This is our last week of classes and I am seriously overwhelmed. But I thought I will quickly respond to some of the reactions to my concern about Nigerian politics. The response of Professor Mbaku and Professor Ochonu are consistent with the spirit of my posting. In agreement with Professor Mbaku, I will say that Nigerian society or elites have never made a really serious effort at participatory democracy or a democracy that enables all Nigerians to feel that they are capable and functionally trained to hold their leaders accountable and make their society work effectively so that all Nigerians can improve their human development or as Amartya Sen characterizes it, the capability to function.
I will argue without hesitation that the Nigerian elites and the political system have not only prevented but have made it a major concern of theirs to not allow the ordinary Nigerian develop the capability to function to the point he or she can hold his leaders accountable and live as a human being with dignity. It is not enough for the Nigerian government to adopt a presidential system of government or write a new constitution without sincerely asking: what are the conditions that will truly ensure the true functioning of the political system, in order, to uplift the lives of the least advantage people. We should measure our development not by the number of expensive cars driven by rich Nigerians, the skyscrapers or the money people have to buy the conscience of others. Rather it is the human development and the capability to function of the least advantage people that matters. We should be able to achieve that while allowing others who have great talents to excel function as well. This requires working hard to balance equality and liberty. But this is not a simple question of getting a constitution written or even having a process adopted.
Rather it is a matter of what Robert Bellah will call "Habits of the Heart." How do we make the Nigerian or the African cultivate these values, and to feel really responsible to his fellow brother or human being? This of course is a broader question that applies to even the United States given the widening degree of inequality (See Robert Reich's documentary: "Inequality for All" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9REdcxfie3M). The Guardian has an analysis of the documentary. See it here:
http://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/feb/02/inequality-for-all-us-economy-robert-reich
In Kano, Northern Nigeria, for instance, during the era of PRP, you can find ordinary Kano people who speak Hausa and can read Hausa but can engage you in deep political analysis of Nigerian politics in a progressive way because someone has taken time to educate them. A good example of what I am talking about here is exemplified in the documentary on Wangari Maathai (see it here:
http://www.greenbeltmovement.org/wangari-maathai/taking-root-documentary).
There is a portion in the documentary where Professor Maathai's NGO engaged in serious political and civic education. You can see from the faces of the women and men participating how empowered they felt. At one point, they discussed whether if they faced injustice they will wait until Jesus comes back before they get the situation rectified. Maathai became a threat because she was doing what Paulo Freire called "conscientization." To build strong democratic and resilient institution, you have to invest in people and be prepared that if you educate them they will ask you questions and hold you accountable. Once when I was teaching on Education and Development in my Sociology of Third World Development course, we discussed Brain Drain. After the discussion, one student looked at me and said, you are a very good example of Brain Drain. It may sound disrespectful but actually in the context, what happened was that the student understood what the concept meant and needed a way to apply it. I did not take it personal, because my presence in the U.S. is indeed an example of brain drain.
I appreciate the contribution of Professor Ochonu too. There are two things he said that I want to emphasize. First, the need for a radical critique of contemporary Nigerian or African politics. A critique of Nigerian politics or African politics is not a call for dictatorship even though as I will explain below, there are non-liberal democratic societies today that are run by authoritarian regimes but are functioning very well, and the countries are well-governed. As the son of poor peasant farmers, of course democracy would ideally be good for people like me because it will give us a voice, but I do not want to discuss democracy based on paper definition. The need for the radical critique is necessary because the current system does not work for many people.
I have attached two pictures of the elementary school building and classroom I attended in my village in Bauchi State. I want to show people the basis for my righteous anger about the Nigerian political system. When I started attending the school it was still a mission elementary school (later handed over to the government before I finished), and though it was well after Nigerian got independence, the school was better maintained and equipped. But if you look at the building now and the children in it, if I were one of them today, I will never receive the kind of education that enabled me even as the son of poor peasants to be where I am today. There are many Nigerian children in this same situation, all over the country, indeed, African children all over the continent. But we want not only Nigeria but Africa to be a continent where even children who grow up in a village and poor will be given the opportunity to develop themselves and live a better life. What you see in the picture is what late Professor Ali Mazrui described in an episode of his documentary as "A GARDEN IN DECAY." Even as at the time he wrote, he saw the decay of institutions: clinics without drugs, doctors and nurses trained, but no equipment to use so as to increase their productivity. Under this condition, I cannot just praise democracy on paper or a democracy that has disenfranchised our people. If Nigerian elites want me to praise democracy, they have to show empirically that it works in uplifting the life of every Nigerian without exception on the basis of ethnicity, religion, region, etc. And that requires deep thinking. At this moment I do not think the majority of Nigerian elites care about the "garden in decay."
The other point that Ochonu makes that is worth noting is looking at our precolonial past. We should not be ashamed of it but we should be courageous as I noticed in Professor Mazrui documentary series, to praise ourselves on what is worthy of admiration but to critique ourselves without feeling bad on what needs to change. All societies need to go through that. It is true that we cannot retrieve that past. I once wrote on this forum that a careful study of what happened in Northern Nigerian history if properly understood should have taught Nigerian elites lessons on how to create a better society. I believe in the study of all human history and that humans are capable of being inspired by ideas in societies other than theirs. While they can learn from such experiences, it is their responsibility to ask themselves how they can synthesize ideas from many sources in the context of their history in order to create a better society. They can adopt and adapt. All human societies have borrowed from each other. The West borrowed from the East. I am surely not the type of persons who will talk about Afrocentricism in order just to prevent a constructive critique of what is not working in Africa. But Botswana did not go for the kind of liberal democracy Nigeria went for. Yet the country is better governed than Nigeria and they have had exceptional record of economic growth.
For the most of Nigerian postcolonial history, the country's elites have done an honest job of truly building institutions that will give a voice and enable ordinary Nigerians to develop themselves. They just go for pacts among themselves. They are more concerned about the form of democracy rather than the substance and I believe it is our responsibility as scholars to deconstruct that. The other day I saw a documentary on Christian Zionism which highlights how some Christians support the Israeli government oppression of Palestinians. What came to my mind was that in Israel, the government created physical walls to prevent and control how Palestinians live their lives and pursue their legitimate aspirations. In Nigeria, our elites and political system have created social and institutional rigidities that are as effective in preventing ordinary Nigerians from pursuing their legitimate aspirations as human beings. So the elites in the two countries are using different methods to accomplish the same objective, i.e., a system of government that privileges some and disenfranchised others.
Now I will make some clarifications as to why even though I have no problem with democracy, and will prefer it, but reading the literature on democracy in the Western tradition, I have great concerns about why we should as African scholars just take it for granted that democracy would work or is inherently better without being concerned about the specific conditions and caveats under which it is operating. Since Africans have abandoned their traditional system of government or have been forced to, and have decided to adopt the Western approach to governance, it behooves them to seriously and carefully study what the westerners in their tradition say about democracy and their concrete historical experience with democracy before they adopt it. And if they adopt it, they must be honest about its prerequisites. I would prefer, even though I know it is difficult for Africans to reflect more about their history and context and work honestly to create a system that is rooted in their realities rather than adopting a foreign system that grew out of different historical context and just assume it will work. This is another topic. I still believe that with commitment Nigeria can thrive with the current system governance. No wonder Hamza Alavi calls such a postcolonial state "over-developed." Some concerns (not in chronological order that have been raised about democracy in the Western tradition are:
- Plato's "Parable of the Ship of State."
- Book VIII of Plato's Republic which discusses Socrates' critique of Democracy.
- Aristotle's Classification and Analysis of Different Types of Constitutions where he did not feel Democracy is necessarily the best.
- Machiavelli's The Prince, which illustrates some realism in governance.
- Hobbes' Leviathan, which makes the case for strong government or state because without the state providing peace there will be no basis for civilization as life will become "poor, nasty, brutish as short."
- The Debate between Thomas Paine and Edmund Burke. Burke is a conservative but this notwithstanding, his ideas shows that we cannot ignore the role of tradition in strengthening the stability and efficacy of institutions. In traditional Nigerian culture, there is shame. But in Nigerian politics today, there is no shame, which is an important source of honor and social control.
- John Stuart Mill's suspicion of democracy and the threat it poses to capitalism in his 1861 book "Considerations on Representative Government." His contribution shows that many of the people who promote democracy probably did that as a superficial cover or strategy for pursuing their private interest. They allow us to go and vote to give us a feeling that we are part of the system, but they are afraid of us being informed and using our democratic power to regulate or hold the system accountable.
- Weber's analysis of the danger of "Legal rational authority" which is what liberal democracy is. It can be legal but not necessarily ethical. Laws are obeyed because they earn their legitimacy in process, but the process does not guarantee social justice as such.
- Winston Churchill's statement that "Democracy is the worse form of government but for the others." What if the some of the others in some countries today produce better and more effective results than the so-called democracy? Such a question cannot be ignored. Rwanda has an authoritarian government but it is far more ordered than Nigeria and it seems to have raised more hope for the future than in Nigeria. It is not a perfect government but in terms of results, it is far better than Nigeria whose status as the largest economy in Africa does not mean much to a lot of people. The real challenge for Nigeria is how the country can make democracy work for the people.
- The Debate between Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson on the role of Government. At one level, Jefferson was for the ordinary guy, even though he was an elite who had slaves and thought that black people were inferior (see Letter on the State of Virginia). Hamilton came across as elitist because he favored strong government but his was born out of wedlock and the only founding father not born in the U.S. but the Caribbean.
- Robert Michel's "Political Parties" which critiques so-called political parties that are in theory committed to bringing about a just and egalitarian society in Europe but within the structure of the political parties, their internal organization was not just and egalitarian – meaning, the parties could not give what they themselves did not cultivate among themselves.
- Alexis de Tocqueville's' analysis and concern about American democracy. He analyzes many factors that demonstrate whether democracy works well or not in achieving its ideal goals is contingent on many factors. Americans have ignored many of those contingencies and now they have a political system where there is what some call "a silent takeover" i.e., the political system is silently being taken over by private interests instead of public interest. Nigerians elites often talk of the form of democracy, ignoring the contingent factors.
- Some insights from James Buchanan's "Public Choice Theory"(see Keynesian Economics in Democratic Politics) which is a scathing critique or at least caution and description of how even though in theory democratic systems have good ideals, in practice, the process does not necessarily function as expected. The practice ends up with a situation where politicians use democracy to pursue private interest at the expense of public interest.
- The 1975 report by the Trilateral Commission titled "The Crisis of Democracy'" It was written by Samuel Huntington, Michel Crozier and Joji Watanuki which documents how sometimes the workings of democracy may end up undermining public interest, while furthering private interest. This is what David Popnoe once called "private pleasure, public pain."
- The work of Mancur Olson titled "The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups (1965) and "The Rise and Decline of nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation and Social Rigidities" (1982). One of his concepts that are very relevant for Nigeria is the theory of "Rational Ignorance." The theory argues that the knowledge and skills citizens need in order to function very effectively in the democratic political system is time consuming and expensive. Consequently many decide rationally to remain ignorant, unless they have some specific ntrest that they know if they invest their time on, the return will be very high. Thus small groups with specific interests are more likely to invest in knowing the political system and taking advantage of it while the majority who see the marginal return on their lives from public policy is negligible, decide rationally to remain ignorant.
These are just a few sources that while I do not agree with everything they say, but believe me, I have learned to be patient to read the works of people who I will initially think I do not agree with but when you evaluate what they are say carefully, you still find some insights that you cannot ignore. My main point is that we cannot just debate democracy abstractly but we have to understand the concrete conditions or process in which it works. Indeed, there is a whole literature on how the electoral system in a country can have serious impact on campaigns and the nature of political mobilization and social welfare services provided at the grassroots level. It is such serous analysis of the workings of institutions and institutional arrangements that I want to see in Nigeria.
I will argue also that based on the literature, while the form of Nigeria's government is liberal democracy, its substance is not. And we have a situation where a government maybe democratic in form but the effects of its operation is autocratic. Here is a quote to illustrate this:
"A democracy and an autocracy also often differ in a number of other critical aspects related to economic development. In autocratic countries, a small group of elites usually controls a large part of the country's wealth and productive assets. The elite will tend to use the political regime to perpetuate its economic control and privileges by discouraging both the entry of new firms into the economy and market competition, favoring instead to erect barriers to market entry via laws and regulations. In contrast, in a democracy, while special interests and political lobbies generally favor established firms, there are also countervailing tendencies as consumers favor market competition and low prices, and small medium enterprises favor low costs of entry into the economy" (cited in Gerard Roland, Development Economics, Chapter Nine, p.241, 2014).
The description above of autocracy fits very well with the Nigerian society and government, even though the Nigerian government claims to be al liberal democracy. In one source I read, 85% of Nigerian oil money goes to only 1% of the population. Connection to the powers that be is necessary for business success in Nigeria. While true in many societies as well, it is terrible in Nigeria. The countervailing factors that are supposed to exist hardly exist in an effective way, and this is true even here in the U.S. The difference is that here in the U.S. the long history of institutional efficacy and expectations such as the respect for the rule of law help very much. Most Nigerian elites do not feel constrained by the rule of law in really serious manner. If you visit some Nigerian organizations and talk to be people, even the government organizations are run in autocratic style; yet the country deceives itself as having a liberal democracy. This may be true in American society too where business is treated as a private space. So the quote above is why I do not honestly feel like democracy can be defended just abstractly. There is too much written about a lot that can go with democracy, and less appreciation for other systems that may not be liberal democracy but produce more effective governance. Throughout history people have raised cautious concerns about it and in my view, the best way to honor the lessons of history is to draw relevant insights from the past and see how democracy can exist while abusing the citizens of the country.
The literature also documents the problem with autocracies, one of which is it is difficult to enforce the rule of law, thus, the government presumably has a monopoly of power and so enforcing contracts can be a problem. In Nigeria, we have a liberal democracy and presumably a judiciary, but just try to investigate the question of the enforcement of contracts. In my local government, there are people who invade houses of people in broad daylight and extort money. They make the villagers kill and fry chickens or goats to them. Sometimes they rape their wives. I just spoke to someone in my local government on Wednesday and verified this. The person works in a local clinic where they are treating such people. The government does nothing. The government still owes the employees of the state and local government salaries of one or two months and this is not just a problem in Bauchi State. This can encourage corruption as workers have to find a way to survive. All this is in the name of democracy, its form instead of substance. And the people cannot go to court even though it is a democracy where presumably the rule of law should help in enforcing contracts. But here is what the text concludes about autocracies:
"Autocracies usually lack any commitment obligation to honor promise made to their citizens – for example, to not expropriate the property of private investors. The only way to obtain commitment in an autocracy is by REPUTATION. If a dictator manages to establish a reputation for being strongly pro-business, that reputation can act as a long-term commitment device for repeated interactions between the government and the private sector. A good example would be SINGAPORE, which has scored very well on indicators of the rule of law and protection of property rights even though it has a non-democratic government" (cited in Gerard Roland, Development Economics, Chapter Nine, p.243, 2014).
Singapore is a country that attracts many Westerners who settle there to do business or just live. It is peaceful and has high human development. Yet it is not a liberal democracy. Nigeria is a liberal democracy, but hundreds of women can be kidnapped and the government does nothing. Human development is very low. And "The Garden is in Decay." What all this shows is that to a great extent Asian elites have more courage than African elites to sincerely pursue a goal of developing their societies even if the model they adopt does not fit the traditional western expectation. In this respect I find Deng Xiaoping of China very interesting when in spite of Western claim of superiority and distant pontification, he asserted publicly using a Sichuan aphorism that "It does not matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice."
I will like democracy to work in Nigeria, but if it will be a legal process through which Nigerians would be disenfranchised forever, I will rather prefer an authoritarian government that has reputation and commitment to uplifting the living standards of its citizens like the case in Singapore and China. China is not a perfect country but many Nigerians will be happy to live in such an economy. In Nigeria we abuse our citizens and suffer the consequences of what you would assume is characteristic of autocratic governments but yet is happening in a democracy. This complicates the discussion indeed. Thomas Piketty argues that every nation has to figure out how it will navigate the pursuit of economic and social development within the broad framework of liberal democracy. There is not just one single formula. Of course in political sociology there is large body of literature eon how capitalism impacts democracy and how democracy can impact capitalism. The relationship is not as smooth as some people would want to think about it.
The current situation in Nigeria is a serious confusion. Nietzsche description of the crisis of modernity seems to be applicable to Nigeria. He describes it as a situation where modern people being confident that they are safely in the ship of modernity, and ready to sail, they destroyed the harbor (i.e., their past or traditional society). They proceeded confidently about the future as they sailed to the sea in their ship, i.e., their journey into the modern world with great hope and expectations. They went far away and then realized that they have lost their bearing, they could not figure out where the North Pole was. Yet they were far away into the sea. They became worried, but they cannot return to the harbor because even if they wanted to, they have destroyed it, it is no more there, just like Nigeria cannot go back to its past "certainties." But to move forward without having a clear North Pole, is to live in a state of confusion and meaninglessness. As the sailors look ahead of them there is no horizon, it is just infinite body of water. That is how many ordinary Nigerians see the future in terms of the infinite possibility of neglect. Often they will wait and hope for God or miracle but there is no nation that has solved its problems by just praying for miracle. I have not seen one example of that in history and I do not think Nigeria will be the first. Religion which can definitely serve as a resource for correction and inspiration for moral and ethical uprightness has become as corrupt as the government. Where do we go from here? Well, as I see it, it is struggle and struggle. Max Weber said that the future of humanity in the Western world is going to be an iron cage and not a Garden of Eden, but on the other hand, he maintained that ultimately, the future is open-ended because much depends on what Nigerians decide to do with it. I have not lost hope. I still want to return to Nigeria and teach in spite of all the frustrations and risks. I just hope that I can in spite of the frustrations raise some poor kids just as some people invested in me. Without investing to raise some there, I will not feel happy when I am on my deathbed.
Samuel
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2014 15:03:54 -0700
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: SALARY COMPARISON OF LEGISLATORS ACROSS SEVERAL COUNTRIES
From: jmbaku@weber.edu
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Not holding brief for Samuel Zalanga, but why is it that every time someone suggests that we rethink our failed, destructive, and clearly dysfunctional practice of democracy, we impulsively accuse the person of preferring or advancing military rule? I can understand Abuja politicians and bureaucrats who are invested in the dysfunction making that accusation, but uninvested intellectuals? I may not support Zalanga's call for a strong man, authoritarian rule because as I said in response to Dambisa Moyo's call for a benevolent authoritarian rule, the concept is oxymoronic, and it is a huge gamble to subject the fate of a whole country to the whim and benevolence of a single individual or group of individuals. That proposition, for me, may be worse than Nigeria's disastrous democracy.That said, Africa, not just Nigeria, needs to have an unfettered conversation about liberal democracy, with its expensive rituals of regular elections that mean nothing and offer little or no choice, its expansion of the stealing field as so-called institutions, legislative bodies, and paid political offices proliferate, its sham, elite-focused legislations that legitimize corruption and quid pro quo deals, its failure to produce improvements in the lives of Africans, its tendency to cause or intensify divisions and conflicts, and finally its high financial and human cost of fractious electoral contests. There are several ways to be democratic and there are several types of democracies. We do not have to ape the wasteful, expensive liberal democratic model. We need to craft our own democratic systems that speak to and respond to our peculiar developmental challenges and to the singularities of our societies.A critique of current "democratic" practice in Africa is not necessarily a vote for dictatorship. It is a call for radical, as opposed to cosmetic, reform and revision in our understanding and practice of democracy. Before the white man came, we had our own indigenous forms of democracy that were rooted in the prescriptions of culture and religion, in local logics of governance and citizenship, and in mutual obligations between rulers and the ruled. These systems were legitimate and accountable and thereby fulfilled the key tenets of democracy. They are now moribund, and we do not have to retrieve them, but awareness about them should tell us that we are capable of configuring innovative homegrown or hybrid democratic traditions that solve our governance challenges, do not bankrupt our countries or divide our peoples, and foster legitimacy and accountability.Let the conversation begin towards an Africa-friendly, Africa-sensitive democratic culture. Zalanga has provocatively and perhaps inadvertently broached a very important debate and should not be blackmailed or intimidated into silence with the accusation that he is advocating a return to a military dictatorship.By the way, this is a very crude, highly condensed version of an argument I make in one of the chapters of my book, Africa in Fragments.On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Seun Odeyemi <blacng@gmail.com> wrote:Hello Dr Zalanga,
It's been awhile. I hope you are well? I have been following with great interest your critique of Nigeria's failed democratic experiment. The metaphor that keeps coming to mind, given the stark reality of political elite immoral sense of entitlement (nigeria's ignoble reputation as the country with the biggest total compensation for legislators being one example) is that of horizontal governance. A system that rewards, not those who enter public service not in order to take responsibility for the critical work of national development (a platform for important socioeconomic transformation solely needed in Nigeria), but rewards a blatant ambition for power. The power, as Negri would put it, which creates structures of "legitimate" accumulation at the expense of the bodies, humanity, aspirations, dreams, hopes of the more than 150m Nigerians who are essentially disenfranchised.
I shared your critique with some of my friends in order to stimulate conversation on the terrible direction Nigeria as headed since the inception of democractic governance. I have not been to Nigeria in 7years, but I try to stay abreast of the issues which bring into poignancy the dysfunctionalities of the Nigerian state -- some of which were effectively teased out in Arch Bishop Kukah's essay on the "fractures" which continue to hamper Nigeria's political transformation.
I just wanted to reconnect with you after a long time. Hopefully, we will be able to meet someday when you are flying through Atlanta.
Lastly, reading through some of the applications for the Mandela Washington Fellowship for Young African Leaders (from Nigeria) has rekindled my hope that there is still a future for Nigeria.
Regards,
Seun.On Dec 8, 2014 6:39 AM, "ZALANGA SAMUEL" <szalanga7994@msn.com> wrote:Sure, Nigeria needs democracy or whatever. But after how many years of democratic rule, statistically speaking, for many ordinary Nigerians in the part of Nigeria that I come from, it is better to be a cow in Europe than to be a kind of human being there. I explained what this assertion meant at the University of Jos in a public presentation and the people agreed with me. It was not said out of disrespect, but it was said to clearly demonstrate the misery of many of our people.I grew up poor and my people are still the "wretched of the earth" and so it is not possible for me to go to Nigeria and not interact with such people. Such an encounter is profound education and reminder. A cow in Europe is more secure than many ordinary Nigerians because of EU subsidy (not less than $2:50 per day) and because of the products with market or economic value that cow produces,, which makes it more economically relevant.I have heard a lot of rhetorical arguments in favor of democracy but I am interested in results that transform the human development of ordinary Nigerians. We are wasting too much time. As Martin Luther King Jr. said in his Letter from Birmingham Jail, some scholars and elites have a tragic conception of time, because they will tell these poor people in Bauchi and other parts of Nigeria to wait, by and by, pie in the sky. I came from those poor people who are treated like sandals by the rich and powerful and I truly feel based on empirical evidence the price these people are paying for democracy is too much.China is not a perfect country but with its authoritarianism, it has pulled many people out of poverty in a manner that is far better and faster than Nigeria. Singapore has an authoritarian government. But many Nigerians would not mind staying there because it will provide them better opportunities. Nigeria has liberal democracy but 25% of her annual budget is on the national assembly. I cannot defend this kind of liberal democracy when many of our people cannot make $2 per day, they have no healthy drinking water, no good education or health care and we are not investing much to develop their human capital -- empowering them. Our elites want them to be permanent beggars so that they can control them, all in the name of democracy.Liberal democracy is not built on some kind of mysticism but rational system of governance rooted in a rational individual and so we must evaluate it in those terms. It is working for a few, but not the majority. IN one data I came across 85% of Nigeria's oil money goes to 1% of the country's population.If democracy was serving the people of Nigeria well, I would have no problem with it. but I am willing to debate anyone based on evidence on how decades of democracy has NOT helped the ordinary peasant in rural Bauchi State where I come from. And this is true in many parts of Nigeria, especially, the North. The peasants are not Cultural Dopes. They know their pains. It is difficult for me to argue without looking at the empirical evidence. I am really very sorry in this respect. I do not mean any disrespect. Show me the results in terms of the transformation of the lives of the least advantaged people to use John Rawls principle in his theory of justice as fairness.And moreover even if Nigeria wants democracy we know full well that there are certain prerequisites for democracy to function in the liberal sense of it. You do not just come and copy the presidential system of government of another country whose democracy developed in certain concrete historical and cultural contexts different from yours and just impose it on your people.What sincere effort have the Nigerian elites made to put in place concrete conditions that will help the effective functioning of democratic institutions? Little or nothing. They just use the democratic freedom to make our people become more bigoted along religious and ethnic lines, instead of encouraging people to work together to solve common problems. How long will it take Nigeria to change at this pace and kind of liberal democracy? Will the whole world wait for Nigeria? The train is leaving. Again as Martin Luther King Jr. said in his said letter, I will ordinary Nigerians are yearning for justice with a sense of "cosmic urgency." On Thanksgiving day, my thanksgiving was not simply celebrating what I have, but praying for others who do not have. I am not more human than them, and so I pondered why I got what I have and they do not, and concluded that if I was to think on behalf of humanity, I have little to rejoice about the system of injustice, even though I may think I am doing "well."My lamentation.Samuel
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2014 09:42:42 -0800
From: corneliushamelberg@gmail.com
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Subject: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: SALARY COMPARISON OF LEGISLATORS ACROSS SEVERAL COUNTRIES"It's coming from the women and the men.
O baby, we'll be making love again.
We'll be going down so deep
the river's going to weep,
and the mountain's going to shout Amen!"
(Democracy, once upon a time, according to Leonard Cohen)
"I am not against democracy per se, but..." (Dr. Samuel Zalanga)
"Nigeria would do better under an authoritarian system that has more determination, commitment, vision and discipline to create conditions and environment that will enable all people to pursue their legitimate aspirations." (Dr. Samuel Zalanga)
A Confucian discipline or the protestant ethic as part of a people's culture, or as a national ethos is only to the good, but we're talking about Nigeria, not even North Korea.
The second statement must be broken down into its two components, (1) an authoritarian system per se, and (2) an authoritarian system that Dr. Zalanga wants to qualify - ideally – as a benign, unelected military dictatorship of the type that up to this late date, Nigeria has never known, for the simple reason that from the word go, any such "authoritarian system" is bound to be bedevilled by problems of its own making, such as that you cannot take away from the enfranchised Nigerian people, certain of their civil liberties and the rule of law, e.g. the freedom of the press and the right to say that the president is an idiot (and to be prosecuted for defamation by Doyin Okupe) , without very strong resistance to such measures.
In that West Africa interview conducted by Sister Stella, Emeka Ojukwu told us that the military always takes over for one reason only:" for profit"
On a pragmatic level the cost of running an administration under a military dictatorship is considerably reduced with the curtailment of senators' salaries etc, but what are the other advantages of a still unproven, long term "authoritarian system "for Nigeria?
Even if a Jesus type (love your enemies, do good to those that hate you, turn the other cheek) were to be head of such an authoritarian system, there could be other problems...
RE – The "tiger mom" – I asked a Chechen mother how come Chechen men are so brave and she told me that it's because they were never bullied or given corporal punishment by their parents when they were children.This discussion must continue...In Sweden I'm mulling over our minister of finance and her prime minister now telling us that Sweden's third largest party in the Swedish Parliament, the Sweden Democrats are "a neo-fascist party", and telling us this, only after the Sweden Democrats torpedoed their budget. That's part of democracy. for you. I don't agree with our prime minister and his minister of finance about this labelling. Moreover, the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats are likely to win even more sympathy and more seats in the March 22nd Elections perhaps precisely because of this new labelling...
We Sweden
On Sunday, 7 December 2014 09:43:26 UTC+1, szalanga7994 wrote:Nigeria's Second National Development Plan had the following as objectives of National Development, i.e., creating or achieving:a) a united, strong and self-reliant nation.b) a great and dynamic economy.c) a just and egalitarian society.d) a land of bright and full opportunities for all citizens.e) a free and democratic society.I surely commend the older generation of Nigerians who thought all Nigerians deserve such a nation. But where did that generation go? When did they change their mind, or was this all a gimmick in the first place. Let the reader check the salary comparisons of legislators across several countries of the world and see how Nigeria is a serious embarrassment. Here is the link for the salary comparison:One important lesson from this is that those who think that democracy is necessary for development need to think twice. It is a very simplistic claim. Japan laid the foundation for modern development after the Meiji Restoration, which was authoritarian. Singapore is authoritarian; South Korea and Taiwan laid the foundation of their countries under authoritarian regimes just like the United States after the Civil War. Ony authoritarian governments would operate the kind of Jim Crow system that existed in many parts of the U.S. especially the South. It is not true that to for a country to be successful capitalistically it needs to be a liberal democracy. Of course we know that the issue is not just democracy or authoritarianism per se. There is not short cut around good governance and effective institutions, and the issue here is that sometimes and under certain conditions, authoritarian regimes may govern better and create more effective institutions that set a better context for economic development. But as it is, democracy is not a panacea, I am sorry to say.Most of all, China has made great progress in reducing or getting people out of poverty even though it is not a liberal democracy in the way that people want to think of that term. China has guided liberalized economy while the political system is authoritarian i.e., the Beijing Consensus. As Professor Niall Ferguson said, when he visited the country after the 2008 Great Recession, many Chinese people say in relation to the WEstern claim of the monopoly of all wisdom to bring about prosperity, "physician, heal thyself." The very things that made the Western capitalist system a model plunged the world into an economic catastrophe and after the 2008 Great Recession, economic power started tilting to Asia. Ferguson would later express his frustration with the West in his book on The Greatest Degeneration. Nigeria too is an example of such degeneration given how relatively more effective the institutions function when I was a boy.Democracy as it is, is terrible for Nigeria. Nigeria would do better under an authoritarian system that has more determination, commitment, vision and discipline to create conditions and environment that will enable all people to pursue their legitimate aspirations. If democracy means this kind of expenses as in the table of comparison with no accountability and effective solutions to the national problems of the country, then democracy is too expensive for Nigeria and maybe many other African countries as well. I do not care whether the proponent of such a democracy is ALexis de Tocqueville, Locke, or Lincoln. Thomas Hobbes is more relevant for Nigeria in terms of empirical reality. There are certain conditions for civilization or economic prosperity. Currently they do not exist for everyone in Nigeria or even the great majority.I am not against democracy per se, but I want to see results and the data in this comparison suggest that for the ordinary Nigerian, democracy is just another added burden without any dividend or payoff. It is time not to make case for democracy just in theory but to show through empirical results.This reminds me of Amy Chua's Battle Cry for the Tiger Mom. It turns out that authoritarian mothers who have clear vision and mission are more likely to help their children to succeed even when on the surface it may appear that the mothers are mean. Laissez Faire mothers may appear humane on the surface, but end up producing lousy results. Nigeria, if she was a mother, is a very LAISSEZ FAIRE MOM. And she is seeing the results of her mothering strategy -- WOEFUL FAILURE. She helps in producing many children that have no moral conscience when it comes to how they treat their fellow brothers and sisters. As for the father or fathers of the nation, we do not know even where they are. If the fathers exists and were serious, they will mobilize some of the committed children to support the Tiger Moms and embark on a campaign to salvage the nation. On the contrary when you try to make a case for Nigeria, if you mention one thing you want to do to make a difference, you are told ten reasons why it is a waste of time. That is why sometimes I just start my conversation about Nigeria by saying Nigeria is at the end of history, i.e., there is nothing new under the sun that would emerge except the escalation of what we see today. Maybe that would provoke some Nigerians to have some hope, as they would be force to disagree with the pessimism.Samuel
--
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.
--There is enough in the world for everyone's need but not for everyone's greed.
---Mohandas Gandhi
--
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.
J.D. (Law), Ph.D. (Economics)
Graduate Certificate in Environmental and Natural Resources Law
Nonresident Senior Fellow, The Brookings Institution
Attorney & Counselor at Law (Licensed in Utah)
Brady Presidential Distinguished Professor of Economics & Willard L. Eccles Professor of Economics and John S. Hinckley Fellow
Department of Economics
Weber State University
1337 Edvalson Street, Dept. 3807
Ogden, UT 84408-3807, USA
(801) 626-7442 Phone
(801) 626-7423 Fax
--
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment