Tuesday, January 22, 2019

Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - The Ethnic Victory of 2015 and an Apology

The zones occupied by Fulani herdsmen are well known.

Go to Google.

If  trying to debunk online information on that, existing in various platforms, corroborated by various news agencies,  the usual tactic, make clear why you think the information is false.

Also dont ask me to do the research for you. I have done that already, in my essay posted on this group, on the open support for terrorism by various Fulani interest groups.

toyin

On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 at 18:07, Salimonu Kadiri <ogunlakaiye@hotmail.com> wrote:
​When Goodluck Ebelechukwu Jonathan was elected President of Nigeria in 2011, the likes of Oluwatoyin Vincent Adepoju and Moses Ebe Ochonu never saw ethnic conspiracy in his election. But when Jonathan was voted out of office in 2015 after being a substantive President for six years, his defeat at the 2015 presidential elections is now being attributed to ethnic gang up against him. A major problem that is responsible for the ways Moses and Oluwatoyin reason about political and official elections/appointments in Nigeria is that they consider themselves as coming from minority ethnic groups in Nigeria while at the same time they support ethno-religious background as a merit, and not competence, for elections/appointments at the centre. They hate larger ethnic groups causing them to develop ethnic inferiority complex. On that ground, they promote impunity and mask vital wrongs committed by Jonathan during his six years tenure in office as President of Nigeria with ethnic chauvinism. The Presidency of Jonathan neither translated to prosperity for the people of South-South (including his hometown in Bayelsa State Otuoke) nor for other geo-political zones in Nigeria. He practised ethno-religious balancing by composing an amalgam of ethnic elites who shared available resources of Nigeria among themselves for the purpose of enjoying material comforts produced in USA, Europe and Asia. The Presidential elections of March 2015 was the expiry date of President Jonathan's political and economic lies which had nothing to do with his ethnic origin.

​It speaks for itself that it is highly impossible for any herdsman, whether nomadic or settled Fulani to occupy any territory with his cattle by force. Cows in particular are very sensitive to violence and forceful occupation of a land area with them makes them vulnerable targets in an eventual fight over a disputed territory. Just think of it, how many nomadic Fulani herdsmen with a flock of about 100 cows will be required to occupy and defend a land area? Even a propaganda must be believable. 

​In a presidential election where 73 candidates are contesting, you are propagating for a boycott because of two participating contestants, Atiku Abubakar and Muhammadu Buhari. In this wonderful world, there are people who believe that beheading self is a good solution to migraine without knowing that a beheaded person automatically becomes a corpse. I tremble for such idea.
​S. Kadiri



Från: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com <usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com> för Oluwatoyin Vincent Adepoju <toyin.adepoju@gmail.com>
Skickat: den 21 januari 2019 03:37
Till: usaafricadialogue
Ämne: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - The Ethnic Victory of 2015 and an Apology
 

Lets take one by one Kadiri's  defense of the Buhari govt in response to Moses' description of  ethnocentric motivations that brought that  govt to power and that, to a significant degree, sustain it even today.

1. Power Dynamic of Northern Nigeria, the PDP and 2011 Elections and Aftermath

The dominant demographic of Northern Nigeria are the Fulanis and the Hausas, often Muslim. In Nigerian history, as in the 1966 crisis and the civil war, they have been supported by the Middle Belt. That alliance has been destroyed by the escalation of Fulani terrorist colonization activity in the Middle Belt, supported by the Buhari govt and Miyetti Allah, headed by Nigeria's most elite Fulani. Responding to the ethnic cleansing agst his people, 1966 counter coup and Nigerian civil war leader Theophilus Danjuma has indicted the Nigerian army and govt and taken his case to the United nations.

The anti-GEJ  thrust of the Muslim North was defined by Atiku Abubakar's threat of violent change bcs a Muslim Northerner, namely himself, was not made PDP 2011 Presidential candidate. Building on this foundation, pervasive across the Muslim North, Boko Haram Islamic terrorism re-erupted after GEJ came to power,  restricting their attacks in the first two years of the escalation to govt agents and agencies and Christians, presenting themselves as Muslim warriors fighting an infidel govt, in the process getting both overt and covert support for their mission from  a sizebale no of  Muslims    in the region, with even Bamanga Tukur, PDP chairman, the party of the President, once describing them as freedom fighters. 

Even after the tide of public opinion in the Muslim North had steadily turned agst Boko Haram on account of the scope of destruction they were wreaking, this mentality of support for the group was sustained by various Northern Muslim elite, particularly as far as 2013-2014 by Muhammadu Buhari describing the war agst Boko Haram as war agst the North and by Murtala Nyako, Adamawa governor, describing the war agst Boko Haram as anti-North genocide in a letter he circulated to all Northern governors, while the Borno elders played a self destructive game of fighting with central army command in the person of Ihejerika, a move that blunted the effectiveness of the war.

The Northern Muslim PDP base that supported GEJ in 2011 was at variance with the general mood of their region, a disconnection  widened  by the unrelenting opposition of Boko Haram later built upon by the CPC/AC alliance.  

2. AC (SW) CPC (Right Wing Muslim North) Alliance

What could have moved Tinubu and the AC, who in 2008 publicly castigated Buhari for declaring that ex-dictator, fellow Northern Muslim and his employer in his govt, Sani Abacha did not steal national monies even as portions of Abacha's unending loot were being returned to Nigeria by Switzerland and yet in 2014-2015 chose to align with Buhari's CPC and present this same figure not only as the new party's  Presidential candidate but as an anti-corruption fighter?

What moved Nobel Laureate Wole Soynka to tear up his exhaustive 'The Trouble with Buhari', the most comprehensive anti-Buhari document up till 2015 and endorse Buhari?

What led scholar and writer Pius Adesanmi to put aside his 2008 critique of Buhari for his pro-Abacha declaration and support Buhari?

What led various members of the SW intelligentsia, to which Soyinka and Adesanmi belong, to put aside their earlier critiques  of Buhari and support him in 2014-2015?

If they were motivated by the inadequacies of the GEJ govt, did they have to go along with the choice of Buhari as APC flag bearer? Why dd they align their own mission so closely with that of the politicians?

Could Chinua Achebe's final essay and book, deeply pro-Igbo, strongly critical of the West's hero Awolowo, have anything to do with this, along with the convergence of factors including jostlings for power in the PDP as key figures left to eventually form APC?

3. The Ongoing Terrorist Colonization War by  Fulani Militia/Politicians/Pressure Groups in the Middle Belt

There exist two major categories of Fulani in the Middle Belt and across Nigeria, the settled and the nomadic, cattle herding Fulani. The nomadic Fulani have been at the centre of increasing conflict with settled non-Fulani communities across Nigeria, increasingly becoming identified with terrorism, extortion and armed robbery, leading to their being described  by a Western terrorism monitoring agency as one of the world's top 4 deadliest terror groups, listing their attacks  and casualties from those attacksyear by year , these orientations climaxing in an escalation on Nigerian national ruler, the  Fulani man Muhammafu Buhar's ascension to power in 2015, an escalation demonstrated in massacres in different parts of Nigeria, occupations of property and land, such as classrooms and farms belonging to others, eventually focusing in a policy of ethnic cleansing, scattering of occupants  and occupation of lands in the Middle Belt, while the Nigerian govt not only often refuses to engage them, it works with rather than moves agst the open support of  them by Miyetti Allah, and cooks up various schemes to empower them with Nigerians' lands, cattle owners and govt working together in transferring their responsibilities to the govt and working to carve an empire  through terrorism and political manipulation, with one of Buhari's spokesmen suggesting that communities should surrender their lands to Fulani herdsmen's demands or face death.

4. Cultures of Corruption

To what degree can the Buhari govt be described as an anti-corruption govt?

What investigations have been made into corruption by its key figures, from Fashola,  to Amaechi, to Babachir to Buratai, among others?

How come that budgets presided over by Buhari  demonstrate ridiculously huge allocations to Aso Rock?

Even after the massive monies allocated to Aso Rock clinic in budgets in Buhari's tenure,  described as being much more money than allocated to  other hospitals  in the country, why is Buhari's medical tourism a prominent feature of his time in office,  leading him to be out of the country for a good no of months during his tenure?

Why are soldiers publicly complaining of being made to fight Boko Haram with inadequate weapons, even as the terrorist group seems to demonstrate tactical superiority over the Nigerian army  as some soldiers are deserting rather than face the terrorists?


Message to All : Buhari and Atiku belong to the same terrorist enabling, ethnic supremacist  mindset. Boycott elections and and begin the journey to putting  an end to a national political and economic system designed for failure.











On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 at 00:00, Salimonu Kadiri <ogunlakaiye@hotmail.com> wrote:
​Moses Ebe Ochonu has set up a moral tribunal and with a twisted version of recent political events in Nigeria he is putting Muhammadu Buhari on trial for tribal misdemeanour. On the election victory of Muhammadu Buhari in 2015, Moses asserted, "What happened in 2015 was a tribal victory." Since Nigeria contains many ethnicities, one is bound to ask which of the more than two-hundred ethnic groups in Nigeria won the presidential election in 2015? As if he anticipated that that question will be posed, Moses explained a tribal victory thus, "A core group of politicians and intellectuals from the Northern and Southwestern parts of the country repackage a former military dictator who had two years earlier been universally reviled as unelectable." Moses is an intellectual who admits to being a Northerner and a supporter of Buhari in 2015. He is now apologizing for supporting Buhari to victory in the 2015 presidential elections. Although Moses is a northerner like Buhari, they are not of the same tribe. In fact, Northern part of Nigeria contains several tribes. The people of Southwestern part of Nigeria are not of the same tribe with either Moses Ochonu or Muhammadu Buhari. Therefore, attribution of the presidential election victory of Buhari in 2015 to an ethnic group is wrong and fraudulent. Truly, Buhari was a former military dictator but that should not disqualify him from contesting election as a civilian just like the former military dictator, General Olusegun Obasanjo, who ruled for eight years as a civilian president under the platform of PDP.

For the Southwestern elite, it was about getting back in power through the backdoor of a Buhari Presidency. For the North, it was obvious: they looked upon Jonathan as a usurper, as the man who had purportedly taken their turn at the presidency - Moses E. Ochonu

​Politically considered, there is a big difference between the expressions Southwestern (Nigeria) and North (meaning Northern Nigeria). A quick reflection on our history will remind us that on 27 May 1967, the then Lieutenant Colonel Yakubu Gowon split Nigeria into twelve states out of the then existing four regions. The twelve States had since trippled into thirty-six states. During the constitutional conferences that took place under Babangida and Abacha, it was the late Dr. Alex Ekwueme that suggested division of Nigeria into six geo-political zones for better economic and administrative purposes. The six Geo-political zones are : North-Central, North-East, North-West, South-East, South-South and South-West. Obviously, the political expressions - Northern Region, Western Region, Eastern Region and Midwest Region had ceased to exist from 27 May 1967 as they have now been replaced with 36 States. The North had ceased to be a single political entity and it is now composed of nineteen states or three geo-political zones just as the west is now composed of six states or a geo-political zone. Out of the six states in the Southwest geo-political zone, Ekiti and Ondo states were controlled by the PDP during 2015 elections and as such, were not part of the APC at the election of 2015. In the South-South geo-political zone, Rivers State and Edo states were part of APC just as the Imo state of the South-East geo-political zone in the 2015 election. Hence, it is mischievous to claim that APC was able to bring Muhammadu Buhari to power because of an alliance between the ethnic Yoruba and ethnic Hausa/Fulani. APC could not have been permitted to participate in the 2015 elections if it was not a national party as required by the constitution and electoral laws.

I now know for a fact that Jonathan was not ousted for being incompetent, weak, or corrupt but for losing the support of Tinubu and Southwestern political elite who consider him their leader. For the Southwestern political elite, Jonathan committed the political sin of neglecting a region that arguably won him the presidency and for focussing his patronage on the Southeast and the North that unequivocally rejected him in 2011 - Moses E. Ochonu.

Jonathan could not have won the presidential election of 2011 if the North had rejected him and if the entire South alone had voted for him. The Presidential election was preceded with the argument, especially from the PDP members from the North, about if Jonathan was qualified to contest in view of the rotational agreement between North and South inscribed in the PDP constitution. They argued that Jonathan was only to complete the remaining two years of the first four years of the deceased Yar'Adua's presidency out of the eight years in which a northerner ought to have ruled Nigeria before it returned to the South according to the PDP constitution. Most Nigerians considered the constitution of PDP subordinate to the Constitution of Nigeria which entitled Jonathan to contest the 2011 constitution, especially as he was the sitting President. It is worthwhile remembering that Atiku had left PDP in 2007 to contest Presidential election on the platform of AC which he lost to Yar'Adua of the PDP that year. But after the demise of Yar'Adua and Jonathan became the substantive President, Atiku calculated coldly that PDP presidential candidate in 2011 elections would come from the North therefore, he abandoned AC to re- join PDP, with confidence that he would win the PDP presidential primary in 2010 against Jonathan. Atiku Abubakar contested the presidential primary election dominated by delegates from the North and failed woefully while Jonathan won it overwhelmingly. The Presidential elections of 16 April 2011 had total registered voters of 73, 528,040, out of which 39,469,484 votes were recorded, but 38,209,978 votes were declared valid. Goodluck Jonathan of the PDP won 58.89% of the votes, translating to 22,495,187 votes while Muhammadu Buhari of the CPC won 31.98% of the votes, translating to 12,214,853 votes. During the campaigns for the Presidential elections, Jonathan had told Nigerians that he grew up a shoeless school boy and that he had experienced the same poverty most Nigerians were living under. Elderly Nigerians called Jonathan our son while the younger generations called him our brother. Everybody saw in him a person who knew where the shoes were pinching impoverished Nigerians and for that reason they voted for him. Nigerians did not care about the ethnic origin of Goodluck Jonathan, rather they regarded him as a leader that would turn their impoverishments into wealth. He knew what Nigerians expected of him and that was why he told Nigerians emphatically in paragraph 30 of his presidential inaugural speech on 29 May 2011 thus, "Fellow citizens, in every decision, I shall always place the common good before all else. The bane of corruption shall be met by the overwhelming force of our collective determination, to rid our nation of this scourge. The fight against corruption is a war in which we must all enlist, so that the limited resources of this nation will be used for the collective growth of our commonwealth." In office he acted differently and the limited resources of the nation were shared among his political cronies. If according to Moses Ochonu, Goodluck Jonathan's presidency had neglected only the States in the Southwest and had, instead, focussed on infrastructural and economic developments in the South-South, Southeast, North-central, Northeast and Northwest alone, he would have been re-elected in 2015, regardless of whether the people of Southwest states voted for him or not. And if Jonathan had not been corrupt and incompetent in office, it would not have been so easy, not only, for a friend to market Buhari to Moses Ochonu but to seduce his support for Buhari's election victory in 2015. Moses had already been disgusted with Jonathan which was why he allowed himself to be convinced to shift his support from Jonathan to Buhari. It did not make sense to assert that "Jonathan lost the presidency because the North had always regarded him as a usurper who was enjoying the presidential mandate stolen from them," while at the same time claiming that he, Jonathan, invested in economic and infrastructural developments in the North more than in the South-South. The question then is what would a president of Northern stock have done in the North if Jonathan had not usurped the presidency?

When Benue was attacked by armed herdsmen resulting in many deaths, instead of mourning with the Benue delegation which visited him in Aso Rock, Buhari paternalistically and insultingly admonished them to go and live in peace with their neighbours - Moses Ochonu.

I respect Professor Moses Ebe Ochonu a lot which is why I am surprised that he decided to dishonestly quote Buhari out of context. The present Benue State has always been, and is still regarded as, part of the North. When the agitation for Middle Belt Region was intense in the hey days of Joseph Tarka and others, many from that region desired to remain Northerners because it gave educational and employment advantages over the less Western educated Hausa/Fulani majority in the then Northern Region. It was that Northerner epitet which a Middle-belter, Lieutenant Colonel Yakubu Gowon, exploited on August 1, 1966, when he shoved aside his seniors Brigadier Babafemi Ogundipe, Colonel Adeyinka Adebayo including nine Lieutenant Colonels who were senior to him by dates of promotion to become Nigeria's Head of State. When riots in the North became abnormal at the end of September 1966, Lt-Col. Yakubu Gowon in his noon radio Kaduna broadcast of 1 October 1966, and in which he appealed for cessation of riots said among other things, "God in his power, has entrusted the responsibility of this great country of ours, Nigeria, to the hands of another Northerner." Benue is not only part of the North, it is a part of Nigeria where internal migrations and permanent places of abode have occurred in the last three hundred years across the country. Like many other Nigerians, Fulani herdsmen have moved and settled permanently in many communities across Nigeria and dating back to over a hundred year.

​In Benue, Fulani herdsmen have lived there for over a century and they have no other hometown in Nigeria than their place of abode in Benue. For years Benue Fulani herdsmen had grazed their cattle in free growing bushes in the vicinities without problem. Suddenly, Fulani herdsmen were not only declared aliens in Benue, but the State government enacted anti open grazing law that prohibited herdsmen from freely grazing their cattle in free growing bushes as they have done for centuries. To enforce the anti open grazing law, the Benue State government recruited a hoard of what it termed Livestock guards, empowered to seize cattle from herdsmen grazing cattle freely in the bush that none has grown. Clashes between herdsmen and livestock guards in Benue was what Moses erroneously referred to as one-sided attack by herdsmen on Benue resulting in many deaths. Many of the Fulani herdsmen that were suddenly declared alien settlers by those who considered themselves as indigenes of Benue and owners of ancestral forest land, were born and have lived in Benue throughout their lives and even long before Moses Ebe Ochonu himself was born. If a place of birth legitimatizes ones right to claim ancestral land, then Fulani herdsmen born and bread in Benue and elsewhere in Nigeria have the right to ancestral land at any place of their births in Nigeria. Truly, all Nigerians have rights to God created ancestral air, sun, rain and land within Nigeria's geographical space. That was the main reason why Buhari admonished the Benue delegation to live in peace with their neighbours. Buhari did not stop there, he initiated a move immediately to find solution to the problem of herdsmen wandering aimlessly to find grazing sites for their cattle. Incidentally, the Minister of Agriculture, Audu Ogbe, is an indigene of Benue. He came up with the idea of ranching, to be subsidized by the government as it had done for crops' farmers. Intellectual traffickers in lies renamed ranching, cow colonies while character assassins foresaw mosques growing up everywhere in the country if ranching was implemented. Moses Ochonu has imputed meanings that Buhari never intended in his admonition to the Benue delegates, that visited him at Aso Rock, to live in peace with their neighbours, referring tacitly to Fulani herdsmen that have had Benue as their permanent place of abode for centuries.

As for the fight against corruption, it is appalling that some renowned intellectuals are deodorizing 16 years of PDP corruptions while spraying insecticide on APC for talking about PDP's corruptions that have brought the nation into the economic ruins the country is now suffering from. Booty sharers who crossed over from the sinking ship of PDP now turn around to say that Buhari has caused what they term *money drought* in Nigeria because government money is no longer raining into their pockets. They accused Buhari of not carrying them along and when Buhari jokingly asked them to come and sit on his shoulders, quack Doctors from the backpage of Tribune diagnosed him for dementia for not understanding that it is people's money they want him to share with them. In the same vein, Moses Ebe Ochonu came with a hashtag a while ago tagged, #Bring BackOurCorruption in which he argued that corrupt officials who loot the national treasury, spend looted funds which eventually trickle down to the pepper sellers by the road side. On the contrary, when corrupt officials loot, they purchase private jets, buy series of exotic cars, and buy mansions in Dubai, London, New York and California. And as such, trickle down effects of spending by Nigerian looters occur abroad and not in Nigeria. While one cannot guarantee that there are no corrupt people in Buhari's administration, it is nearly 100% certain that Buhari is personally honest. Before joining, in 2015, a delegate led by Abdulsalam Abubakar to meet President Buhari for the purpose of pleading to him to soften his corruption enquiries into the government of former President Jonathan, Bishop Mathew Hassan Kukah warned Buhari in a transcript speech published in the online Sahara Reporters. Parts of the speech read, "President Buhari is not new on the block. He came and saw but we all know the story. In declaring a war against corruption, he lost his job. It is quite interesting that none of all of those who have suddenly become vocal now in the war against corruption went out on the streets to condemn the overthrow of their hero. If Nigerians were so convinced about the war against corruption, why did they all cross to the other side of the street where President Babangida was already offering them decaffeinated form of war by stating that the overthrow of Buhari had become necessary because, in his words on August 27th, 1985, 'Muhammadu Buhari was too rigid and uncompromising in his attitude to issues of national significance?' ..//..
AS I have indicated earlier, he (Buhari) was overthrown when he embarked on his war against corruption and indiscipline. None of us went out on the streets to show solidarity with him. We embraced Babangida...." (http://www.saharareporters.com/2015/10/07/excerpt-bishop-kukah-speech-lagos). Sentimentally, Sowore, Moghalu and Ezekwesiele are worthy presidential candidates but realistically and effectively, only Buhari has the strength and will to deal decisively with the problems of corruptions that are obstructing the industrial and economic developments of Nigeria. 
S. Kadiri     

 



Från: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com <usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com> för Moses Ebe Ochonu <meochonu@gmail.com>
Skickat: den 18 januari 2019 01:16
Till: USAAfricaDialogue
Ämne: USA Africa Dialogue Series - The Ethnic Victory of 2015 and an Apology
 

The Ethnic Victory of 2015 and an Apology

 

By Moses E. Ochonu

 

It is now quite clear that what happened in Nigeria in 2015 was not a revolution but a scam of historic proportion. To be more specific, it was, as University of Texas Professor and Punch columnist, Adunni Adelakun, put it, a "tribal victory." How so? 

A core group of politicians and intellectuals from the Northern and Southwestern parts of the country successfully repackaged a former military dictator who had two years earlier been universally reviled as unelectable. A man whose only distinction up to that point was his draconian approach to governance as Head of State in the 1980s as well as his belief that repression and coercion represented an all-purpose solution to all of Nigeria's problems. 

How they were able to successfully re-inflict him on Nigeria and give the rebranded dictator purchase with Nigerians will preoccupy future historians who will extend their inquiry beyond Buhari's own personal con in declaring himself a born-again democrat.

On the political side, the most recognizable faces of this ethnic coalition were Bola Tinubu and Nasir El-Rufai. On the intellectual side, there was an army of Northern and Southwestern intellectuals and learned folks who strategically but disguisedly lent their persuasive intellects to the cause and obscured its essentially ethnic character.

This ethnic collective then successfully coopted many intellectuals and politicians and youths from all regions and religions of Nigeria into the project, advancing it as a last-ditch effort to wrestle the nation from 16 years of the PDP's predatory rule, never mind that the emerging coalition was animated and financed by disgruntled PDP members.

The ethnic battalion behind then candidate Muhammadu Buhari manipulated the naïve youths of Nigeria and the opportunism and naivety of intellectuals and politicians from other regions, harvesting their energies into the political effort that ousted Goodluck Jonathan. Their rhetoric of revolution, reclamation, and their fiction of integrity and ethical cleansing found a receptive audience desperate for change and thus willing to overlook the contradictory records of the messengers.

The core of the 2015 coalition remained decidedly ethnic in composition and ideology. The inner circle never believed in changing Nigeria. They only believed in changing its leadership. For the Southwestern elite, it was about getting back in power through the backdoor of a Buhari presidency. For the North, it was obvious: they looked upon Jonathan as a usurper, as the man who had purportedly taken their turn at the presidency. They wanted back in. This was the foundational premise of regime change in 2015. Everything else was a sophisticated marketing gimmick. But it was gimmickry at its most disarming.

Buhari had proclaimed publicly that late dictator Sani Abacha had not stolen any money from Nigeria and has not retracted that claim despite Nigeria taking possession of multiple streams of Abacha's cash stash. In spite of that, and in spite of presiding over a cesspool of corruption and waste at the defunct Petroleum Trust Fund, the ethnic coalition settled on the theme of integrity as their point of departure for their campaign.

Even Buhari's record of parochial insularity was magically transformed into a story of redemptive self-reinvention. He had learned from his failed previous effort to secure the presidency on the misguided premise that support from the north alone could deliver it to him, we were told. This presidential run, the ethnic propagandists claimed, was different from previous ones. They claimed that Buhari was cultivating a broad based national coalition, had shed his northern provincialism, and had embraced a cosmopolitan, ecumenical agenda. 

And yet the evidence of Buhari's dangerous, obstinate investment in parochial endeavors and claims was inescapable.

It was Buhari who said an attack on Boko Haram was an attack on the north. It was he who said Boko Haram was fighting injustice and that it was wrong to unleash the military on them while conferring amnesty and patronage on Niger Delta oil militants.  

It was Buhari who encouraged Northern Muslims to vote only their kind. It was he who led a delegation of Fulani leaders to former Oyo State Governor Lam Adeshina, asking him "why are your people killing my people?" It was Buhari who declared that he would work for the implementation of Sharia, the Islamic legal system, across Nigeria in disregard of Nigeria's plural religious heritage. 

This was the same Buhari who ruled with an iron fist as military dictator, locking up journalists and critics and presiding over an inept and misguided pseudo-nationalist economic policy that worsened scarcity, drove up inflation, and killed economic ingenuity. 

This was the real Buhari. But the ethnic coalition capitalized on disenchantment with Goodluck Jonathan's corruption-ridden administration to claim otherwise or to cast him as remorseful for his past misdeeds, a wiser old man with a different temperament.

Many Nigerians outside the core ethnic constituencies of the coalition fell for this scam. The youths of Nigeria, betrayed by decades of misrule, of which ironically Buhari was a part, fell even harder. They went all in on the sexy message of change.

Ensconced in power, it did not take long for old, familiar Buhari to reemerge. Within a few months of winning the election, both his ethnic insularity and his governing deficits were on full display. 

Even before he was sworn in, he introduced a new, quantified doctrine of 97/5 percent into our political lexicon, indicating that the Igbo, who in his reckoning supplied only five percent of his votes totals in the election, should not expect to be treated in the same way as the regions that gave him "97 percent." The mathematical fallacy of 97/5 aside, Buhari signaled that he was the same old retired dictator whose only post-retirement claim to fame had been a series of insensitive and downright chauvinistic statements privileging the north and Islam above other regions and religious communities.

More reiterations of Buhari's provincial insensitivity followed. Asked about the Igbo complaints of marginalization in a televised interview, Buhari screamed, "What do the Igbos want?" and proceeded to patronizingly lecture IPOB Biafra agitators about his role in the civil war and about how, as small boys, they had no understandings of the danger of war.

When Benue was attacked by armed herdsmen resulting in many deaths, instead of mourning with the Benue delegation which visited him in Aso Rock, Buhari paternalistically and insultingly admonished them to go and live in peace with their neighbors. He then followed it up by absolving the armed herdsmen of blame, saying that their grazing routes had been blocked. The coup de gracewas his declaration, repeated in a recent television interview, that more people had been killed in Zamfara than in Benue and Taraba states combined. This was a macabre, self-indicting comparison of questionable veracity and an insulting trivialization of deaths outside his natal Northwest zone.

Buhari's problem is not merely one of cultural insensitivity but one of a lifelong immersion in the comfort of familiar ethno-religious surroundings and a concomitant aversion to associating, except when duty and ambition required it, with people, ideas, and influences from Nigeria's other regions.

On the economic front, old Buhari reemerged with a vengeance as though he had unfinished business from his truncated dictatorship. As soon as he took over, he decreed a ban, 1984-style, on the importation of tens of goods and declared that the naira must be defended at all costs, including by imposing restrictions on foreign exchange and raiding reserves to prop up a currency weakened by falling oil prices and the resulting slowdown in the economy. 

This was economic stupidity underwritten by Buhari's old 1980s brand of economic nationalism, which sees the economy as yet another realm of national life to be tightly controlled, disciplined, and leveraged for national pride. In this backward, outmoded economic thinking, it did not matter that such a policy of tight controls in a monoculture economy is usually the fastest route to a recession. Predictably, Buhari took an admittedly weak economy into a severe, prolonged recession, with double digit inflation, 11 millions jobs lost, and thousands of bankrupt businesses as the outcome.

He had promised to never pay subsidy on petrol but to fix the refineries to provide access to cheap and abundant fuel. He reneged on that promise. Instead, he increased fuel price by about 70 percent and yet his administration now pays more in subsidy than the Jonathan administration ever paid when fuel sold for 87 naira a liter. By what mathematical logic is this subsidy figure possible when crude prices have tumbled? We are told that somehow, between 2015 and 2018, Nigeria's fuel consumption jumped from about 9 million metric tons to about 15 million metric tons! When challenged to account for this abracadabra, the Buharists' answer consist of two words: Next level.

Other promises made during the grand ethnic deception of 2014/2015 lay in ruins, disowned and disavowed by the president and his henchmen.

We are told that the Federal Inland Revenue Service now generates more than 5 naira trillion in revenue, and that the Customs for its part adds several more trillions to the federal treasury. However, in 2018, despite Nigeria making about 12 trillion naira from crude oil sales, at least 7 trillion from taxes and duties, and an undisclosed amount from non-oil exports, the country still borrowed 1.6 trillion naira to support a 2018 budget of N9.12 trillion naira!

This arithmetic sleight of hand is the latest evidence of the gargantuan corruption proliferating in Buhari's administration. The difference is that much of this corruption occurs through the legal appropriations process.

But that's not to say that it's the only form of corruption. Buhari has not only tolerated graft, he even wrote to the national assembly in the case of his ex-SGF Babachir Lawal to argue his exoneration only to be trumped and shamed by the overwhelming evidence against the man. Although relieved of his position, Babachir has yet to be prosecuted in accordance with the report of the National Assembly panel that investigated his shady dealings. In fact, he continues to work informally for the president, boasting recently that he has unfettered access to the Buhari and is helping his reelection campaign.

Buhari superintended and approved the reinstatement of pension fugitive, Abdulrasheed Maina, and has failed to order and investigation into corruption allegations against his chief of staff, his army chief, and his minister of internal affairs — the last two accusations involving the acquisitions of properties overseas.

It did not take Buhari long before Buhari's intolerance for criticism and contrarian views manifested. The Shiites, hundreds of whose members Buhari's forces massacres are still crying for justice with their leader, Sheikh El-Zakzaky, still in detention and undergoing a secret trial on trumped up charges of murder. Buhari publicly defended the massacre of the Shiites, proving himself comfortable with the gross human rights abuses for which he was known prior to his 2015 political makeover.  Sambo Dasuki, the NSA of the previous administration, remains in detention despite several court orders granting him bail. 

Activist and Buhari critic, Deji Adeyanju, languishes in Kano prison on a farcical charge for which he was acquitted several years ago, the latest victim of the arbitrary detention and harassment rampage of the police and the DSS under Buhari. Dino Melaye remains in detention despite having been earlier detained and granted bail while he underwent trial. Several journalists have been detained, harassed, and intimidated by Buhari's security forces. The recent invasion of the premises of Daily Trustis the latest saga in Buhari's war on the media. It is 1984 all over again.

These are all evidence of the old Buhari reasserting himself and refusing to act according to the script written for him by the 2015 ethnic coalition. The selective morality, the exoneration of corrupt loyal allies, the bigotry and parochialism, the economic illiteracy, the intolerance for criticism and dissent, the absence of intellectual curiosity, the malicious insensitivity to Nigeria's complex ethnoreligious mix, and the lack of a national frame of sociopolitical frame of reference. All these tendencies never went away. They were cleverly disguised behind the rhetoric of change deployed to harness the nervous, desperate energies of unsuspecting citizens in 2015.

This is a rather circuitous way of saying that Buhari's ethnic coalition got away with arguably the biggest political scam in Nigeria's history, managing to recruit many unsuspecting Nigerians into what they knew to be an ethnic agenda to capture power. 

I was one of those who almost believed their pitch. I maintained a studious, skeptical neutrality until the last few weeks before the election of 2015, having previously declared that I could not support the profligate and weak administration of Jonathan for another term and that I had too many concerns about Buhari, based on his history. I interrogated the rhetoric of the Buhari coalition and pointed out the incongruity between it and Buhari's own record, his history. 

Then, when the election was weeks away, some of my social media followers urged me to get off the fence and take a stance because, in their words, that election was too important to be neutral.

I am ashamed to say that I allowed myself to be persuaded by these pleadings and my own emotional, a tad irrational, desire for Nigeria to chart a new course away from that path it was on. In this emotional state, I stated that as a diaspora Nigerian I did not have a vote but that if I could vote I would hold my nose and vote for Buhari, but only as a gamble for change since there was nothing in the man's record to inspire confidence.

Mine was a tepid, reluctant, and half-hearted endorsement if you could call it that. It was a non-endorsement endorsement. But it still was a public declaration of reluctant hypothetical support.

Even for this weak, late, and qualified acceptance of a deeply flawed candidate, I am now ashamed and feel a need to apologize to my inner, skeptical self, and to my compatriots who are now groaning under the jackboot of the resurgent dictator. 

I should have maintained my neutrality. As a historian and as someone who had written on Buhari's extensive baggage prior to 2015, I should have known that it was almost impossible for an old man to leave his checkered past behind and reinvent himself in both temperament and capacity. I should have known that, as the popular cliché says, the past is usually a prologue to what to expect, what is to come.

In shedding my usual skepticism and critical distance, I became one of those who unwittingly joined and bolstered what has now unraveled to everyone's notice: an ethnic coalition that produced an ethnic victory, leading to disillusionment among those who were coopted, seduced, or otherwise tricked into believing in the genuineness of the change movement. 

I now know for a fact that Jonathan was not ousted for being incompetent, weak, or corrupt but for losing the support of Tinubu and the Southwestern political elite who consider him their leader. For the Southwestern political elite, Jonathan committed the political sin of neglecting a region that arguably won him the presidency and for focusing his patronage on the Southeast and the North — the north that unequivocally rejected him in 2011. 

Jonathan lost the presidency because the North always regarded him as a usurper who was enjoying a presidential mandate stolen from them. When these two forces converged, Jonathan could not survive the resulting onslaught. Support from the countervailing ethnic constituencies of the Southeast and South-South was simply not enough to keep him in power. That is the story of 2015, stripped of the pretentious rhetorical nonsense.

Many of those who did not join the coalition for ethnic reasons have since deserted it. Others who remain in the camp have replaced their initial aspirations with opportunistic self-interest. This latter group is small, however. What remains of the 2015 ethnic coalition is largely the original ethnic nucleus of Southwestern and Northern elites — political and intellectual — united only by their thirst for power and its perks.

As for me, the lesson has been internalized for future referencing. I was never a Buharist in the traditional sense but I should have done more to puncture the case for him in 2014/15. More importantly, I should never have yielded to pressure to abandon my neutrality in favor of an endorsement of Buhari, however qualified and half-hearted that endorsement may have been.

 

I am sorry.

 

 

 

 

 

--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Monday, January 21, 2019

Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Topics Everywhere But None to Research

Ongoing responses to Moses Ochonu's post on his Facebook wall on Nigerian academic research culture : 
  • Bamidele Ademola-Olateju
    Bamidele Ademola-Olateju That is the effect of rote learning. The inability to be original, to recognize, to apply, to think differently.
  • Tito Kunyuk
    Tito Kunyuk Same here in Kenya Prof. Moses Ochonu
  • Ahmad Mubarak Tanimu
  • Chidozie Odogwudozilla Nnachor
    Chidozie Odogwudozilla Nnachor Somewhere in this post, their teachers, lecturers and indeed the educational system should have gotten at least a whiff of the koboko, but they didn't.

    I used to think like that, but it took a journey through the Western educational system to wean me of such defeatist thinking.


    There's something wrong in the water students drink by the bucketfuls in Nigeria.
    Oluwatoyin Vincent Adepoju
    Write a reply...

  • Paul Ogbunigwe Dzwaiyol Cfr
    Paul Ogbunigwe Dzwaiyol Cfr Prof Prof.
    You have made a salient and valid point herein.Somehow, the lecturers are also a part of the blame.
    When you bring a certain topic that doesn't conform to what they want, you will be told it's "unresearchable".

    I have followed you for a very long time and must confess the gulf between what we have and what is over there is alarming.
    The Nigerian educational system needs a complete overhaul.
    It's mundane structures be dismantled and a new system that allows meritocracy, New ideas and innovation to stand.
  • Igbobụagbara Chinedu Joseph Ofobuike
    Igbobụagbara Chinedu Joseph Ofobuike Nigerian lecturers are most times too lazy to even entertain students with innovative ideas. They will even be the ones to discourage you with the tale of the these ideas being a virgin area where you don't have much authority to research. They just want a topic that they don't even have to read before they approve it for defense. I strongly believe that the laziness starts with the lecturers.
  • Olori Thanos
    Olori Thanos I am using this election to research the use of ADR in resolving electoral disputes and I will be using live data from my field work during monitoring elections and subsequent petitions. I am so excited. When I decided to do this, I got scared, this post just encouraged me more. Thanks prof
    Oluwatoyin Vincent Adepoju
    Write a reply...

  • Adeboye Ifaturoti
    Adeboye Ifaturoti The undoing of the average Nigerian student is that he truly believes that he is getting an education!
  • Ọbọọ Omena
    Oluwatoyin Vincent Adepoju
    Write a reply...

  • Hon Stephen Ati
    Hon Stephen Ati Good observation and I thank my observant brother falz the artist doing the needful.
  • Dese T. Chongo
    Dese T. Chongo Hahahahaaaaaa, ironically sometimes the teachers are not willing to help the students come up with something original and because some teachers are not experts in what you want to do they tell you it's not researchable. Pride is killing the system. They don't even advertise in their postgraduate studies their areas of specializations and research interest. Its a rat race Prof.
    • Moses Ochonu
      Moses Ochonu When I was about to start researching my doctoral dissertation, I paid a visit to my alma mater in Nigeria, BUK. One of my undergraduate lecturers pointedly told me that the topic was not researchable, that I would not be able to find "materials" on it. I politely disagreed and not only did I produce a dissertation on the topic, the project became my first book.
    • Dese T. Chongo
      Dese T. Chongo Let me private chat you prof on what is happening.
    • Folami Kolade Izuchukwu
      Folami Kolade Izuchukwu Yeah "colonial meltdown"
    Oluwatoyin Vincent Adepoju
    Write a reply...

  • Ogbonna Nwachinemere
    Ogbonna Nwachinemere Prof many serious young academics with original topics are looking for mentors. I am working on Electoral Prophetism and National Security with a colleague. It is largely a fertile ground. We contacted a renowned Prof in that area to guide and mentor us in order to publish the paper. The work is done. What we asked was his guidance and expertise. He advised us to first of all finish our doctorate degree program before publishing papers. Many serious young academic do have original ideas. What we lack are mentors. In fact there are Universities in Nigeria that presenting or working on fresh ideas translate to academic suicide.
    Oluwatoyin Vincent Adepoju
    Write a reply...

  • John Odoh
    John Odoh A bitter truth
  • Beji Musa Beji
    Beji Musa Beji Prof,most of these lecturers always want a junk in junk out from their students during exams.They don't encourage new ideas and innovations but are ok with already discovered ideas
  • Emmanuel Owobi
    Emmanuel Owobi In an ideal knowledge enviornment students are encouraged to break new grounds, but here the lecturers are the ones that kill curosity,innovations and unorthodox opinions.They are mostly half-baked,unscholarly materials and snobbishly unapproachable and not amenable to new challenges.The students are not given what they need to spur them to the excited world of research and self-discovery.lf the system is not overhauled we must remain contented with intellectual mediocrity and retrogression.
  • Anthony Agbali When some of the teachers cut corners and paid for their credentials why wouldnt the system breed such students and nuisance. The situation may be bad with the humanities and social science students but it is, however, in my opinion equally bad in the natural sciences and other areas of scholarship. It maybe one of the reasons why for God knows why that jobs are for auctions to the highest bidder. A nation full of deceit and hypocrisy reaps the best outcomes of the odious and obnoxious worst possible!
  • Dr-Orokpo Francis Ogbole
    Dr-Orokpo Francis Ogbole Thanks for flogging us intellectually. He who has ears to hear let him hear.
  • Muhammad Muzdaleefa
    Muhammad Muzdaleefa One of the bane for original research work in Nigerian Universities is that students start with finding topic instead of literature review.
  • Idris Obadaki
  • Steven Atogi
    Steven Atogi Prof, the problem is, majority of undergraduates and Post Graduates are not familiar with in-text citations and referencing of audio-visuals, electronic media (including e-books), paper adverts, social media, etc. When they ask about "material" they mean published books or journals, that's how limited the scope of their definition of material or sources are. Secondly, most PhD holders who are supervisors to undergraduate and Post Graduate researchers would mark you down when you write new and original works that they are barely familiar with, due to their own self-imposed stagnancy to knowledge and inability to keep up with new information in the open. If they don't wanna suffer you much, they cancel your work and ask you to do another with old familiar sources of authority in that field. The Nigerian education system is so structured to dwarf minds than build it to a higher level of functionality. The god-complex of sadistic supervisors is another factor, you don't question them even when they are apparently wrong.
  • Oladipo Abiodun Sammie
  • Nsikak Essien
    Nsikak Essien Thanks for the expo Prof
  • Akinbode Badiu Akinola
  • Malam Daha Tijjani
    Malam Daha Tijjani Just what I was talking with a co author. We are looking at the use of celebrities in election: Its effects on the voters.
    • Moses Ochonu
      Moses Ochonu Very original, refreshingly innovative topic with broader continental and global significance. Can't wait to read your insights.
    Oluwatoyin Vincent Adepoju
    Write a reply...

  • Shachia Oryila
    Shachia Oryila There are a lot to research during this period.
  • Smithson Onyebuchi Ahiabuike
    Smithson Onyebuchi Ahiabuike Colonial mentality is still our focus. Hand me down. But the times are changing a great deal. Nigerian students and their teachers are never interested in looking outside the box. They are in a hurry to regurgitate other peoples work because this is how they are taught. If the teachers can venture outside the box, the students will learn and follow. But honestly the system has long decayed. 
    It needs to be resurrected.
  • Olusola John
    Olusola John Thinking differently isn't so much part of our system here. I tried it with my PhD, and nobody told me to let go of the topic when I couldn't make meaningful progress after two years.
  • James Godson
    James Godson Word of the day....
    No photo description available.

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 08:06, Oluwatoyin Vincent Adepoju <toyin.adepoju@gmail.com> wrote:
Moses Ochonu, himself a graduate of Nigerian universities, has ideas that could be very useful in Nigerian education, but his perpetually insulting and condescending tone in relation to Nigerian universities and academics often leaves a bitter taste in the mouth when encountering his suggestions.

That determined stewing of the repellent and the inspiring does not help appreciation of  the value of what he is offering.

A more helpful approach is the following reworking of his thesis-

Creating Greater Sensitivity in  Nigerian Academia to Originality of Research Orientations 

Humanities and social science students and academics in Nigerian universities need to expand their research orientations through greater sensitivity to the character of research as the cultivation of new insight into phenomena.

This insight could be demonstrated in exploring what has either not been studied before or little studied or the development of new angles of perception on subjects already significantly investigated.

Thus, academic research reports often open with a justification of the project in relation to the field within which it exists, explaining, in general terms, its contribution to knowledge in terms of the observation of what is yet undiscussed or unexplored at the level of the current project or the new project's  opening of a new space for viewing the already familiar.

"The newer, more unfamiliar a topic is, the greater the payoff and originality of potential insights and thus the greater the original contribution to knowledge--the most important factor in evaluating masters or doctorate dissertations [ a criterion also central to assessing  research articles and books]", as summed up by historian Moses Ochonu.

There are materials and topics all around [ the Nigerian environment]  that are unresearched and unused and that would enable  insightful observers who can see  the evidentiary and analytical potentials of such sources to make an ORIGINAL contribution to knowledge, as different from largely derivative research, summing up Ochonu largely in his own words. 

"As we speak, it's the season of elections" Ochonu continues. "Rallies and public gatherings are occurring everywhere, with so many visual [ what is visible to the eye and by implication, the senses, foundations of human awareness] , discursive [ accessible to critical examination, a second stage of relating with phenomena, beyond basic awareness of them], and material [ the physical form in which phenomena are expressed and thus immediately accessible to human knowledge]  aspects to the campaigns and events around them.

 [ A sensitive] researcher's eye can see many potential [ research]  topics in these campaigns alone--from the crowds--the dueling crowds and the social media debates around them, to the musical compositions and performances at the rallies to the political economy of crowd rental to debate theatrics and debates about debates to new forms of political rhetoric and lexical innovations to the stagecraft of election rallies.

This election/campaign season is a fecund research field where a serious, innovative researcher would find plenty of  [ research material ]  ranging from interviews to newspaper and social media debates and writings to electronic news reports and videos to political musical and dance performances to campaign-branded textiles to campaign accessories, billboards, TV and radio political adverts to the emerging archive of sociopolitical acoustics. 

 These are all potential topics of [ research for ]  masters and PhD dissertations [ as well as articles and books]  in political science, sociology, literature, theatre arts, anthropology, journalism, mass communication, economics, and other fields. 

What are Nigerian scholars doing to capture, document, analyze and theorize this political moment and its many fascinating multidisciplinary potentials?

Where is a historical study of material culture of elections and political campaigns in Nigeria?"

 Beyond entertainment, scholars should wonder about how these situation can be discussed and explained and the knowledge developed shared with the world, this process being the remit of scholarship.

As a scholar once put it, the researcher organizes a discipline around his or her research subjects or questions. The same subject can be explored from various perspectives, reflecting the specific methods and insights of particular disciplines as well as through forms of interdisciplinary  research, conjuncting the  methods and understanding  of various disciplines so  as to better demonstrate  the multifaceted  unity of the phenomena  in question.

The fact that a  topic is unconventional, unfamiliar,  has not been theorized or researched, suggesting an absence of research material on it, represents a chance for the insightful researcher to become the creator of such materials, to lay foundation stones in creating a new path of inquiry , to blaze a trail of new research. To adapt the biologist Edward Wilson, a scientist's achievement can be summed up in the completion of the question "Scientist A  discovered.....".

Research culture is centred In ways of positioning oneself to provide fruitful answers to that question in relation to oneself.

At the core of this process of uncovering new possibilities is  curiosity about phenomena, trying to understand them and share what one learns. Scholarship, ideally, is a way of life, a vocation, a focus in terms of one's underlying values, one's way of navigating the world, of journeying through life, an "orientation of one's life and work in terms of one's ultimate sense of mission", as Websters Third New International Dictionary describes  "vocation", not simply a job or  a means of getting certification and gaining social positioning, these latter being possible outcomes of scholarship. It involves being open eyed to the universe one inhabits and trying to understand as much as possible about what others have discerned on what one is observing, critically relating one's knowledge to those of others  and sharing what one learns in the process.

Such a culture can be cultivated  anywhere and at any level of an educational system. Ideally, it should be cultivated from the earliest stages of learning, developing an understanding of learning as essentially exploratory and recreative  rather than purely assimilative and reproductive. The more developed socio-economic and academic contexts of some global regions are more facilitating of such learning but various cultures have long developed this orientation.

"We see much but how much do we understand of what we see?", a conflation of  conceptions on visuality from Yoruba, Aristotelian, Igbo and Akan thought, the latter as presented by Ayi Kwei Armah in The Healers may ask. The movement from seeing to interpretation, from perception  to the exploration of the significance of what is perceived, from "oju lasan",  basic, unexamined perception, as understood in classical Yoruba philosophy,  to "oju inu" and "oju okan", the inward eye, the mind's eye, the critical relationship with what is perceived as the data communicated  by the senses is processed by the mind at varying stages of acuity, the exploration of meaning beyond the obvious, beyond the evident, in a movement from the known to the unknown, from the visible to that which is not visible until uncovered by the seeker, is the core of scholarship, as this progression is delineated in Babatunde Lawal's "Aworan: Representing the Self and its Metaphysical Other in Yoruba Art".  













On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 at 19:47, Moses Ebe Ochonu <meochonu@gmail.com> wrote:

Nigerian Graduate Students are Surrounded by Research Topics But they Complain of the Lack of "Viable" Topics--Why?


By Moses E. Ochonu


Nigerian humanities and social science graduate students, especially those based in Nigerian universities, are always scrambling to find topics to research. 

Sometimes they send you private messages to ask for "materials," as they call sources, or to ask for topic suggestions. There are materials and topics all around them that are unresearched and unused and that would enable them to make an ORIGINAL contribution to knowledge, but they are too lazy or clueless to research such topics or to see the evidentiary and analytical potentials of such sources. 

When you point out a topic to them because the topic is unconventional, unfamiliar, or has not been theorized or researched, they get scared and say "but where will I find materials on it?" 

They seem to think that if a topic has not been researched, if there is no literature on it, then it cannot be researched or that it is not a viable subject of dissertation inquiry. 

They want to research topics that have already been researched to death and where as a result the potential to make an original contribution to knowledge is slim to none. But they don't care if they simply reinvent the proverbial wheel and reiterate familiar insights. They want the easy way to a dissertation and a masters or PhD certificate. Their supervisors don't know any better, having themselves produced derivative rather than original research for their own PhDs, so the students almost always get away with their scheme. 

They have no idea that the newer, more unfamiliar a topic is, the greater the payoff and originality of potential insights and thus the greater the original contribution to knowledge--the most important factor in evaluating masters or doctorate dissertations.

As we speak, it's the season of elections. Rallies and public gatherings are occurring everywhere, with so many visual, discursive, and material aspects to the campaigns and events around them. My researcher's eye can see many potential dissertation topics in these campaigns alone--from the crowds--the dueling crowds and the social media debates around them, to the musical compositions and performances at the rallies to the political economy of crowd rental to debate theatrics and debates about debates to new forms of political rhetoric and lexical innovations to the stagecraft of election rallies. 

These are all potential topics of masters and PhD dissertations in political science, sociology, literature, theatre arts, Anthropology, journalism, mass communication, economics, and other fields. 

This election/campaign season is a fecund research field where a serious, innovative researcher would find plenty of "materials" ranging from interviews to newspaper and social media debates and writings to electronic news reports and videos to political musical and dance performances to campaign-branded textiles to campaign accessories, billboards, TV and radio political adverts to the emerging archive of sociopolitical acoustics. Where is a historical study of material culture of elections and political campaigns in Nigeria?

What are Nigerian scholars doing to capture, document, analyze and theorize this political moment and its many fascinating multidisciplinary potentials? They're just sitting around and getting entertained, still thinking of potential topics for their dissertations.

In March when the elections are over, they'll start sending out texts and private messages again to mentors and friends asking for suggestions on topic ideas.


--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
 
Vida de bombeiro Recipes Informatica Humor Jokes Mensagens Curiosity Saude Video Games Car Blog Animals Diario das Mensagens Eletronica Rei Jesus News Noticias da TV Artesanato Esportes Noticias Atuais Games Pets Career Religion Recreation Business Education Autos Academics Style Television Programming Motosport Humor News The Games Home Downs World News Internet Car Design Entertaimment Celebrities 1001 Games Doctor Pets Net Downs World Enter Jesus Variedade Mensagensr Android Rub Letras Dialogue cosmetics Genexus Car net Só Humor Curiosity Gifs Medical Female American Health Madeira Designer PPS Divertidas Estate Travel Estate Writing Computer Matilde Ocultos Matilde futebolcomnoticias girassol lettheworldturn topdigitalnet Bem amado enjohnny produceideas foodasticos cronicasdoimaginario downloadsdegraca compactandoletras newcuriosidades blogdoarmario arrozinhoii sonasol halfbakedtaters make-it-plain amatha