ChinenyeN, you seem unintelligent to me. After ezeagu gave you the definition of ethnic group and tribe, you still can't comprehend it. Let me post it again for you to cram.

Ethnic group
1. pertaining to or characteristic of a people, esp. a group (ethnic group) sharing a common and distinctive culture, religion, language, or the like.
2. referring to the origin, classification, characteristics, etc., of such groups.

Tribe
1. any aggregate of people united by ties of descent from a common ancestor, community of customs and traditions, adherence to the same leaders, etc.
2. a local division of an aboriginal people.
3. a division of some other people.


You have to understand it's ethnic GROUP.

do we really need new states? have the agitators actually thought it through or are they simply trying to satisfy their insatiable ego? I think it will only result in spending the tax payers money on go "government projects" .God help us!

006:

ChinenyeN, you seem unintelligent to me. After ezeagu gave you the definition of ethnic group and tribe, you still can't comprehend it. Let me post it again for you to cram.

I thought I was the only who noticed. I can only suspect that the Ngwa is up to no good and must be stopped. Even when Enugu state was created, the "WAWA" people never argued their distinctness or uniqueness as fervently as these Ngwa goons fellas are doing here. I suspect something very sinister and the larger Igbo group must stop this Ngwa buttshiot.

Nigeria is really terribly constituted, because if that were not the case, all these fly by night state creation agitations would not exist.

Michael Iheonukara Okpara was able to run the affairs of the Whole East (from Enugu) and brought pipe borne water into my village in the 60s long before I was born. Today -after 8 states have been carved out of it, there are no pipe borne water in ANY of the fragments of the old East.

Since we've passed that era, the only remaining sensible option is resource control. If you can find enough money to run a state without running to the federal government for handouts, we give you a state. If not, go back and learn to work hard first and stop eying other peoples property to corner in your new state.

If we had Biafra, all these nonsense would not be happening. Every new idiocy in Nigeria provides more reason  that country should not exist. For Nigeria to survive as one, merge all of these silly states into one viable and autarkic federation unit in each zone. If we do that, sanity will return. 

The only thing that would suit Igboland (I don't know about other nations) is a sort of system like the shires of England. Igbo people cannot do the one man ruling thing, it's not in their nature and we can see the problem it is causing in this thread alone.

^^
It causes no problem, don't mind that Ngwa boy that believe the word Igbo was a recent coinage by the European slave traders and that Igbo identity is a recent development.

Someone that does not know who he is, so shameful.

ezeagu:

The only thing that would suit Igboland (I don't know about other nations) is a sort of system like the shires of England. Igbo people cannot do the one man ruling thing, it's not in their nature and we can see the problem it is causing in this thread alone.

I don't think anyone is calling for that type of a thing. What I'm calling for is a system like we had before, where you had one regional government that was strong enough to take on huge projects and fund big things like Trans Amadi industrial layout in Port Harcourt (from Enugu). We had "Urban Councils" then, and they were able to provide  detailed services like sanitary inspections and welfare services.

Each Urban Councils were more efficient than the states we have today. We can have councils for as many as are able to prove relevance. This way, we can preserve our language and culture which are both dying off in the cacophony and Tower of Babel that is Nigeria. Then, these Ngwa militants activists can have their council with a close monitoring from the regional government to keep them in line.

If Biafra had succeeded, we could have built that nation with sanity even with our minority groups. Sanity is the only thing lacking in Nigeria, and sanity is all you need to succeed. If there is sanity in Nigeria, no one will be asking for a new state in an impoverished country with millions of unemployed. They are about to create new fiefdoms for local warlords and thieves! 

udezue:

What you see within the Ngwa that qualifies them as an ethnic nation is the samething I see within the Oka, Aro, and Ajali people.

I can't speak for those groups. I don't know how they're structured. Udezue, Ngwa can not be a tribe, because tribes don't develop states. Now, on to language, how you know if two speakers speak the same language is if they can inherently communicate. Whether or not it'll take you three years or a month to finally understand Ngwa does not matter. The only question is, (take Oka, for example) if you were born in Oka, grew up Oka, and Oka is your lect, could you and someone who was born in Ngwa, grew up in Ngwa, and speaks only Ngwa inherently communicate? You and I both know the answer to that. For that very reason, linguist would classify our lects as separate languages, because language is about being able to [inherently] communicate.

ezeagu:

Which state did Ngwa have? Ngwa is a band of villages and a league of traders just like any other Igbo tribe out there, or maybe I'm wrong, No?

You are only partially correct, in that we are somewhat traders, but you're wrong in stating that we are a band of villages. We Ngwa are more than just a mere band of villages. Unlike other typical Igbo groups, pre-colonial Ngwa had already developed into a nation-state with Ngwa-Ukwu as its capital. A hierarchical system of authority, from the village-group level to the Ezeala Ngwa in Ngwa-Ukwu, was established. We have an ancient constitution, developed in Ngwa-Ukwu that affirms both the hierarchical authority as well as laws governing the entire Ngwa body. "Congressional Meetings" were held annually in Ngwa-Ukwu (Ekelafo), where the constitution was discussed. Communal worship, and rites of Ala-Ngwa were held and performed annually at Ngwa-Ukwu (Okpu Ala-Ngwa). After the "congressional meetings", the Ofo holding representatives returned and reaffirmed the constitution in their village-groups as well as perform the same communal worship and rites of Ala-Ngwa, which were performed in Ngwa-Ukwu, during the annual meeting. Now, a state is defined by its institutions which govern its sovereign and definite territory. Ala Ngwa has defined borders. It has institutions that govern the whole territory. It is sovereign (Nri, for example, has no authority in Ngwa). Ngwa truly exhibits all the characteristics of a state.

Ngwa is a dialect and shares practically all the same words with Igbo only with a few letters changed.

To address this, let's draw a comparison; Spanish & Italian and Ngwa & non-Ngwa (save the four groups previously mentioned).

Spanish & Italian.
--- Practically share the same vocabulary
--- Can inherently communicate; mutually intelligible

Ngwa & non-Ngwa (save the four groups previously mentioned)
--- Practically share the same vocabulary
--- Cannot inherently communicate; not mutually intelligible

According to your comment above, Ezeagu, you're saying that Ngwa is a dialect (consequently a "tribe" of the Igbo "ethnicity", because it shares practically the same words with non-Ngwa (not a linguistic criteria, by the way, but hey, we're only entertaining the comment). Ngwa and non-Ngwa lack mutual intelligibility, though (the actual linguistic criteria for determining same language). If we take your comment seriously, then it means the same should be applied to both Spanish and Italian. The two share practically the same words. They are even mutually intelligible. . . Yet, they are considered as separate languages. Why? Because sharing practically the same words evidently does not determine dialects from languages. What does? Group Consciousness. According to linguistics, Spanish & Italian are the same language, but because of their respective group consciousnesses, their modes of speech are considered separate, distinct languages. Now, let's apply the same "Spanish-Italian" logic to the Ngwa & non-Ngwa situation. We already know that according to linguistics, Ngwa & non-Ngwa don't speak the same language. So, that's not important. What's important here though is the group consciousness. Like the "Spanish-Italian" scenario, Ngwa & non-Ngwa don't share the same group consciousness (we all know this, don't try lying about it). So following that "Spanish-Italian" logic, we would also say that Ngwa & non-Ngwa do not speak the same language, because to state that the Ngwa and non-Ngwa speak the same language, would be to equally imply that Spanish and Italian are the same language.

ezeagu:

It's fine having an Ngwa identity, but that should not come in the way of a much older and important establishment. The Ngwa consciousness has been there but the slaves that left Igbo lands hundred or so years ago did not classify themselves as 'Ngwa' because they knew the power in numbers.

Since when has Ngwa identity stood in the way of Igbo identity? As for the slaves not classifying themselves as Ngwa, the answer is simple. Very infinitesimal number of slaves were taken from Ngwa, and from southern Igboland, in general. The majority of the Igbo slaves came from northern, central and northwestern Igboland.

Regarding ethnicity and ethnic identity, the characteristics of an ethnic group are as such:
1) They recognize their own group consciousness in contrast to the group consciousness of others.
---- Being honest, we Igbo STILL exhibit cultural, political, and consciousness fragmentation. Speaking realistically, we do not bear one consciousness. Our consciousnesses are recognized in contrast to that of each others'

2) Self-identification with respective group consciousnesses.
--- We STILL, to this day, generally self-identify with our respective consciousness, and not really to the larger Igbo identity (as in, most Igbo put their respective consciousnesses first).

3) Their feelings towards their group consciousness.
--- 'Til date, we Igbo are generally not willing to give up our respective group consciousnesses. We still exhibit some kind of loyalty to what you all want to call our "tribes", much more so than to the general Igbo populace.

4) Group consciousness is culturally perpetuated
--- Any and all social institutions, such as the lect, territory, culture, religious practices, how they govern themselves (taken from the definition presented by Ezeagu) can be used as a means of increasing, and passing on group consciousness from generation to generation. Speaking realistically, we ourselves perpetuate our respective group's consciousness as well as those of other. Because of our decentralized nature, we do not see each other as the same. Seriously, perform the experiment. Any [wo]man of non-Ngwa extraction, staying within Ngwa, will be considered as foreign and non-indigenous, by the Ngwa. Likewise, any [wo]man of non-Oru extraction, staying within Oru, would be considered as foreign and non-indigenous, by the Oru. Any [wo]man of non-Izii extraction, staying within Izii, is considered as foreign and non-indigenous. Any [wo]man of non-Nri extraction, staying within Nri, is considered as foreign and non-indigenous, by the Nri (or am I wrong, 006?). The list goes on. Realistically speak, we Igbo cannot even travel within Igboland as simply "Igbo". We are considered as foreigners outside of our respective territories. No sense of oneness.

5) Members can intermarry.
--- So long as it cannot be considered incest.

As we can see, group consciousness (sense of peoplehood; group identity) is actually the main key requirement for establishing ethnicity. With this in mind, you can see how our decentralization automatically downplays the supposed existence of an "Igbo ethnic group". A group so fragmented, and lacking the essential sense of peoplehood; a group which 'til this very day, really fails to thoroughly identify with each other, cannot be an ethnic group. I won't lie. There is a very loose sense of shared identity, but we Igbo have seriously failed at proving ourselves to actually be one and the same; indivisible. We have yet to prove that we actually have one group consciousness.

006, your last post was unfounded. Where did I say that the word "Igbo" is a recent coinage? Anyone who has actually discussed this with me, here on NL, will know that I recognize the term "Igbo" as having been around since before pre-colonial times. I just don't recognize the "Igbo identity" as having existed before colonialism.

^^^

Ngwa is a tribe/clan and not an ethnic group.

Germanic tribes used to live separate like the Igbos before they were finally unified as an all inclusive German ethnic group that’s now Germany.

By the way, what is the difference between Igbo Identity and Igbo?

"Igbo Identity" as we know it now, is a recent development.

Another failed example, 006, because apparently, the Igbo "tribes" are not unified, and all-inclusive.

When I say "Igbo", I'm referring to the relatedness in modes of speech and culture (but primarily modes of speech). When I say "Igbo identity", I'm referring to "Igbo consciousness".

What is this relatedness in modes of speech and culture called and if it's called Igbo, how is this "Igbo Identity" a recent thing?

Do you see how myopic it sounds?

I already explained that.

ChinenyeN:

Another failed example, 006, because apparently, the Igbo "tribes" are not unified.

When I say "Igbo", I'm referring to the relatedness in modes of speech and culture (but primarily modes of speech). When I say "Igbo identity", I'm referring to "Igbo consciousness".

You are wrong my friend.

The Ngwa are not a separate ethnicity sorry to say. You used the examples of the Spanish and Italians, but they is a foolish example. Look at how much land and water separate them and the reason why they speak a similar language is, because both languages are based off of Latin. And the reason why there are so many Latin words in Spanish is, because the Romans colonized Iberia (Spanish Peninsula). So that was a horrible example.

Let me use the example of the Ashanti and the Fante. They are different tribes, but they speak the same Akan language with vast differences, but they are still the same Akan speaking people. The same goes for the Igbo speaking people such as your people the Ngwa and the Mbaise people.

The example is illegitimate because body of water, and land separates them? Understand that I was speaking about their modes of speech, specifically, in that example; not territory and identity. Territory and identity is for discussions of ethnicity. Modes of speech is specifically a discussion of language.

ChinenyeN:

I already explained that.

You haven't.

Wow. . . seriously? I haven't. Well, I would ask you to go back and reread my post, but you may still decide to deny where I explained the differentiation between "Igbo" and "Igbo identity".

ChinenyeN:

Another failed example, 006, because apparently, the Igbo "tribes" are not unified, and all-inclusive.

When I say "Igbo", I'm referring to the relatedness in modes of speech and culture (but primarily modes of speech). When I say "Igbo identity", I'm referring to "Igbo consciousness".

ChinenyeN:

--- I recognize the term "Igbo" as having been around since before pre-colonial times. I just don't recognize the "Igbo identity" as having existed before colonialism.

You're really a confused man. What's the difference between Igbo, Igbo Identity, and Igbo consciousness when the people with this "related modes of speech and culture" are already Igbo?

How can there be a special Igbo consciousness or let me say Igbo awakening when the people already knew who they are, so how come you said that ""Igbo Identity" is a recent development" as if the people never knew they were Igbo?

ChinenyeN:

The example is illegitimate because body of water, and land separates them? Understand that I was speaking about their modes of speech, specifically, in that example; not territory and identity. Territory and identity is for discussions of ethnicity. Modes of speech is specifically a discussion of language.

As I explained to you, the reason why there modes of speech is the same is due to fact that the Romans originated in Italy and colonized Spain and mixed with the inhabitants. That is why they have similar 'modes of speech.'

You cannot compare their modes of speech with Ngwa and the greater Igbo populace. The Ngwa are ONLY a tribe, not an ETHNICITY!!! When will you realize the error of your ways and cease and desist with this nonsense.

Okay. 006, seems like you're over-thinking it. It's really as simply as I stated it. Any attempt for me to further clarify it, beyond that, would be me simply doing too much.

UcheUwadi, relax. You're beginning to mix two separate discussions, and over-complicate this discourse. What we (you and I) are talking about is the Spanish-Italian situation (discussion of modes of speech). We are not talking about identity. That is something different. I used identity in that example to illustrate a point, but my main focus was on modes of speech. The two discussions (modes of speech and identity) are separate. Don't mix them. Now, which do you want to talk about?

^^^

Good and stop derailing this thread with your warped argument.
I see no difference between you and Ikwerres only that we didn't allow you to land at your final destination which is Ngwa is not Igbo and that Ngwa language/dialect is different from Igbo language and that "Igbo Identity" was forced on you during slavery.

Again, displaying lack of knowledge and understanding.

When every Igbo person on this thread has tried to educate you?

We're trying to educate each other. You all just want to wishfully think (making a very good attempt at establishing what never was), and I just want to be realistic about things, as they are now.

I see more opportunities 4 politicians to siphon public money.

ChinenyeN:

We're trying to educate each other. You all just want to wishfully think (making a very good attempt at establishing what never was), and I just want to be realistic about things, as they are now.

You should be thanking your stars for the European intrusion into Igboland the time they did, because if not for that intrusion, one igbo group would have eventually conquered the rest and we won't be having this conversation. Just at the very moment my village (clan) in Nnewi forcefully unified Nnewi and created one "federal" government (One Igwe and four Obis each for each village inside "Anaedo-Nnewi" the British were entering to save other groups around Nnewi from forced unification. If the British didn't show up, who knows which towns, clans or groups we would have today in Igboland?
So ChinenyeN, like we say in my town "eat beef as wastefully as you wish, your father is a cattle farmer!".

Meanwhile stop derailing this thread with your Ngwa activism. There is a tribalism section on nairaland
This thread is about state creation, and if you can prove that Ngwa land can raise N10 billion monthly without running to Abuja, you can have your Ngwa state.

I think this is a good idea at lest the Government will more closer to the people.

Onlytruth:

You should be thanking your stars for the European intrusion into Igboland the time they did, because if not for that intrusion, one igbo group would have eventually conquered the rest and we won't be having this conversation. Just at the very moment my village (clan) in Nnewi forcefully unified Nnewi and created one "federal" government (One Igwe and four Obis each for each village inside "Anaedo-Nnewi" the British were entering to save other groups around Nnewi from forced unification. If the British didn't show up, who knows which towns, clans or groups we would have today in Igboland?
So ChinenyeN, like we say in my town "eat beef as wastefully as you wish, your father is a cattle farmer!".

I am pretty sure my Aro people would have dealt with the people of Nnewi if the British did not penetrate Igboland. For all we know, the Aro would have unified the Igbo under one unified nation along with the Ibibio and the Annang. Sometimes I get disgusted with the British because they interfered with Aro affairs.

And I am pretty sure that the Ngwa would not have been able to resist the Aro onslaught for too long. They may have repelled some of our penetration into Ngwaland but that would not have lasted that long. Maybe we should of called on our warrior allies from Ohafia to deal with the Ngwa.

EzeUche:

I am pretty sure my Aro people would have dealt with the people of Nnewi if the British did not penetrate Igboland. For all we know, the Aro would have unified the Igbo under one unified nation along with the Ibibio and the Annang. Sometimes I get disgusted with the British because they interfered with Aro affairs.

And I am pretty sure that the Ngwa would not have been able to resist the Aro onslaught for too long. They may have repelled some of our penetration into Ngwaland but that would not have lasted that long. Maybe we should of called on our warrior allies from Ohafia to deal with the Ngwa.

Anything could have happened.
I know for instance that my people had slave "strongholds" or "outposts" in every town from Nnewi all the way to Arochukwu. Till today, there are still people who speak my type of dialect in Imo and Abia states-they were Nnewi warriors and taskmen sent there from Nnewi to ensure smooth trading route. We were mainly into slave trade-(y'know, capturing insubordinate folks and selling them off unfortunately ), but still powerful, which explains the size of my town (both in land mass and population). I don't know how many single towns are bigger than Nnewi (in landmass and population) in Igboland. That is a result of the action of one man called "Eze a agha" (the king who loved wars). So, the Aro was our ally in crime if you like.
Those were the days things could have solved themselves. The Ngwa could have been all sold out by the Nnewi to the Aro. ROTFLMAO!

On a serious note, all these are silly talks. Any clan or group that wants a state should fund it. If you can't fund it, then shut up!
All these "plate in hand to Abuja" state creations should cease!

Please Chinenye, in the name of Jesus, please stop this arguement. All along you have done so well educating Ika Igbo on their identity. You have done so well to reduce their beliefs to zero. You countered their impression nicely to the amazement of all.
So why do you want to turn back on what you have preached in a different thread. In this case, what are you saying to the Ikas.
Just my final word, you can be Eziama, Ngwa and Igbo.
Umunede, Ika and Igbo.
Umuihi, Etiti and Igbo.
Unwanna, Afikpo and Igbo.
Also, one can be Asero, Abeokuta, Egba and Yoruba.

This is a very good development. I fully support the creation of the true 'Delta State'' from the present Delta State. The true Delta State will exclude the Delta Igbo speaking people from its boundaries - they've always wanted their own Anioma State anyway.

You all are turning self-identification, and a people's sense of true peoplehood into a crime. You all are really fighting hard to create the impression that Igbo identity (as we know it) has always been, when in fact it never was, and it barely is today. An honest league of wishful thinkers. We all know that we cannot operate as one (don't try to lie about this. Even non-Igbo are very familiar with our decentralized nature). Why then is it so difficult for you all to compromise, and allow us to operate as a multi-group federation, knowing that a one-identity thing just won't work for us?

The truth is that we do not see each other as one and the same. Onlytruth, EzeUche, and I have all given examples, to that effect, and many more examples abound. That is the only truth, in this issue. That is the reality of the situation.

That said, Andre, I haven't turned my back on anything. You all (except Abadaba and Abagworo) are the ones acting on sentiment, over-simplifyig (or over-complicating, whichever applies) and misunderstanding my stance on the issue. Like I stated before, we Ngwa are proud Igbo, but we are Ngwa, FIRST and FOREMOST. Why is that so difficult for you all to grasp?

Seriously answer me this though. . . As an Igbo (considering our HIGHLY decentralized nature), am I not entitled to identify with, and to be identified by my own group consciousness? (It's a serious question) because, if nothing else, it is actually amongst the most "Igbo" thing to do. So why are you all fighting so hard against it?

Wow! I can't wait fou our Apa state.

ChinenyeN:

You all are turning self-identification, and a people's sense of true peoplehood into a crime. You all are really fighting hard to create the impression that Igbo identity (as we know it) has always been, when in fact it never was, and it barely is today. An honest league of wishful thinkers. We all know that we cannot operate as one (don't try to lie about this. Even non-Igbo are very familiar with our decentralized nature). Why then is it so difficult for you all to compromise, and allow us to operate as a multi-group federation, knowing that a one-identity thing just won't work for us?

The truth is that we do not see each other as one and the same. Onlytruth, EzeUche, and I have all given examples, to that effect, and many more examples abound. That is the only truth, in this issue. That is the reality of the situation.

That said, Andre, I haven't turned my back on anything. You all (except Abadaba and Abagworo) are the ones acting on sentiment, over-simplifyig (or over-complicating, whichever applies) and misunderstanding my stance on the issue. Like I stated before, we Ngwa are proud Igbo, but we are Ngwa, FIRST and FOREMOST. Why is that so difficult for you all to grasp?

Ok, I'm back to serious talks (I was derailed by EzeUche a while ago).

I think you have really missed -( I suspect deliberately) the single consistent message from other Igbo folks here who suspect your true motives.That message is that Igbo is Igbo, whether Ngwa or Nnewi.
Do you think other Igbos here are not FIRST and FOREMOST from their own Igbo subgroups and clans?lmao!
Do you think I would surrender my Nnewi or Anaedo identity anytime soon, or do you think the Ngwa are prouder than Nnewi people?
We embrace the larger Igbo because it MAKES SENSE to know and identify with all those who share our language and culture. I can't think of any other reasons why we need one Igbo identity.
Today, after fighting a brutal civil war, the most brainless thing for any group to do in Igboland is to create more and more fractions. Soon, families will seek "autonomous community" status. We fought that to a standstill in my town. Some of the sub-villages (villages within the four major villages) are bigger than many autonomous communities in Imo and Abia, yet we have ONE Igwe for the whole of Nnewi and the seat is strictly hereditary. Even Onitsha can't boast of that.
My point is that the more you argue your point, the more you sound redundant and then increase the suspicion of your true motives. You are not saying anything new. We've heard all of that before.
The Biafran war brought all Igbo groups together as one group for the first time. We've tasted that common identity and it is good. The cat is out of the bag!
We don't want to go back to the stone ages of infinitesimal villages or clans without the power to fend of external aggressors.

Seriously answer me this though. . . As an Igbo (considering our HIGHLY decentralized nature), am I not entitled to identify with, and to be identified by my own group consciousness? (It's a serious question) because, if nothing else, it is actually amongst the most "Igbo" thing to do. So why are you all fighting so hard against it?

Our decentralized nature is not good if we want to survive in Nigeria, and by the way it is NOT chiseled on iron. Under Biafra, even non-Igbos created and identified with one identity. Though Ojukwu is from Anambra, to this day, he still enjoys love and loyalty in ALL parts of Igboland. You may not believe it, but if the federal government stays away from internal Igbo politics, we can actually create one identity and ensure common values like we had before and during the civil war. Which is why state creation is a war strategy. States will be created because it serves a strategic goal -it divides people. Which is manifested in our argument and disagreements on this thread. If you can pause and actually think, you would realize that state creation is NOT a good thing even for the Igbo subgroup in Ngwa land.