The only reason they are crying foul is because Mugabe is no longer willing to dance to their tune

the problem is Mugabe doesn't dance to anyone's tune not even that of his people.

bawomolo:

Idiagbon tried to turn Nigerians into robots rather than changing their orientation.

Well, they were good little robots while it lasted!! roflmao!!

Kobojunkie:

Well, they were good little robots while it lasted!! roflmao!!

well until babangida cracked the code 

debosky:

You miss my point dear. Let's look at it this way. The 'forces that be' were supporting him before. They stopped supporting him and he is STILL there, IMPOSING himself on his people. Is the current sit tight policy now as a result of 'foreign power backing'??

He is exhibiting an African trait of sitting tight as a ruler to impose his will on the people. This is not about Western Powers supporting him or perpetuating his rule.

Outside Africa, western powers support free market policies in South America, yet Brasil is democratic and changing presidents as it wills, but Venezuela has a leader bent on perpetuating himself. What world leader is holding him up?

We need to stop making excuses for bad leadership by saying others foisted it upon us. In 2009 with all the 'education' we claim to have, it is still the UK's fault that Nigeria has bad leadership? Madeline Albright and Abiola?? ROTFLMAO!!

Eliza has little or no political power, she's a figure head sitting pretty in B'ham Palace. Completely different situation.

No no no no no, don't get me wrong sweetheart, why would I wanna argue with me lord and my master, my pumpkin

I am not for any leader ruling more than four years, its just that Mugabe's issue should not be used as a comparison. The bottom line is that he wants the WEST to relinquish their hold on that country, hence the reason for his eccentricities.

And the problem with Zimbabwe is caused by the West in their attempt to besmirch him. They cancelled all the country's credit facilities, they asked them to repay back money they didn't have and which they knew would throw the country into turmoil.

They blocked the country's access to foreign currencies and credit which is needed to trade on the open market, hence the reason Mugabe had no choice than to devalue the ZIM dollars. He wanted to peg the price of goods and food, but his effort was thwarted by Tsvangirai, hence the reason for the spiralling cost of food.

They were also behind the recent upheaval in South Africa which caused the killings of Zimbabweans, telling them to go back to their countries, this they did because other African leaders refused to speak to Mugabe, because they know what the West are up to. Now they have started their propaganda of cholera killing them. Don't more people die of malaria or typhoid fever, do you hear that in the 9'o clock news? The tutsi and hutus have started their uprising again, raping children as young as 1 and women as old as 90, is that in the news, no

Now the whole world is going through the same credit crunch Mugabe was subjected to, and even Britain went cap in hand to the IMF and was turned down, hence the reason they had to devalue their currency to attract inward investments, and keep Britain from travelling out to spend money that could be used to boost the economy. Now Gordon Brown and his Chancellor are even in talks about printing money to alleviate the growing problem.

Compare Zimbabwe to Haiti, they wanted the president out too, and got what they wanted and replaced him with a figurehead, like they wanted to install Tsvangirai. Is Haiti the better for it, no. Kobojunkie posted an article recently about the people in that country eating mudpie to survive, George Bush visited the country and guess what he said? There is no more problem in the country, the country had never had it so good Go figure.

Like I said earlier, four years is enough, if they can't achieve anything, they should give others a stab at it too

Sweetie I am tired of eating pounded yam every night, can you make me banga and stockfish instead with Semolina, and don't forget I don't like cold food, loff you loads

Africa needs Jesus not Democracy

remeber many of these established democracies are christian nations by origin u know.

democracy does not work it is faith that works but the question is which faith?

all the successful rich democracies are guess what chrictian nations.

kabna:

Africa needs Jesus not Democracy
remeber many of these established democracies are christian nations by origin u know.

democracy does not work it is faith that works but the question is which faith?

all the successful rich democracies are guess what chrictian nations.

What is this one talking about?

Do you know anything at all?

kabna:

Africa needs Jesus not Democracy

remeber many of these established democracies are christian nations by origin u know.

democracy does not work it is faith that works but the question is which faith?

all the successful rich democracies are guess what chrictian nations.

Africa DOES need democracy.

The one we have, however, is not peculiar to our political and cultural awareness today. So far, no one has addressed my points and questions.

I'm still waiting.

kabna:

Africa needs Jesus not Democracy

remeber many of these established democracies are christian nations by origin u know.

democracy does not work it is faith that works but the question is which faith?

all the successful rich democracies are guess what chrictian nations.

This is an interesting twist and angle to the debate that is surely worth exploring I will like to suggest Olumba Olumba

Busy_body:


This is an interesting twist and angle to the debate that is surely worth exploring I will like to suggest Olumba Olumba

Can we add TB Joshua, Rev King and Clifford Orji for good measure?!

The one we have, however, is not peculiar to our political and cultural awareness today. So far, no one has addressed my points and questions.

I'm still waiting.

what do you mean by our political and cultural awareness today?

this is what i mean by africa needs jesus not democracy,

democracy is workable if there is tolerance amongs different groups and enough objectivity without prejudice.

no tru democracy on earth in my opinion is admirable not even america for if it wer, many of the problems within that system would have been dealt wiv not manages as we see every where.

so is about what works.

wiv africa's issues wee need jesus not democracy

MrCrackles:

Can we add TB Joshua, Rev King and Clifford Orji for good measure?!

What about Guru Maharaji

@ busy_body

Ok let's agree to disagree. I personally think it's too convenient, especially in 2009 to be blaming outside interference for inability to organise ourselves properly. Externals will always work in ways to benefit themselves, it behooves us to clean up our act for our own benefit.

oga not all africa is democratic. democracy works best in places of heterogenous mix.

what alternative democracy do u propose?

kabna:

oga not all africa is democratic. democracy works best in places of heterogenous mix.

what alternative democracy do u propose?

Good question!

Do you know anything at all?  

yes i know a lot.

democracy is not a perfect system.

in heterogenous human societies one group, people will alays seek to outdo the other except ther is a commonality shared amongst majarity of the people. what democratic establishments try to do regardless of wheter it is wetern or otherwise is to cretae the need for objective analysis and the need to do away wiv prejudice. when those 2 things improve ( ie more objective awareness and less prejudice ) people are able to focuss on relevant issues in order to demand accountabilty. until a society reaches such stage, the quickest route to any meaningful thing been achieved is to unite people around a commonality say faith, human rights, culture or common intersets.

the western style we re practisisng is not very diffrent from what is practised any wher on earth. what we should be concerende abotu are pressuer groups in democratic systems and alos demand accountabilty. first we sholud ensure that our eloectoral systems are free and fair. then when leaders mess up we chane them. by this they will know they are accountable to us the electorate.

kabna:

oga not all africa is democratic. democracy works best in places of heterogenous mix.

what alternative democracy do u propose?

People centered/performance rewarded meritocracy with consensus decision making and efficient decentralization.

ayanfe good

what u have suggested id the western style democracy.

u are rewarded when people continue to validate u throuh the ballot papers either as a local MP or the President.

consensus bilding through diferent forms of dialogue. yes

but ayanfe

in africa corruption will not allow consensus building people will pay or buy their way through.

so ther is no problem wiv the western style system it is the people at the center of affairs and the attitude of the masses.


simply put wee need to embede good values in democratic systems only then will they work.

ayanfe:

People centered/performance rewarded meritocracy with consensus decision making and efficient decentralization.

oga o, who be this? nairaland igodo megodo

I agree on decentralization but consensus decision making? how would that work.

bawomolo:

what do you mean by our political and cultural awareness today?

Three major tribes. Two major religions. Alliance by tribe and religion.

Perceived imbalance of leadership (among other things) by tribe/region. Thus, one very enormous clash.

Chaos.

Minor tribes suffer.

Chaos=disorder=opportunism=corruption=coup=counter-coup=chaos=disorder=opportunism=corruption=decay=sh*t. From top to bottom. From the government to its agents to the people. Pretty much Nigerian history, if you want it bluntly succinct.

Cultural/personal/political mistrust rooted in riots, war, envy. Survival, play-hard, under-the-table tendencies. Igbos hate Hausa. Yorubas hate igbos. Northern leadership subdues southern leadership (perceived or real?).  Favoritism. Further detachment from real issues and needs.

Everyone suffers.


Now, as to your question about our political and cultural awareness today, I'd still say it's about the same as the first minute in post-colonial times. Tribal.

Here is what I think: Nigerians (and majority of Africans) are still very much rooted to their ethnic groups and will better communicate and co-ordinate along those lines. In a south-south village physically and culturally miles away from Nigeria's center in Abuja, what will better guide the people to self-sufficiency, higher standards of living, peace, confidence, education, and security in the knowledge that their interests are very much protected and not abused? A south-south puppet state government trudging under the command of a centralized, psuedo-westernized, God knows what? A government much too distracted by political bruhaha and the pay-to-play protocol we're so familiar with?  

Or a south-south government that is politically, economically and culturally autonomous from a weakened center? A south-south government that isn't even that centralized itself? Apply the same question to the south-east, the North, the west. I'm not asking for Nigeria to split, mind you.

Solution? Democracy, of course. But as decentralized as we can get without ushering disorder - and with as many checks and balances as sanity will allow. But I think you knew that. The smaller the units, the better the chance that everything and everyone is accounted for- our money, our welfare, the system, hungry-mouths to feed, policing, citizen-to-government relations,etc.

Some matters will still be of inter-ethnic, national interests. Our binding glue might be contained, for instance, in the issues of national security, national trade, foreign relations, etc.

The above is only a suggestion from a lay-person's point of view. I might be bullcrapping myself, but it is what I think. Any better suggestions?

kabna:

ayanfe good

what u have suggested id the western style democracy.

WRONG. Western style democracy is majority rules. And more times than not is oppositional. A point of view is sacrificed if it does not win necessary votes. It is not consensus building. EVEN WHEN OBAMA TRIED TO BRING A CONSENSUS BUILDING MODE OF THINKING IT FAILED. WESTERNERS ARE INCAPABLE OF CONSENSUS REASONING. They are by nature, oppositional, and approach reality as an opposition of elements.

u are rewarded when people continue to validate u throuh the ballot papers either as a local MP or the President.

Wrong again. The system I speak of, have people awarding points to everyone, from doctor to cleaner, based on how much good those people graded have done for humans in their own little way. The more points you gain, the higher you move up and the more responsibility you can bear, if you are willing to take it up. That way, only the good ones rise to the top of greater responsibilities.

consensus bilding through diferent forms of dialogue. yes

but ayanfe

in africa corruption will not allow consensus building people will pay or buy their way through.

Bullsheet. You mean the African style corrupted by Western originated fiat currency and morality orbiting around material wealth.
Do you even know about pre-colonial society? When my greatgrandfathers could leave their farm produce by the road side and trust people to take all they needed and put down in exchange other goods they feel are worth the price of what they took? Nonsense. Consensus building have been a part of African societies. Look at the selection of Kings in Yoruba land and Elders in Igbo land pre-colonially.

so ther is no problem wiv the western style system it is the people at the center of affairs and the attitude of the masses.


simply put wee need to embede good values in democratic systems only then will they work.

The very fact that the Western style allows for mischief is an indication of it's flaws. Any implementation of a fool proof system must be easy, unless the fool proof system is not fool proof in the first place. In which case, you must discard the system as open to manipulation and seek ways suited to yourself.

bawomolo:

oga o, who be this? nairaland igodo megodo

I agree on decentralization but consensus decision making? how would that work.

We were able to attain consensus decision making in the past. Why cry out now? Abi dem done colonize your mind to work within the framework of majority rules, oppositional thinking? Na so so this majority rule, conquer mentality they make leaders predate dem followers, and one tribe predate the other. We lived for thousands of years before all this nonsense.

Asian countries have suffered too.  has Naija gone through  the horrors a country like Pakistan or Afghanistan have faced? people need to learn democracy is a working process before bailing on it.  Rather than abandoning democracy, you can tweak it till it works.  I would say the systems in Australia or Canada would fit Nigeria

 

True. Our democracy is just a baby compared to the US that is over 200yrs. Let just say we are still in the era of playing cowboys and red Indians. We would surely get there.

Sane Africans?? Who is a sane African??
Embracing the culture of the white people is what makes you sane??
Are you technically saying Africans were wallowing in insanity before the arrival of the white folks??
Jesus Wept!!   

Don't twist my words. Why don't you parade on the streets with twigs and leaves as your only clothing? Mr. embracing the white culture is what makes you sane?

stillwater:



Don't twist my words? Why don't you parade on the streets with twigs and leaves as your only clothing? Mr. embracing the white culture is what makes you sane?

Roflmao!!

ayanfe:

WRONG. Western style democracy is majority rules. And more times than not is oppositional. A point of view is sacrificed if it does not win necessary votes. It is not consensus building. EVEN WHEN OBAMA TRIED TO BRING A CONSENSUS BUILDING MODE OF THINKING IT FAILED. WESTERNERS ARE INCAPABLE OF CONSENSUS REASONING. They are by nature, oppositional, and approach reality as an opposition of elements.

And Africans are by nature not oppositional and do not approach reality as an opposition of elements?

ayanfe:

Wrong again. The system I speak of, have people awarding points to everyone, from doctor to cleaner, based on how much good those people graded have done for humans in their own little way. The more points you gain, the higher you move up and the more responsibility you can bear, if you are willing to take it up. That way, only the good ones rise to the top of greater responsibilities.

You mean a system sort of like the same Abiola used to gain points, even after stealing the future of Africa, for sending a handful of people to schools abroad; points enough to get him elected as president back in 1993( Lord Knows if he would not have been worse than Obasanjo)? You mean the way Obasanjo was able to score points by working as a farmer in otta, and making himself visible in public pretending to care about the people, and was able to get elected as president back about 10 years ago? You mean a system that allowed people like Adedibu ability to win over his agbero gang who helped shut up those who opposed him?

In essence you propose a popularity contest of some sort, knowing how those have turned out in recent history, as your solution to replace what we have now which is not close to what one would seriously tag a democracy?

ayanfe:

Bullsheet. You mean the African style corrupted by Western originated fiat currency and morality orbiting around material wealth.

Morality orbiting around material wealth? Do Explain!

ayanfe:

Do you even know about pre-colonial society? When my greatgrandfathers could leave their farm produce by the road side and trust people to take all they needed and put down in exchange other goods they feel are worth the price of what they took? Nonsense. Consensus building have been a part of African societies. Look at the selection of Kings in Yoruba land and Elders in Igbo land pre-colonially.

Consensus building, part of African societies? When? You mean when people took the word of their Kings and Elders as ultimate, mostly out of fear of being targetted or executed for having opposing views? You want us to REVERT to precolonial system of government? What people do you expect to do this? The Hausas who have adopted Sharia rule? The Yoruba’s in lagos who are almost rid of their Kabiyesis? Or the ibos who are more interested in their dream of a Biafra? Which particular group will welcome this precolonial idea when they all want to be in charge?

ayanfe:

The very fact that the Western style allows for mischief is an indication of it's flaws.

How does it allow for mischief?

ayanfe:

Any implementation of a fool proof system must be easy, unless the fool proof system is not fool proof in the first place. In which case, you must discard the system as open to manipulation and seek ways suited to yourself.

HUH?

stillwater:


Don't twist my words. Why don't you parade on the streets with twigs and leaves as your only clothing? Mr. embracing the white culture is what makes you sane?

Look at your freckled nose. . . . .
There were clothes before the arrival of white people in Africa.
We were living comfortably well until they brought their POSION.
Democracy. . . . .What the crap is that?? How do you preach democracy to megalomaniacs we have in Africa??
People who were told by the oracle they would RULE while others would serve them
Stilly, don't make me bash your nose with a sledgehammer. . . . .lay off this line of argument.

ayanfe u are describing precolonial days.

u seem to forget that cultural values are dynamic and as a result of global interactions the average african is diffrent now. societ is always evolving and its impossible for us to return to precolonial attitudes. thats why we must encourage this system of democracy. what u call westen style is no different from what we as africans inherently practice. yes ther are flaws to the system but that asa result of human fraitlities not the afct that it is western. we could have taken the sysetm and perfected it.

concensus building brouth about by objective reasonin and less prejudice as OBAMA proposes will lead to the majortiy making the right decisions.
the problem is the attitudes of the masses and leaders are self seeking. yes the westerners diguise this well but we are not good at hiding it in our democratic systems that is why its seems so obvious.

stillwater:

 

True. Our democracy is just a baby compared to the US that is over 200yrs. Let just say we are still in the era of playing cowboys and red Indians. We would surely get there.

Erroneous reasoning.

The U.S.A. and Nigeria (nay, Africa) are very different. 200 years ago the U.S. was a functioning state for the times.

Democracy. . . . .What the crap is that?? How do you preach democracy to megalomaniacs we have in Africa??

Is it not some kind of monarchical ideology where one man rules till eternity the likes of Mugabe or the Togolese president -Eyadema (the son had to replace the father ) are practicing, ? And what is the fruition? What if some Abacha twin becomes King, what would our future look like?

People who were told by the oracle they would RULE while others would serve them

Is it this same mindset you want some king to rule you with in this era?
What are the chances of opposing some king who believes his word is final even if it's of no good to the people and avoid being thrown in some dungeon?
Use the same sledgehammer to bash your nose first before you attack my argument, ok?

Nnenna1:

Erroneous reasoning.

The U.S.A. and Nigeria (nay, Africa) are very different. 200 years ago the U.S. was a functioning state, especially for the times.

Definitely not erroneous. Functioning state? Some people actually didn't believe democracy would work at that time period, and it didn't stop them from protesting and engaging in riots.

The U.S.A. and Nigeria (nay, Africa) are very different. 200 years ago the U.S. was a functioning state for the times.

a functioning state of the time? why don't u tell susan b anthony and frederick douglas that the US was a functioning state for the "times". The US at that time was financial and politically unstable. Are we talking about the same US that couldn't pay its soldiers after the revolutionary war. I really don't get your arguments, India is just as heterogeneous as Nigeria with a population of 1 billion but it still implements democracy.

democracy isn't exactly a "western" concept.

stillwater:

Definitely not erroneous. Functioning state? Some people actually didn't believe democracy would work at that time period, and it didn't stop them from protesting and engaging in riots.

I think I addressed this briefly in this thread. The Union (when the immigrant colonists seized the land after the American Revolution) was formed by willing parties who thought out rules and governmental forms most suitable for the people (thus, the constitution). Things ran relatively smooth for those times (even with the civil war) - worldwide conflict with industrialization, and the toppling of the European aristocracy made America "saner" than most nations. Despite some differences, I'd say that at the end, many Americans held the union in high regard because it was of their making. There was an upward progression.


I cannot say the same for Nigeria.