Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - UNILAG: BEYOND THE NAME CHANGE CONTROVERSY

Is it conceivable that the real subtext of the challenges to Jonathan's decision to rename the University of Lagos, problematic as that is, could be that Jonathan is Head of a political party, PDP, that the people of Lagos love to hate? Brand name? I have always wondered why women of any age accept change of name when their marital status change? I have always wondered also why corporations sometimes change the names of other corporations they buy over etc etc. To argue that a name is inviolable or that renaming it is null because the decision was autocratic begs the very question of what lies beneath or beyond the announcement, and challenges to it. But besides the problem of the PDP as a menacing political party, there is also the subtext of the fragile alliance Abiola himself had with the radicals and pro-democracy advocates. His struggle required an unimaginable conversion of mortal enemies. Dr Beko Ransom Kuti, whose very brother Fela had called Abiola an international thief would become the point man for realizing Abiola's mandate, even the preeminent social critic, Dr Tai Solarin died as an Abiola associate marching for the realization of that mandate. I dear say that even if Fela had been alive, he would have joined Chief Gani Fawehinmi to risk his life for Abiola's mandate as well. However, precisely because it was such an unlikely and uncomfortable alliance for many, it is expected that with time, Nigerian radicals would soon revert to their default memory or unconscious of Abiola as an unworthy hero. All the arguments being made now where available and relevant when the University of Ife was renamed after Awolowo but one can only assume that there were no riots and they were not made because Awolowo was perceived as a worthy and legitimate National hero. Great as the contributions of Awo and Zik were to the nation, it is not clear to me that they had developed a sound philosophy for an engagement with military dictatorship. In fact, Zik embraced it and if his ideas had been accepted, military rule would have become institutionalized in our idea and practice of democracy: he proffered the solution of Diarchy, something like Abacha practiced for a brief moment with Shonekan in 1993. Awo in his own case espoused the wisdom that you do not argue with a gun! He resigned from Gowon's regime in protest but did not openly challenge the indefinite extension on the ban on political organization. His was the "siddon look" approach, perhaps with underground machinations. This is why we have to view Abiola's willingness to go on a kamikaze mission in challenging the Nigerian military under its worst leadership in the history of the country a truly important watershed and historical moment for democratic rule in Nigeria. Abiola went into this knowing he might not return. He said in an interview that if you were encounter a madman wielding a machete, you must fight by first disarming him. Part of the remarkable history of his struggle was that it repeated the grand strategy of liberation struggle in West Africa which disarms and expels conquerors/colonialists without having to go to war!  The question is therefore not the brand name of The University of Lagos, but whether that University, because of its unique history, legacy, proximity and involvement in that struggle considers it a barge of honor to be the institution that will bear the legacy of democracy, anti-military struggles, and democratic struggles to the next generations of Nigerians. Jonathan already indicated the creation of a national center for democratic studies as part of this new vision. But I have to agree that such vision, consideration and decision may require some form of consultations.

Bode Ibironke

On 6/4/12 12:21 PM, Toyin Falola wrote:

 

UNILAG: BEYOND THE NAME CHANGE CONTROVERSY by AYO OLUKOTUN Much of the past week, was taken up with the controversy and vociferous students’ protest over the change of the name of the University of Lagos to Moshood Abiola University in a Democracy Day broadcast by President Goodluck Jonathan. Ironically and sadly, the storm precipitated by the decision gathered fury precisely at the time the University of Lagos community was mourning its former Vice-Chancellor Professor Tokunbo Sofoluwe who was buried on Thursday. As several observers have noted, the timing of that announcement defied the civility and courtesies that should have been extended to a community grieving the painful loss of a distinguished academic and versatile administrator. This writer was part of a solemn assembly that gathered at the Faculty of Social Sciences of the university in honor of Sofoluwe a few days before the shocking announcement of the change of name and can testify that the dirges evoked a much loved helmsman . Obviously, the Jonathan administration had sought albeit in an incomplete and as is increasingly evident in an ill-starred manner to atone for a vivid injury, a gash in the psyche of the nation by reinstating the winner of the annulled June 12 1993 elections, Bashorun Moshood Abiola in the national memory. The gesture may have come too little and too late but it nonetheless stands in contrast to the contentious bypassing and dimunition of Abiola’s historic contribution to the evolution of our admittedly imperfect democracy. There are those who feel for example that a more thorough going revalidation of June 12 by proclaiming post-humously an Abiola presidency would have been more of a restitution than the entirely symbolic and misdirected renaming of one of our premier universities. Nonetheless, it is proper to recognize that this is a gesture in the right direction to the extent that it seeks to right the scales of a seminal wrongdoing. One worries however that not much thinking appears to be going into decision making under the current administration if we judge by the way government has sought to carry out the renaming of the University of Lagos. For example, it is obvious that the decision would have benefitted from input by the university community and other critical stakeholders in the university project. Had such consultations been made it would have been pointed out that the executive cannot unilaterally void a name that was instituted by an Act of Parliament in 1962. Such consensus seeking which is routine in a proper and functioning democracy would also have preempted the tornado that broke out in the wake of the announcement or at least forewarned of its possibility. One is forced to inquire or wonder aloud about the quality of advice which the president receives on sensitive national issues such as these; it is also a little enigmatic to consider that the president himself is a doctorate degree holder and is therefore not a stranger for example to the collegial nature of decision making in a university itself a prototype of a democratic public sphere. There is the issue too that names are in the language of socio linguistics signifiers and carry emotional connotations which speak to the quality of the brands that they represent. At age 50, the university of Lagos can be regarded as a developed brand name ably marketed as the “university of first choice” by one of its successful vice-chancellor Prof Oye Ibidapo Obe. This of course is related to the fact that the university like many others conducts International Relations as a non-governmental actor which implies that a change of identity would have international consequences. It is to be regretted that these ramifications were not considered before the peremptory announcement of the change. Marketing scholars tell us that branding or rebranding efforts can come to nought if the brand that is being developed had not been internalized by its stakeholders who are expected to live out the brand. In this sense a change of identity connoted by a change of name should have been bounced off the prospective users of the new identity namely the university community. The point also bears wider application in a nation where too often important decisions are made according to a vertical geography of power in which the people are taken for granted or are “consulted” in a mechanistic and ephemeral manner. Those who have argued that acceptance of Abiola as a great hero should automatically translate into acceptance of the honor done him by the government are mistaken to the extent that there are equally valid ways of honoring a national icon without tampering or in some sense diluting the brand of one of the nation’s oldest institutions. In this respect, a number of suggestions have been made which include for instances the renaming of national sporting edifices, the declaration of June 12 as democracy day or the award of the most eminent national honor to the democracy martyr. These would have been valid and uncontentious ways to do deserved honor to a man of substance who paid the ultimate price in the crucible of democratic struggle. Irritating and ominous is the fact that rather than strike a conciliatory posture following the outbreak of protests government spokesmen such as  the Minister of Information took a hardline stance and declared flatly that “there is no going back” on the decision in effect daring the protesters and demonstrators to do their worst. Is this the language of democracy or of sinister authoritarianism? Indeed that damning posture evokes the anxious days of the fuel subsidy removal protests when government officials talked down at protesters flatly asserting in the words of one minister that “they had been called out to protest”. This is another way of saying that government is all knowing and all wise while those not in government are all stupid or mischievous or both. It is interesting that rather than face the issue squarely we are now being bombarded with another outrageous fib to the effect that the spontaneous protests by the UNILAG community against the arbitrary change of name were masterminded by a political party. Certainly this is not the atmosphere for constructive dialogue but one of intimidation, pigeonholing and demagoguery. If you relate this to the gathering suspicions of a second term agenda by the president then we are been forewarned that like happened before in our recent history increasingly severe reprisals may be meted out to those who speak their minds or who differ from the administration’s position. It is conceivable that the social and economic frying pan that this country is increasingly being turned to through a mixture of squander mania by the political class and harsh neoliberal policies tend to give bite and lend a certain distemper to social protests. If the protests had seemed vehement and emphatic then perhaps government ought to consider whether in the language of semiotics their resonance is a referendum of sorts on the lackluster performance of the administration on wider governance issues

Toyin Falola
Department of History
The University of Texas at Austin
104 Inner Campus Drive
Austin, TX 78712-0220
USA
512 475 7224
512 475 7222 (fax)
http://www.toyinfalola.com
www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa
http://groups.google.com/group/yorubaaffairs
http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com