisited the belief that mere soothing words, possibly with Obafemi Awolowo’s portrait are enough to win elections. After all, we are yet to be told that the Biblical Israelites adopted an “only prayer” approach in surmounting their enemies.
Besides, while taking cognizance of the events of 1914 and 1919 which led to the redrawing of the map of Europe and near Asia, we should also not forget in a hurry that Canada would probably have long gone along the lines of Ontario and Quebec but for the collective sincerity of purpose on the part of Canadians.
May God save us from ourselves!
Komolafe writes in from Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State([email protected])
ABIODUN KOMOLAFE,
020, OKENISA STRET,
PO BOX 153,
IJEBU-JESA, OSUN STATE.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });