Professor Falola,
Thank you very much for your question. I will try to be very brief in explaining my position and response. But first, I appreciate that a person like you with great experience and high standing can recall the contribution that Professor Agbese made to pro-democracy struggles in Nigeria in the past. I have heard of others apart from the ones you mentioned who used some Nigerian Diaspora Organization in the U.S. as a stepping stone for a more lucrative position in Nigeria. This is an example of what I meant when I said that a single event should not be used to portray a person in a manner that makes him or her look as someone who is just after himself or herself.
With regard to registration of associations or organizations, there are so many dimensions to the issue. In principle I have no objection to groups meeting freely without registration depending on what they are doing, but in practice I have a hermeneutic of suspicion about that because there are different types of groups in a liberal democratic society. But let me begin by saying that a lot about your question has to do with the distrust of the state and the struggle for maintaining social order in a complex society. This is a huge issue that I cannot discuss here. But if after hundreds of years, modern people cannot still create a state that they trust, it suggests we should raise large questions about the nature of the society they have created. Fukuyama wrote a book on Trust where he criticized neoclassical economists for not taking trust seriously as a foundation for creating a well-functioning society. They just focus on exchange.
The freedom do associate in a liberal democratic society is I believe part of a larger pantheon of themes that are characterized as the liberal ideology of liberating human beings from tyranny and oppression. So in this respect, progressive groups such as the one you mentioned in Texas can freely organize and be subversive or operate without formal public registration. In doing so, they have contributed to creating a more just and fair society. The only problem is that this same right or freedom the groups in Texas enjoyed whether registered or not can equally be enjoyed in a liberal democratic society by hate groups such as the ones in Charlottesville. There are lots of things that hate groups can do to make life horrible for others without breaking the law actually.
Some weeks back, I reviewed a documentary film on Charlottesville and other similar groups across the United States whose ideology is white or racial supremacy. When the incident at Charlottesville happened last year, or was it in 2017, I was out of the country. I wanted to really understand what happened and decided to order the documentary film titled "Documenting Hate." One of the major challenges the authorities had which constituted a serious security problem is that many of such groups across the country operated without registration. Security agencies had to use video recordings to capture certain consistent faces that appear in such events and try to track and identify the relevant individuals. I have also used a documentary film on the history and activities of KKK groups where they preach hate message. But in this case, the police are there to even protect them because of the freedom of expression. It is hard for me to see anything that groups with progressive agenda can do to defy the state that right-wing groups cannot equally do. It is like a draw game. Other factors will make the difference but not simple freedom to associate without registration.
Registration of associations can be used by the state to jail or track individuals and prosecute them, but lack of registration also create security situations in the country that people only become worried about when violent events happen. So part of the question is the distrust of the state, depending on what it is, and then part of the question is whether the lack of registration automatically guarantees a better and progressive society, given that any right that a progressive group can claim to propagate its ideas in defiance of the state as in Texas, can equally be claimed by hate groups or something similar in propagating their messages or vison of the new society somewhere in the United States. In my assessment, progressive groups require more effort to build themselves because they are trying to build bridges and promote a more inclusive and just society. It is easier to organize hate groups, because they appeal to the narrow selfish human interests, and they can be smaller in size but much more energetic. And as Mancur Olson argues in "The Rise and Decline of Nations," for social groups to shape public policy, they do not have to be many in terms of membership. They can be small but if they are highly motivated and well-organized because of the gain and satisfaction they can get from their activities, they will make far more impact that is disproportionate to their size in society.
In support of the line of reasoning that groups should not be judged by someone with regard to the validity or utility of their ideas in the public square, Juan Stuart Mill, I believe in his book "On Liberty" argues that ideas as articulated by different groups or individuals should be allowed to compete in a free market place of ideas where the market or the public square can decide which one is right and which one is wrong in the long run. This is where politics and consumer behavior almost overlap. But here we are almost at a point similar to Nozick's reduction of justice to commutative exchange. In other words, in so far as there is a willing seller and buyer, whatever result that comes out of a transaction is just even if it is unfortunate. In this case, if organizations as the sellers of ideas in the public market place are matched with buyers or consumers of their ideas, whatever result that comes out of the transaction is fine. Of course there is a commitment to protecting human dignity. No group should violate the human dignity of others. The problem is that people hardly angry on what these boundaries of human dignity are especially in a neoliberal hegemonic economic system which we take for granted. That is why we need the state to intervene through the courts etc. On the surface, the liberal society claims to offer a lot to human beings, but it fails because laws alone cannot inform human conduct if there is no virtuous cultivation of moral and ethical restraints as Alasdair MacIntyre would argue in his work on virtue ethics.
This whole issue is similar to the debate in economics, which should not surprise us as liberal ideology traverses both economics and politics. The related question in economics is why should there not be free trade? The argument is similar. If we allow the government to regulate businesses by requiring all producers of goods to be registered it will lead the state to deny some people their freedom to engage in free commerce. There is evidence to support this. But on the other hand, while free trade or unregulated trade sounds like a good idea about granting the individuals the freedom to engage in transaction as willing sellers and buyers with no one's interference, yet Joseph Stiglitz has demonstrated how the idea of free trade that is unregulated has been used to the disadvantage of the masses in many countries, both in the developed and in the developing world.
Along the same lines, one would argue that not allowing people to cook food and sell it anywhere they have space to do so in the U.S. is limiting people's freedom because there are willing sellers and buyers and frankly the price may be cheaper if allowed. But because of public health concerns etc. the government said, no. Thus, to cook and sell food one must be registered. It seems like there is public support for this. Depending on the nature of the state, registration is a kind of quality control on what someone claims to do and whether they are doing it well. Not all people may be informed enough to judge what various groups claim to be doing. Left-leaning groups will complain that the right wing state will use registration requirement to silence them, and Right-leaning groups will equally complain that the left-wing state will use registration requirements to silence them. Ideally, customs and traditions of respect for the human dignity of all should regulate human conduct beyond the law, but liberal society broadly conceptualized generally undermines customs and traditions in order to create a more homogenized society, notwithstanding the talk about multiculturalism.
Moreover, there are some who would argue that in our world today, the production, spread and consumption of certain ideas can be potentially damaging as the consumption of some kind of food. There are many ideas that were distributed in the social media by the Russians during the last presidential elections in the United States. Some of it was intentionally and deliberately aimed at poisoning the population consuming the information, which cannot be traced initially to anyone specific producer or group at the time. But when people believe the poisoned information like food, they begin to hate or fight each other with great public repercussions as we have come to realize after the 2016 elections. Now there is effort both in the United States and other countries to increasingly regulate the social media in many countries because the consumption of its product can be dangerous sometimes especially when the product is there but we cannot identify who exactly is responsible for it and why? Knowing who is responsible for producing it can really help in maintaining social order. European countries are struggling with this concern very much now.
For me, at this stage, what I feel about liberalism is that what it gives you with one hand, it takes away with another. It is the recognition of this that led MacIntyre to emphasize virtue ethics instead of simple reliance on the law to regulate our complex human society. But as a society, we are too much in a rush and few in society care to cultivate virtue ethics because that slows people down in their pursuit to reach their state of "Nirvana" so to say.
To conclude, in my assessment, registration is in theory not a big deal at all. The freedom to associate is one of those juicy promises of liberalism to humanity. But lack of registration or registration should be understood within the broader context of the structure and process of liberal democratic society, which promises a lot in terms of freedom and liberation of people but conducts itself in such a way that results in making people fight each other as it heightens egocentric behavior while undermining the genuine sense of community. Any strategy that can be used by a progressive group to defy the state can also be used similarly by some kind of hate group on the far-right. At the end, it is like a dog eat dog world, a Social Darwinist social order that is packaged as liberalism's attempt to emancipate and free people from political tyranny.
Yet, the major tyranny that liberalism fails to address is the tendency of tyranny within many of us human beings today in our psyche, where human appetitive desires take over and contorl the mind, reason and the soul. The social crisis in the wider society is a manifestation of this inner crisis in the human psyche that we encounter today at a more egregious level. Religion has tried to address it but in my assessment, I have the feeling that this human appetitive desires that have taken over the human consciousness have also gotten a privileged seat at the inner-sanctum of many religious places of worship. Such religious organizations may be free to organize as part of civil society without registration, but that does not help us in terms of guaranteeing a pathway to "Dar es Salaam," the "New Jerusalem," or the "Neoliberal Utopia," among other visions of human ideals.
Thank you very much.
Samuel
--Sam:
Can you please elaborate on one point regarding the legitimacy or otherwise of an association based on registration and non-registration? Registration is an instrument of control by the state, a policing instrument to throw innocent people into jail. It is also an instrument to delegitimize as in characterizing some organizations, as in the case of many anti-apartheid ones, as terrorist organizations. It is a tool. You can be subversive by refusing to register as we did with the Zapatista Movement in Austin. I was in several anti-war associations but we did not register as we knew the consequences on our individual members. If the birds perch and human beings use catapults to kill them, no one teaches them to keep flying without perching as your stones will keep missing!
The Idoma people in Nigeria or anywhere in the world do not need anyone's permission or registration to come together to discuss issues of concern to them. However, if they want to raise funds, and they don't want to be accused of mail fraud, like Marcus Garvey, they can do the paperwork.
Thousands and thousands of organizations remain un-registered—in churches, mosques, communities, etc.
The issue, to me, is not about registration, but about voice—who speaks for the others?
Pita Agbese was active in the 1990s in pro-democracy movements. He did not push to benefit from it and returned home as Kayode Fayemi or Julius Ihonvbere did, but his contributions to the termination of military rule in Nigeria were solid.
As a moderator, I only issue cautionary statements, and I don't get involved.
TF
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://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
From: dialogue <usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Samuel Zalanga <szalanga@gmail.com>
Reply-To: dialogue <usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com>
Date: Monday, May 27, 2019 at 6:19 AM
To: dialogue <usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - A Reply to Kperogi.doc
Thank you very much OAA. I read the email exchanges that took place in this forum with regard to the essay written by Farooq on Professor Gwamna and Professor Agbese. I am writing this to share some of my thoughts about it because I was at the conference that Farooq made reference to and even made a presentation there. Of course I am not one of the organizers but I remember inviting three friends of mine to attend the conference / forum. Two of the friends I invited are from south western Nigeria while the other is from Southeastern Nigeria. Two of them are professors: one is a systematic and contextual theologian and the other is criminal justice scholar. The other is an employee of the state of Minnesota.
In my assessment there are two main parts to the concerns raised by Farooq about Professors Agbese and Gwamna. One has to do with claiming to represent an organization that is not registered, and the implication that this was done for dubious reasons or so it seems as he argued. The second part has to do with the claim that the two persons are engaged in some kind of propaganda to support the Buhari administration in spite of the terrible situation that the Buhari government has created in Nigeria.
Let me start by saying that just as Farooq accorded respect to the two persons based on their meeting at the Zumunta Convention last year, I too will start from there but I will go further. I have met many Nigerians in the United States, but Professor Gwamna who is a senior colleague to me has become like a brother to me. I am from Bauchi but he is from Southern Kaduna. I remember hearing his voice reading news in Radio Nigeria Kaduna when I was younger. I visited him in Iowa twice and the most recent was last Easter. I celebrated my last Easter break with him. This is my full disclosure. I have come to know his spouse who is a very kind woman. I have had extended contact and interaction with them such that while I agree that the concern Farooq raised about representing an organization that is not registered is a legitimate one, I do not want people to just totalize the character of the two persons around that. Please try to know them as persons in a holistic way. There is more to each one of us than just one wrong decision. I observe a lot and while people do make mistakes, I do not see anything in the life of Professor Gwamna that indicates that he is the kind of money-chasing person that he is being made to look like. His life is characterized by faith, moderation and humility. One can still make mistake but let us not from a distant just use one mistaken decision to draw conclusion on a person's character please.
Professor Agbese is someone I see not just as a senior colleague too but as a mentor since he was the classmate of Attahiru Jega. Jega returned to Bayero University Kano while I was still there as an undergraduate but I did not take a course from him. I however used to see him regularly at the Faculty of Social and Management Sciences. Although Professor Agbese visits Nigeria frequently according to Farooq, yet, this is not something that started recently. Even before Buhari became president he used to travel to Nigeria a lot. I am not sure also, but I have heard him speak on the role of the military in Nigeria in many conferences in the past, which indicates to me that either that is his area of specialization or one of the areas of his scholarly focus. His interest in the military is not starting now. This would help in greatly explaining his interest in the military. Now, again this does not mean that this makes it right to represent an unregistered organization but please, I do not want us to rush to totalize someone's character just based on such a mistake. That is why I feel strongly that Professor Agbese's picture should not have been in the article written by Farooq. In my view, that went too far. This is almost like treating someone as a criminal. From the way Farooq wrote, at some point it looks like he did some intensive research and knows a lot about the two persons. But I was surprise when he asserted that the two persons live in the same town. In fact, the distance between where the two live is more than two hours drive or thereabout. Let us all be careful about claiming details on things on the ground. I have visited Professor Abegese's house too but in my observation, I did not see any extravagant lifestyle that one may suspect based on Farooq's article, unless of course if I made a mistake in my observation which I could..
As for the conference organized in Minnesota last year, it went very well. Indeed, I wish there were more people in attendance. It was not propaganda as some may think. The presenter truly brought to limelight a lot of details about what is happening on the ground in Nigeria in fighting insurgents in order to help Nigerians here understand the complexity of the situation in Nigeria. Yet, he also encountered tough questions and scrutiny. I will say as my friends who were there would say also that if the goal was propaganda then the person did not succeed because it was a serious forum for intellectual discussion. I was not paid and no one dictated to me what to present on. I wish there would be more of such forums organized because that will help Nigerians in diaspora understand some of the things happening on the ground. After living in Nigeria for 13 months in 2017-18, I realized that we assume too much that armchair expertise or philosophizing here by us can bring immediate change in the distant grassroots communities in Nigeria or Africa at large. This is not a de-legitimation of the work we do, but I prefer praxis in the sense of the dialectical relationship between theory / ideas and existential life and struggles of people out there in the real world. And seeing the reality on the ground in Nigeria made me feel humbled about what kind of civil repair I can initiate in Nigeria from here. People in the conference were free to express their disagreement with the presenter and the body language of the presenter did not indicate he was shocked about that. He is a very educated military officer and did an excellent job in articulating his analysis of the issues and he got challenging feedback.
While food and accommodation was provided to those who attended the conference, this, in and of itself in my assessment should not immediately qualify as something dubious except of course if someone has some other kinds of evidence. For example, there was a time an organization at the Graduate Theological Union in California received funding from Templeton Foundation to promote dialogue on science and religion in Africa. They invested seventy thousand dollars or thereabout to organize an initial conference about this subject matter at the University of Ilorin, Nigeria. At the very time the conference was to take place, the United States invaded Afghanistan and for security reasons, the organizers were advised not to travel to Nigeria for security and safety reasons. The organization requested me to represent them instead, which I did. But they paid for all people's food and accommodation at the conference in so far as one's paper was accepted for presentation. So my point is not to say that I know exactly the details of anything but in my assessment, having seen something like this somewhere and long ago, it should not be immediately assumed that organizing the conference in Minnesota was dubious. I know that all that attended felt it was a value addition. With regard to the press release, in and of itself, there is nothing wrong since it is an expression of their perspective, except for the point that Farooq made about representing an organization that does not exist. But let us treat that as a mistake and be cautious not to use it to totally condemn their lives and character. There are many press releases that I never read, e.g., from the White House.
I do not think that Professor Agbese and Gwamna do not feel the pain coming from the violence in Nigeria. There was one conference in Atlanta, where Professor Agbese made a thorough analysis of the Fulani Violence in Nigeria. What I will say briefly is that he examined the intersection of factors and processes that led to the violence instead of isolating just one factor as many people do. With regard to the fact that as Farooq claims Professor Agbese supports Buhari, I believe while many will disagree with that, but if he chooses to do so, the best one can do is to provide counter evidence. In this forum, there are many opinions that disagree and sometimes it is not just disagreement but as Thomas Kuhn would say in "The Structures of Scientific Revolution," the different positions people take are incommensurable. Before the elections in Nigeria, people supported different candidates. Yes, intellectuals should not sell their conscience but at a deeper level, conscience itself is not developed in social or cultural vacuum. Owing to elective affinity and how the intersection of social and material interests can subconsciously create a plausibility structure for a worldview and political arguments, intellectuals may end up supporting something that cannot claim universal applicability to all social and interests groups. Of course this does not mean that we should discard the question of "social responsibility."
The way Professor Agbese is presented is that he is too close to the military. Well, I do not know as much as Farooq claims to know but I know that Agbese did his sabbatical at Bingham University which was established by the denomination I grew up in i.e., ECWA. It is not necessarily one of the highly rated universities in Nigeria. Would not someone highly connected to the military establishment or the government of Buhari as implied be able to use his connections to get a more strategic location for his sabbatical through the military at for instance, The National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies in Kuru (Plateau State) or even the Army Resource Center in Abuja? How much will Bingham pay him? Bingham University has been in serious financial difficulty. I truly believe they did not pay him on time. Please let us not rush.
I agree with Farooq that it would not be good or nice for anyone of us to represent an organization that is not registered. Even if we have good intentions, doing so can create concern about our intentions, but that notwithstanding, please let us not rush to judge these two people based on one issue or mistake. And let us all learn a lesson from this. It is always good to understand people in different or numerous ways than doing so based on one issue. I do not deny that humans can make mistake or make wrong judgement but let us not reduce the complex life of a person to one issue or event please. These two persons are not perfect human beings and I am not sure there is one, but I believe if one knows them closely, he or she would not rush to put them in a pigeonhole.
Samuel Zalanga
Bethel University
Department of Anthropology, Sociology and Reconciliation Studies,
Bethel University, 3900 Bethel Drive, #24, Saint Paul, MN 55112.
Office Phone: 651-638-6023
On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 12:16 PM OLAYINKA AGBETUYI <yagbetuyi@hotmail.com> wrote:
Let me thank Bitrus Gwama for this modulated response stating his side of the story.
OAA
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
-------- Original message --------
From: "Dr. Bitrus Gwamna" <bgwamna@gmail.com>
Date: 25/05/2019 11:15 (GMT+00:00)
Subject: USA Africa Dialogue Series - A Reply to Kperogi.doc
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/01b501d51299%24a35cc580%24ea165080%24%40gmail.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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/AM0PR04MB4275E96BDD44D217750D0276A61C0%40AM0PR04MB4275.eurprd04.prod.outlook.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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/CAAeyH_P_CD4YGWb__exOAEvPHf3_6HtguO%3DJKfvjOaH9q-zq8w%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
This message is from an external sender. Learn more about why this matters.
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/76E985D9-7BB8-48FC-A02A-533E2DE66F2B%40austin.utexas.edu.
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/CAAeyH_MwdDBVnRBTfzjNzHFmvUPsRb%2Bc1kzW6FCNfcM79jyn_A%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
No comments:
Post a Comment