I remember an unforgettable moment a few years ago when a co-panelist in a local event, made the statement
that "Nigeria had no roads." At the time I really found this assertion weird. I had travelled from Zaria to Kano
and even as far as Sokoto, on roads; travelled from Kaduna to Lagos by public transport, on roadways,
and travelled to Port Harcourt and Calabar, back and forth, over the years on roads that
were functional. The Nigerian Historical Society annually held conferences in various parts
of the country and with a department vehicle a few of us would make our way to the
chosen university hosting us that year.With the exception of what was then Gongola state,
we had covered a large part of the country in our annual conferences. Being an inveterate traveller,
I also did a lot of private travel - all in public transportation. I wouldn't say that I covered every
state but I did quite a bit.To be honest, what concerned me most, occasionally, was not the roads
but some of the vehicles on the roads. Some were definitely not road worthy. Some were. I am still alive
to tell the tale - but this definitely remains an area in need of urgent attention. Nor am I claiming that
road expansion and maintenance should be abandoned.
But describing the country as a country that had no roads was particularly ridiculous to me-
unless my travels were all one great hallucination.I even pinched myself there and then.
(I remembered that old statement a few weeks ago in my road travel from Abuja to Jos via Keffi, while
I was in Nigeria to attend the 57th Congress of the Historical Society - and smiled to myself).
"Since Nigeria has no roads how did you make it
to the airport, Professor," asked a student who had attended the local
event discussed earlier. " Did you swing from tree to tree like a monkey,
to get to your destination?"
"Yes." I replied.
I did not want to be called a liar.
GE
Professor Gloria Emeagwali
Prof. of History & African Studies
www.africahistory.net<http://www.africahistory.net/>
www.vimeo.com/user5946750/videos<http://www.vimeo.com/user5946750/videos>
Documentaries on Africa and the African Diaspora
________________________________
From: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com [usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of OLUWATOYIN ADEPOJU [tvade3@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 3:03 PM
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Okay Ndibe: A case for abolishing democracy in Nigeria
MODIFIED
Actual Facts, Imagined "Fact" and Simplistic Facts in Relation to Summative Interpretation of Facts
I acknowledge the many factual aspects of Ndibe's and similar formulations on Nigeria.
My problem with the essay is its blanket criticism of Nigeria that goes so far as to include a falsehood of fundamental significance and a simplistically dismissive summation of the major security crisis of the nation, Boko Haram terrorism.
These two examples suggest a tendency to simplistic dismissal of the nationwhile ignoring the complexity and contexts of its development, a tendency some Nigerians demonstrate.
My problem with the Ndibe style of Nigeria critique is that it lacks historical context.
Secondly, it also includes falsehood.
Government in Nigeria
Ndibe expressed one gross falsehood in his first critique:
' The Nigerian president's only formula for tackling serious crises is, one, to issue a hollow speech or, two, to form a committee.'
That is patently false.
It does not help the quality of the writer's critique to include a falsehood that may suggest that a writer's primary interest in giving the country a damning report. It could suggest such an eagerness to declare a failed state that he struggles to rip off the head of the country, the apex of government, as a non-government.
The business of government in Nigeria is serious business. From Aso Rock, to the various regions and states, without too much effort, I can describe the strategies being employed by the various components of government in running the country.
There is a lot that is unhealthy-to put it politely-with the country- but it is totally false and pure fantasy to declare that ' The Nigerian president's only formula for tackling serious crises is, one, to issue a hollow speech or, two, to form a committee.'
Coming from a Nigerian, it is also an irresponsible statement.
Nigerians should realise that the self image of their nation and the image others have of that nation is significantly affected by their own attitudes and utterances towards the nation.
We should criticise but at least not conjure falsehoods about our own country.
Boko Haram Terrorism
Ndibe also states: "a country whose security apparati aren't able to curb the incessant killing of innocent Nigerians by Boko Haram"
That statement suggests total lack of understanding of the situation.
Why?
It is a grossly simplistic perspective that suggests no understanding of the history, ideological and demographic implications and total scope of the Boko Haram challenge and the cycles of development of this challenge.
It demonstrates ignorance of the fact that the terrorist crisis has been consistently addressed head on by the government for years.
It also suggests that the writer has not examined the effects of the government's efforts in facing this challenge.
Whatever one's position, I would think that one needs to at least address the issues in terms of which I think that the fight against the terrorists can be described as increasingly successful -
1. Killing and capturing of their members and key operatives
2. Total ideological defeat of the group, this being of fundamental strategic value
3. Creating a situation where the terrorist are now described as suing for peace and negotiations and in a climate where their bargaining power is practically non-existent, and, in my view, the best thing they can do for themselves might not even be to try to negotiate-on what platform?-but to quietly disappear.
I would like to elaborate on these points another time.
Human Biological Relief
Also, I object to this description of my country as unfair, unless effort is made to prove otherwise:
"where many (if not most) people defecate and pee in the open".
I dont think this is fair.
I have had memorable adventure in relation to this and wrote an essay on it "The Culture of the Toilet <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WoleSoyinkaSociety/message/5051> ", posted on this and other groups.
It is true that Nigerians do what Ndibe has described. Is it correct, however, to describe Nigeria as one defined by that practice? May one expect to encounter that everywhere and in all contexts in Nigeria?
Is Ndibe's characterisation of Nigerians in that line a basic description of the truth or does it go beyond that to suggest an exaggerated picture? Should such summations about Nigeria be qualified so as to avoid suggestions of exaggeration?
Am I being painstaking about the semantics of describing symptoms when a more serious issue is being addressed, along the lines of the massive problems with developing a robust water delivery and drainage system and the need for an effective policy on facilities for human biological relief?
Adopting a New Style of Government or Pursuing a Slow Transformation of the Old One?
I see that Ndibe makes an effort to go beyond criticism to suggest a solution. I would need to read his essay carefully to better assess the entire essay and the solution it suggests.
For now, though, I want to ask tentatively, how realistic is Ndibe's technocratic solution?
I suspect that Ndibe's suggestion of rulership by a technocratic elite might suggest some alienation from the complexity of Nigeria and limitations in understanding the space for action that the society provides as a nascent democracy, unlike other much older democratic spaces such as the US and England where the political society has coalesced around particular formations.
I get the impression that there might be no solution beyond the complexities of the political process as it currently exists.
In that regard, I suggest that it could be wise to see what can be done with the current political process if one wants to effect change. That suggests a long range perspective. Anyone who wants to defeat the PDP at the Presidency, for example , might need a ten year plan.
How does one build a party that remains true to an idealistic vision?
Understanding and Harnessing Dynamism/Change in Nigerian Politics
I was struck to learn that Alex Ekwueme and other genuine statespeople-that being my general impression of Ekwueme- were foundational to forming the ruling PDP. I had thought it was purely a descendant of an alliance between the military and Northern Nigerian power brokers grouped around General Musa Yaradua.
I would be happy to be educated on this beceause I am particularly intrigued by this party which seems likely to remain the most powerful in Nigeria up till and beyond 2015.
Ekwueme and others of similar seemingly idealistic vision bemoan the hijacking of the party they formed and their ousting from the party by rough and ready elements.
Some in the South West are decrying what they understand as the use of the mantle of Awolowo's vision to pillage the people, describing Bola Ahmed Tinubu as an example of a metamorphosis from a heroic, or perhaps deceptively heroic, NADECO fighter to a corrupt oligarch.
A movement on Facebook began, it seems, by someone who calls himself Comrade Aremu for Youths, has galvanised a lot of attention, attracting a significant number of Nigerians and members of the government to debates on the way forward for Nigeria. Some in the debate are suggesting the formation of a youth party.
thanks
toyin
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 7:27 PM, OLUWATOYIN ADEPOJU <tvade3@gmail.com<mailto:tvade3@gmail.com>> wrote:
Facts vs Summative Interpretation of Facts
I acknowledge the many factual aspects of Ndibe's and similar formulations on Nigeria.
My problem with the essay is its blanket criticism of Nigeria that goes so far as to include a falsehood of fundamental significance and a simplistically dismissive summation of the major security crisis of the nation, Boko Haram terrorism.
These two examples suggest a tendency to simplistic dismissal of the nationwhile ignoring the complexity and contexts of its development, a tendency some Nigerians demonstrate.
My problem with the Ndibe style of Nigeria critique is that it lacks historical context.
Secondly, it also includes falsehood.
Government in Nigeria
Ndibe expressed one gross falsehood in his first critique:
' The Nigerian president's only formula for tackling serious crises is, one, to issue a hollow speech or, two, to form a committee.'
That is patently false.
It does not help the quality of the writer's critique to include a falsehood that may suggest that a writer's primary interest in giving the country a damning report. It could suggest such an eagerness to declare a failed state that he struggles to rip off the head of the country, the apex of government, as a non-government.
The business of government in Nigeria is serious business. From Aso Rock, to the various regions and states, without too much effort, I can describe the strategies being employed by the various components of government in running the country.
There is a lot that is unhealthy-to put it politely-with the country- but it is totally false and pure fantasy to declare that ' The Nigerian president's only formula for tackling serious crises is, one, to issue a hollow speech or, two, to form a committee.'
Coming from a Nigerian, it is also an irresponsible statement.
Nigerians should realise that the self image of their nation and the image others have of that nation is significantly affected by their own attitudes and utterances towards the nation.
We should criticise but at least not conjure falsehoods about our own country.
Boko Haram Terrorism
Ndibe also states: "a country whose security apparati aren't able to curb the incessant killing of innocent Nigerians by Boko Haram"
That statement suggests total lack of understanding of the situation.
Why?
It is a grossly simplistic perspective that suggests no understanding of the history, ideological and demographic implications and total scope of the Boko Haram challenge and the cycles of development of this challenge.
It demonstrates ignorance of the fact that the terrorist crisis has been consistently addressed head on by the government for years.
It also suggests that the writer has not examined the effects of the government's efforts in facing this challenge.
Whatever one's position, I would think that one needs to at least address the issues in terms of which I think that the fight against the terrorists can be described as increasingly successful -
1. Killing and capturing of their members and key operatives
2. Total ideological defeat of the group, this being of fundamental strategic value
3. Creating a situation where the terrorist are now described as suing for peace and negotiations and in a climate where their bargaining power is practically non-existent, and, in my view, the best thing they can do for themselves might not even be to try to negotiate-on what platform?-but to quietly disappear.
I would like to elaborate on these points another time.
Human Biological Relief
Also, I object to this description of my country as unfair, unless effort is made to prove otherwise:
"where many (if not most) people defecate and pee in the open".
I dont think this is fair.
I have had memorable adventure in relation to this and wrote an essay on it "The Culture of the Toilet <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WoleSoyinkaSociety/message/5051> ", posted on this and other groups.
It is true that Nigerians do what Ndibe has described. Is it correct, however, to describe Nigeria as one defined by that practice? May one expect to encounter that everywhere and in all contexts in Nigeria?
Is Ndibe's characterisation of Nigerians in that line a basic description of the truth or does it go beyond that to suggest an exaggerated picture? Should such summations about Nigeria be qualified so as to avoid suggestions of exaggeration?
Am I being painstaking about the semantics of describing symptoms when a more serious issue is being addressed, along the lines of the massive problems with developing a robust water delivery and drainage system and the need for an effective policy on facilities for human biological relief?
Adopting a New Style of Government or Pursuing a Slow Transformation of the Old One?
I see that Ndibe makes an effort to go beyond criticism to suggest a solution. I would need to read his essay carefully to better assess the entire essay and the solution it suggests.
For now, though, I want to ask tentatively, how realistic is Ndibe's technocratic solution?
I suspect that Ndibe's suggestion of rulership by a technocratic elite might suggest some alienation from the complexity of Nigeria and limitations in understanding the space for action that the society provides as a nascent democracy, unlike other much older democratic spaces such as the US and England where the political society has coalesced around particular formations.
I get the impression that there might be no solution beyond the complexities of the political process as it currently exists.
In that regard, I suggest that it could be wise to see what can be done with the current political process if one wants to effect change. That suggests a long range perspective. Anyone who wants to defeat the PDP at the Presidency, for example , might need a ten year plan.
How does one build a party that remains true to an idealistic vision?
Understanding and Harnessing Dynamism/Change in Nigerian Politics
I was struck to learn that Alex Ekwueme and other genuine statespeople-that being my general impression of Ekwueme- were foundational to forming the ruling PDP. I had thought it was purely a descendant of an alliance between the military and Northern Nigerian power brokers grouped around General Musa Yaradua.
I would be happy to be educated on this beceause I am particularly intrigued by this party which seems likely to remain the most powerful in Nigeria up till and beyond 2015.
Ekwueme and others of similar seemingly idealistic vision bemoan the hijacking of the party they formed and their ousting from the party by rough and ready elements.
Some in the South West are decrying what they understand as the use of the mantle of Awolowo's vision to pillage the people, describing Bola Ahmed Tinubu as an example of a metamorphosis from a heroic, or perhaps deceptively heroic, NADECO fighter to a corrupt oligarch.
A movement on Facebook began, it seems, by someone who calls himself Comrade Aremu for Youths, has galvanised a lot of attention, attracting a significant number of Nigerians and members of the government to debates on the way forward for Nigeria. Some in the debate are suggesting the formation of a youth party.
thanks
toyin
--
Compcros<http://danteadinkra.wix.com/compcros>
Comparative Cognitive Processes and Systems
"Exploring Every Corner of the Cosmos in Search of Knowledge"
--
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
--
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
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment