alj harem1:

tell me about it

we are popular

You all definitely are.

Dede1:

It is an arrant nonsense to suggest we learn defense or economic policy from Yoruba or Benin system of government when both capitulated at sight of British soldiers. It must be recall Ndigbo clandestinely resisted British influence till the time of amalgamation of the Protectorates.

Lol, source? (for all three of the claims in these two sentences)

I think people like the OP, are confusing a system indicative of an earlier stage of development meant not for states but for village communities for the classical Athenian representative democracy of the Athens city-state. At some point every group in Nigeria, every group in Africa, and possibly even every group in the world had what the op is calling "Traditional Igbo Democracy" when living only in village communities but moved past that when powerful individuals in large cities gained a monopoly on power and embarked on ambitious state building. Pre-state organization across all societies would look like what is being called "Traditional Igbo Democracy." The organization of many stateless Native American groups in North America could be called "traditional democracy" and Benjamin Franklin commended them for their democracy, but the reality is that as communities reach sizes and engage in defensive (military) activity and political decisions for which direct democracy is ineffective, centralized government of some kind, whether absolute monarchy, limited monarchy, nominal monarchy, representative democracy, or a fusion of these of some sort must supersede traditional democracy.

The Benin people for example were originally a "confederation" of traditional democracy practicing towns, until the largest town became a center of authority- Igodomigodo, which later became known as Benin - after which the zoning of power among different elders stopped and it become a real state.



from A. Ikechukwu Okpoko, "ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE STUDY OF EARLY URBAN CENTRES IN NIGERIA"


EARLY URBAN CENTRES—A HISTORICAL SURVEY

In the north Kanem-Bornu, as the name implies, was a two phased empire of the
Kanem and Bornu. The Kanem phase had its foundation in the first millenium A.D.
when the Magumi nomads are said to have united the sedentary Zagawa and Kanuri
people living in the northeast of present Lake Chad into a kingdom of Kanem with
its capital at Njimi. Njimi was abandoned by about the 14th century for another
well-fortified capital at Ngazargamu, west of Lake Chad. This capital thrived during
the reign of Mai Idris Aloma (1571-1603).
Kano was powerful enough to embark on military expansion from about 11th cen-
tury A.D., and built city walls between the 11th and 12th centuries.
From 14th and 15th centuries onwards Hausaland began to be absorbed into the
trans-Saharan trade system. As time went by each Hausa city saw the benefits of
such trade and tried to capture strong trading centres. Zaria, for instance, was strong
enough by the 15th century, under the legendary Queen Amina (said to have been
the first real Hausa empire builder) to embark on military exploits and build city
walls in various areas she conquered. Also by the 15th century Katsina had devel-
oped as a terminus of the trans-Saharan route and a commercial centre for the whole
of Hausaland.
In the first half of the 16th century, Kebbi became an imperial power while in the
second half of the same century Kwararafa rose as a strong force. Also by the 16th
century, Zamfara (an agricultural city hemmed in by other powerful cities, such as
Kebbi, Ahir, Gobir, Katsina and Kano) became powerful enough to extend her influ-
ence and to fight wars to the River Niger. Rivalries and conflicts between the lead-
ing cities prevented any of them from forming a virile empire. However, each of the
Hausa cities performed specific functions connected with the growth and security of
the various cities. Thus, for instance, Gobir, located at the fringes of the desert
“served as the northern outpost of Hausaland.” It guarded the whole of Hausaland
against attackers, especially the Tuaregs, from the desert. “Zaria to the south was the
procurer of slaves while Kano and Katsina were trading cities; Rano was an indus-
trial centre while Daura remained the spiritual home of the Hausa” (Mabogunje,
1968: 105).
By 1517 the Igala kingdom with its capital at Idah was strong enough to engage
in a major war with the Benin kingdom. Boston (1968: 7- dated the beginnings of
the present Igala kingship at Idah between the 13th and 16th centuries.
The Yoruba in southwestern part of Nigeria and in some parts of the Republics of
Benin and Togo organised themselves into many kingdoms. The most prominent
among these were Oyo, Ekiti, Ondo, Ife, Egba, Ijebu, Igbomina and Awori king-
doms (Oguntomisin, 1988: 227). The Yoruba oral tradition points to Ile-Ife as the
most ancient city in Yorubaland.
The Old Oyo empire was one of the largest and most powerful Yoruba kingdoms.
The expansionist Oyo was resisted from the 14th century onwards by Borgu and
Nupe because they feared their being absorbed into Oyo. Borgu and Nupe also
feared that Oyo might take a strategic position in the trans-Saharan trade to the dis-
advantage of both kingdoms. The capital of Oyo was eventually sacked and the peo-
ple moved to Igboho, but after a period, the rulers of Oyo returned to their former
capital and improved on their military technique and administrative machinery.
According to Mabogunje (1968: 78) the Yoruba towns grew basically as adminis-
trative centres “and over the centuries had evolved elaborate power structure and
hierarchial system of administration both at the city level and the level of a king-
dom.” For instance, Old Oyo empire was divided into four provinces.
The size of the Benin kingdom with its capital at Benin-city varied according to
different periods as a result of conquests, dynastic connections, trade contacts and
sentimental ties (Igbafe, 1977: 16).
Omoregie (1982: 7-9) identified the different independent communities as areas
and streets in present day Benin City. He further claimed that the Odionwere system
(the rule of the oldest man in a given community) underlay the political practice of
these communities. The Odionwere held his position by age and was the supreme
authority in his village — holding the spiritual, political and judicial powers. He
ruled with a council of village elders, Iko Edievbo. The closely juxtaposed villages
formed a common council, Iko Edionwere (plural of Odionwere), for the purpose of
solving inter-village problems. As the Edionwere in the village communities formed
Iko Edionwere, they established a medium for unifying all the thirty-one village
communities of Ubini (Benin). It was a council of equals. The measures and direc-
tives were not usually very effective in all the individual communities, but such
measures and directives at least laid the foundation for administering villages
through councils. The oldest of them all known as Oka Edionwere was the head of
the council. Assisting him was another Odionwere known as Okaiko. Oka
Edionwere was usually very old and senile, so Okaiko took charge. When this
opportunity came to Igodo—a prominent Odionwere—a leader in a community
called Idunmwunvbioto, he transformed this leadership into the Benin monarchy.
Igodo began the Ogiso monarchy in pre-colonial Benin. Under him, the Benin
monarchy embodying various communities was called Igodomigodo, meaning town
of towns, as well as the land of Igodo. It is said that he removed political authority
from the Edionwere and retained the system as a sub-ordinate authority. The pre-
ogiso era is said to be before 900 AD, and Ogiso era and the establishment of the
Benin kingdom is placed at around 900-1300 AD.
The Igbo communities have been generally described as acephalous, but Igbo vil-
lage-group states with their capitals at Nri, Arochukwu, Onitsha, Oguta, Aboh and
Osomari—have been well-studied and documented (Nzimiro, 1972; Onwuejeogwu,
1981; Dike & Ekejiuba, 1990). However, state formation was a recent phenomenon
in Igbo history. Apart from Nri, these village-group states developed in the 17th cen-
tury as a result of contacts with the neighbouring Igbo and non-Igbo groups and
later, as a result of the trans-atlantic trade. Nri and Arochukwu in the 13th and 17th
centuries, respectively, had considerable populations to visit and supervise various
settlements that dotted parts of Igboland. Like the Yoruba towns, these Igbo towns
grew basically as administrative centres.




Incidentally, it is not a little surprising to see the fundamental difference in perspective on the necessity or non-necessity of a centralized hierarchy playing itself out in another sharply divided discussion again after many decades.

[b]The diverse traditional political orientation of Nigerian regions is one major reason why Nigeria cannot exist peacefully as one.

The North and West had traditional centralized political systems, where the Obas, Sultans, etc were the heads of their areas. Their political systems were dictatorial and centralized. Traditional heads were bowed to and thoroughly respected. The only difference between the traditional political system in the North and West was that , while the Emirs and Sultans in the North were absolutely supreme (Like gods), the Obas in the west were not really supreme, cos their actions could be questioned and they could even be asked to commit suicide by the kingmakers.

In the East, it was totally different. There were more assemblies of leaders (Heads of families/representatives of villages and towns) than monarchs. Decisions were made through consensus among the representatives, and leadership decisions were thoroughly challenged (Leaders needed to thoroughly satisfy the members of the assembly or face intense opposition). Because of this political orientation, other Nigerian ethnic groups think that Eastern Nigerians are not organized. It was also the reason why the British (Used to centralized system of governance) abhorred the Eastern part of the country in favor of the North and West.

This difference in political orientation among Nigerian ethnic groups is the major source of political violence in Nigeria. The present crop of Eastern politicians are after amassing wealth, and are ready to lick the shoes of political god-fathers in order to gain the political post that can aid their goals. The issue of god-fatherism was introduced in the East by Politicians influenced by the North and West e.g Zik, Ekwueme, Orji Kalu, Chris Uba etc. This god-fatherism stuff is alien to Eastern areas.
Imagine the North existing on their own, with their preferred Centralized political system that supports their religious  beliefs? They will simply move ahead in peace like Malaysia, Dubai, Iran etc
Imagine the West with a centralized political system that supports the existence of their centralized monarchical system? They will move on like the British, Turkish, Irish, Scottish, Malaysians etc
Imagine the East with their Republican system of government, which will support their decentralized political system, and democratic nature? They will live in peace and move on like the Americans and other republican countries.

To force these regions to exist as one, irrespective of their traditional political orientation can be likened to a shabby attempt to ensure an "Assimilation" policy that can never succeed.[/b]

Justcash:

[b]The diverse traditional political orientation of Nigerian regions is one major reason why Nigeria cannot exist peacefully as one.

The North and West had traditional centralized political systems, where the Obas, Sultans, etc were the heads of their areas. Their political systems were dictatorial and centralized. Traditional heads were bowed to and thoroughly respected. The only difference between the traditional political system in the North and West was that , while the Emirs and Sultans in the North were absolutely supreme (Like gods), the Obas in the west were not really supreme, cos their actions could be questioned and they could even be asked to commit suicide by the kingmakers.

In the East, it was totally different. There were more assemblies of leaders (Heads of families/representatives of villages and towns) than monarchs. Decisions were made through consensus among the representatives, and leadership decisions were thoroughly challenged (Leaders needed to thoroughly satisfy the members of the assembly or face intense opposition). Because of this political orientation, other Nigerian ethnic groups think that Eastern Nigerians are not organized. It was also the reason why the British (Used to centralized system of governance) abhorred the Eastern part of the country in favor of the North and West.

This difference in political orientation among Nigerian ethnic groups is the major source of political violence in Nigeria. The present crop of Eastern politicians are after amassing wealth, and are ready to lick the shoes of political god-fathers in order to gain the political post that can aid their goals. The issue of god-fatherism was introduced in the East by Politicians influenced by the North and West e.g Zik, Ekwueme, Orji Kalu, Chris Uba etc. This god-fatherism stuff is alien to Eastern areas.
Imagine the North existing on their own, with their preferred Centralized political system that supports their religious  beliefs? They will simply move ahead in peace like Malaysia, Dubai, Iran etc
Imagine the West with a centralized political system that supports the existence of their centralized monarchical system? They will move on like the British, Turkish, Irish, Scottish, Malaysians etc
Imagine the East with their Republican system of government, which will support their decentralized political system, and democratic nature? They will live in peace and move on like the Americans and other republican countries.

To force these regions to exist as one, irrespective of their traditional political orientation can be likened to a shabby attempt to ensure an "Assimilation" policy that can never succeed.[/b]

Nice.

Hmmmm, interesting perspective there.

OP,
You are wasting your time with Nigerians. Even if this system will turn Nigeria into paradise on earth and turn them into billionaire they will still have an issue with coz its coming from the IGBO.

The hate is rabid so I beg let them continue to wallow in it. I just wish what is going on in Southern Sudan right now could be the case with us.

What Nigeria could learn is that more autonomy and decentralization is needed. It may be the case that not enough currently exists, but I wouldn't support autonomy down to the city level.

Justcash:

[b]The diverse traditional political orientation of Nigerian regions is one major reason why Nigeria cannot exist peacefully as one.

The North and West had traditional centralized political systems, where the Obas, Sultans, etc were the heads of their areas. Their political systems were dictatorial and centralized. Traditional heads were bowed to and thoroughly respected. The only difference between the traditional political system in the North and West was that , while the Emirs and Sultans in the North were absolutely supreme (Like gods), the Obas in the west were not really supreme, cos their actions could be questioned and they could even be asked to commit suicide by the kingmakers.

In the East, it was totally different. There were more assemblies of leaders (Heads of families/representatives of villages and towns) than monarchs. Decisions were made through consensus among the representatives, and leadership decisions were thoroughly challenged (Leaders needed to thoroughly satisfy the members of the assembly or face intense opposition). Because of this political orientation, other Nigerian ethnic groups think that Eastern Nigerians are not organized. It was also the reason why the British (Used to centralized system of governance) abhorred the Eastern part of the country in favor of the North and West.

This difference in political orientation among Nigerian ethnic groups is the major source of political violence in Nigeria. The present crop of Eastern politicians are after amassing wealth, and are ready to lick the shoes of political god-fathers in order to gain the political post that can aid their goals. The issue of god-fatherism was introduced in the East by Politicians influenced by the North and West e.g Zik, Ekwueme, Orji Kalu, Chris Uba etc. This god-fatherism stuff is alien to Eastern areas.
Imagine the North existing on their own, with their preferred Centralized political system that supports their religious  beliefs? They will simply move ahead in peace like Malaysia, Dubai, Iran etc
Imagine the West with a centralized political system that supports the existence of their centralized monarchical system? They will move on like the British, Turkish, Irish, Scottish, Malaysians etc
Imagine the East with their Republican system of government, which will support their decentralized political system, and democratic nature? They will live in peace and move on like the Americans and other republican countries.

To force these regions to exist as one, irrespective of their traditional political orientation can be likened to a shabby attempt to ensure an "Assimilation" policy that can never succeed.[/b]

The best post so far in this thread. Bravo!

This was the very reason why I personally want a smaller country where we have common interests and can manage ourselves than a large one with so much differences and confusions.

During the last Anambra Guber race, about 50 people came out to contest on the platform of the PDP alone and some Nigerians where screeming that it was too much, but I said, that is how we are. If possible, let 1000 people contest and from them all, one man, just one man will emerge as the winner.

That man will have the restpect of the other contestants,
That man will be humble enough to be accountable to the people
That man will be dealt with by the people if he failes.

Yet, the internal colonial masters would not allow us to do our thing: they imposed Soludo. Were we angry? Yes! It was an insult and we don't like being insulted like that.

As if the intimidation and harassments are not enough, the Jihadists and still waxing strong in their euphoria of religion by force. In Igbo land, it is by persuation that we do things. It is a shame that sombody from Sokoto will sit at Sokoto and decided and apoint who should rule over the land in Anambra.

This imposition and consensus nonsense from the Internal Colonial masters must stop. You cannot make us slaves in our fathers land.

There are voices of wisdom from Sudan and one of them said; " I like to live in a small country with peace than in large country at war".

He who has ears, let Him hear. - The King of Kings.

noblezone:

This was the very reason why I personally want a smaller country where we have common interests and can manage ourselves than a large one with so much differences and confusions.

During the last Anambra Guber race, about 50 people came out to contest on the platform of the PDP alone and some Nigerians where screeming that it was too much, but I said, that is how we are. If possible, let 1000 people contest and from them all, one man, just one man will emerge as the winner.

That man will have the restpect of the other contestants,
That man will be humble enough to be accountable to the people
That man will be dealt with by the people if he failes.

Yet, the internal colonial masters would not allow us to do our thing: they imposed Soludo. Were we angry? Yes! It was an insult and we don't like being insulted like that.

As if the intimidation and harassments are not enough, the Jihadists and still waxing strong in their euphoria of religion by force. In Igbo land, it is by persuation that we do things. It is a shame that sombody from Sokoto will sit at Sokoto and decided and apoint who should rule over the land in Anambra.

This imposition and consensus nonsense from the Internal Colonial masters must stop. You cannot make us slaves in our fathers land.

There are voices of wisdom from Sudan and one of them said; " I like to live in a small country with peace than in large country at war".

He who has ears, let Him hear. - The King of Kings.

Well said. You and Justcash have the best posts on this thread yet.Nice.

PhysicsHD:


Lol, source? (for all three of the claims in these two sentences)

Pal, I am of the view you are more than knowledgeable to request for the source.

PhysicsHD:

I think people like the OP, are confusing a system indicative of an earlier stage of development meant not for states but for village communities for the classical Athenian representative democracy of the Athens city-state. At some point every group in Nigeria, every group in Africa, and possibly even every group in the world had what the op is calling "Traditional Igbo Democracy" when living only in village communities but moved past that when powerful individuals in large cities gained a monopoly on power and embarked on ambitious state building. Pre-state organization across all societies would look like what is being called "Traditional Igbo Democracy." The organization of many stateless Native American groups in North America could be called "traditional democracy" and Benjamin Franklin commended them for their democracy, but the reality is that as communities reach sizes and engage in defensive (military) activity and political decisions for which direct democracy is ineffective, centralized government of some kind, whether absolute monarchy, limited monarchy, nominal monarchy, representative democracy, or a fusion of these of some sort must supersede traditional democracy.

The Benin people for example were originally a "confederation" of traditional democracy practicing towns, until the largest town became a center of authority- Igodomigodo, which later became known as Benin - after which the zoning of power among different elders stopped and it become a real state.



from A. Ikechukwu Okpoko, "ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE STUDY OF EARLY URBAN CENTRES IN NIGERIA"


EARLY URBAN CENTRES—A HISTORICAL SURVEY

In the north Kanem-Bornu, as the name implies, was a two phased empire of the
Kanem and Bornu. The Kanem phase had its foundation in the first millenium A.D.
when the Magumi nomads are said to have united the sedentary Zagawa and Kanuri
people living in the northeast of present Lake Chad into a kingdom of Kanem with
its capital at Njimi. Njimi was abandoned by about the 14th century for another
well-fortified capital at Ngazargamu, west of Lake Chad. This capital thrived during
the reign of Mai Idris Aloma (1571-1603).
Kano was powerful enough to embark on military expansion from about 11th cen-
tury A.D., and built city walls between the 11th and 12th centuries.
From 14th and 15th centuries onwards Hausaland began to be absorbed into the
trans-Saharan trade system. As time went by each Hausa city saw the benefits of
such trade and tried to capture strong trading centres. Zaria, for instance, was strong
enough by the 15th century, under the legendary Queen Amina (said to have been
the first real Hausa empire builder) to embark on military exploits and build city
walls in various areas she conquered. Also by the 15th century Katsina had devel-
oped as a terminus of the trans-Saharan route and a commercial centre for the whole
of Hausaland.
In the first half of the 16th century, Kebbi became an imperial power while in the
second half of the same century Kwararafa rose as a strong force. Also by the 16th
century, Zamfara (an agricultural city hemmed in by other powerful cities, such as
Kebbi, Ahir, Gobir, Katsina and Kano) became powerful enough to extend her influ-
ence and to fight wars to the River Niger. Rivalries and conflicts between the lead-
ing cities prevented any of them from forming a virile empire. However, each of the
Hausa cities performed specific functions connected with the growth and security of
the various cities. Thus, for instance, Gobir, located at the fringes of the desert
“served as the northern outpost of Hausaland.” It guarded the whole of Hausaland
against attackers, especially the Tuaregs, from the desert. “Zaria to the south was the
procurer of slaves while Kano and Katsina were trading cities; Rano was an indus-
trial centre while Daura remained the spiritual home of the Hausa” (Mabogunje,
1968: 105).
By 1517 the Igala kingdom with its capital at Idah was strong enough to engage
in a major war with the Benin kingdom. Boston (1968: 7- dated the beginnings of
the present Igala kingship at Idah between the 13th and 16th centuries.
The Yoruba in southwestern part of Nigeria and in some parts of the Republics of
Benin and Togo organised themselves into many kingdoms. The most prominent
among these were Oyo, Ekiti, Ondo, Ife, Egba, Ijebu, Igbomina and Awori king-
doms (Oguntomisin, 1988: 227). The Yoruba oral tradition points to Ile-Ife as the
most ancient city in Yorubaland.
The Old Oyo empire was one of the largest and most powerful Yoruba kingdoms.
The expansionist Oyo was resisted from the 14th century onwards by Borgu and
Nupe because they feared their being absorbed into Oyo. Borgu and Nupe also
feared that Oyo might take a strategic position in the trans-Saharan trade to the dis-
advantage of both kingdoms. The capital of Oyo was eventually sacked and the peo-
ple moved to Igboho, but after a period, the rulers of Oyo returned to their former
capital and improved on their military technique and administrative machinery.
According to Mabogunje (1968: 78) the Yoruba towns grew basically as adminis-
trative centres “and over the centuries had evolved elaborate power structure and
hierarchial system of administration both at the city level and the level of a king-
dom.” For instance, Old Oyo empire was divided into four provinces.
The size of the Benin kingdom with its capital at Benin-city varied according to
different periods as a result of conquests, dynastic connections, trade contacts and
sentimental ties (Igbafe, 1977: 16).
Omoregie (1982: 7-9) identified the different independent communities as areas
and streets in present day Benin City. He further claimed that the Odionwere system
(the rule of the oldest man in a given community) underlay the political practice of
these communities. The Odionwere held his position by age and was the supreme
authority in his village — holding the spiritual, political and judicial powers. He
ruled with a council of village elders, Iko Edievbo. The closely juxtaposed villages
formed a common council, Iko Edionwere (plural of Odionwere), for the purpose of
solving inter-village problems. As the Edionwere in the village communities formed
Iko Edionwere, they established a medium for unifying all the thirty-one village
communities of Ubini (Benin). It was a council of equals. The measures and direc-
tives were not usually very effective in all the individual communities, but such
measures and directives at least laid the foundation for administering villages
through councils. The oldest of them all known as Oka Edionwere was the head of
the council. Assisting him was another Odionwere known as Okaiko. Oka
Edionwere was usually very old and senile, so Okaiko took charge. When this
opportunity came to Igodo—a prominent Odionwere—a leader in a community
called Idunmwunvbioto, he transformed this leadership into the Benin monarchy.
Igodo began the Ogiso monarchy in pre-colonial Benin. Under him, the Benin
monarchy embodying various communities was called Igodomigodo, meaning town
of towns, as well as the land of Igodo. It is said that he removed political authority
from the Edionwere and retained the system as a sub-ordinate authority. The pre-
ogiso era is said to be before 900 AD, and Ogiso era and the establishment of the
Benin kingdom is placed at around 900-1300 AD.
The Igbo communities have been generally described as acephalous, but Igbo vil-
lage-group states with their capitals at Nri, Arochukwu, Onitsha, Oguta, Aboh and
Osomari—have been well-studied and documented (Nzimiro, 1972; Onwuejeogwu,
1981; Dike & Ekejiuba, 1990). However, state formation was a recent phenomenon
in Igbo history. Apart from Nri, these village-group states developed in the 17th cen-
tury as a result of contacts with the neighbouring Igbo and non-Igbo groups and
later, as a result of the trans-atlantic trade. Nri and Arochukwu in the 13th and 17th
centuries, respectively, had considerable populations to visit and supervise various
settlements that dotted parts of Igboland. Like the Yoruba towns, these Igbo towns
grew basically as administrative centres.




Incidentally, it is not a little surprising to see the fundamental difference in perspective on the necessity or non-necessity of a centralized hierarchy playing itself out in another sharply divided discussion again after many decades.

I guess you know as much as I do that politics is very local. The cradle of any political system points to a certain village form of the government of the people by the people and for the people before its transformation to either oligarchy or monarchy due to certain circumstances.

The unforeseen circumstances which transformed traditional democracy into traditional monarchy is the factor that set Ndigbo apart from dissimilar ethnic groups in cesspit called Nigeria. The traditional village democracy that transverses Igbo land remained unalloyed by both the factors considered foreseen or unforeseen circumstances even with the introduction of “Warrant Chiefs” by the colonial British.

Every successful country and government had allowed the infusion of traditional and cultural dictates into the system. I shall never call for Nigeria to adopt Igbo traditional democratic system but will agitate for republic of Igbo land where such traditional and cultural values shall be incorporated into the system of government they prefer.

All the so-called empires that dotted the surface of African soil were all VILLAGE EMPIRES.

udezue:

OP,
You are wasting your time with Nigerians. Even if this system will turn Nigeria into paradise on earth and turn them into billionaire they will still have an issue with coz its coming from the IGBO.

The hate is rabid so I beg let them continue to wallow in it. I just wish what is going on in Southern Sudan right now could be the case with us.

Indeed. If only Nigerians would be less bigoted and follow the good examples and traditions of the Igbo. Haters, all of 'em.

Igbo kwenu!

eku_bear:

Indeed. If only Nigerians would be less bigoted and follow the good examples and traditions of the Igbo. Haters, all of 'em.

Igbo kwenu!

.LOVE THE SARCASM!!!!

slowpoke jason kenu!!

I am confused. No one said that democracy cannot be learnt from the igbos. All they are saying is it can only work in the local level. Nationally, it would not work because your country does not only consist of igbos but yorubas, hausas and over 250 other groups. What might work for the Ndigbo community might not work for the benins and vis-versa. Btw, why don't we learn from the yorubas and binis? I still prefer their type of democracy where the cheifs talk to a central ruler before a decision is made. That way, power would not be centralised.mo.

afam

So what you're practising now is working abi. How can u say it won't work when you haven't even tried it.

and they just wouldnt admit

Dede1:

Pal, I am of the view you are more than knowledgeable to request for the source. 

Perhaps your own mind. Or maybe a fiction novel.

Dede1:




I guess you know as much as I do that politics is very local. The cradle of any political system points to a certain village form of the government of the people by the people and for the people before its transformation to either oligarchy or monarchy due to certain circumstances.

The unforeseen circumstances which transformed traditional democracy into traditional monarchy is the factor that set Ndigbo apart from dissimilar ethnic groups in cesspit called Nigeria. The traditional village democracy that transverses Igbo land remained unalloyed by both the factors considered foreseen or unforeseen circumstances even with the introduction of “Warrant Chiefs” by the colonial British.

Every successful country and government had allowed the infusion of traditional and cultural dictates into the system. I shall never call for Nigeria to adopt Igbo traditional democratic system but will agitate for republic of Igbo land where such traditional and cultural values shall be incorporated into the system of government they prefer.   

All the so-called empires that dotted the surface of African soil were all VILLAGE EMPIRES.

Point taken, however, this is quite different from the OP, who was suggesting that non-Igbo people adopt a style of government that some of them have moved past, so what you've said here is not particularly relevant to my post. His was not a particularly bad suggestion, but I think it doesn't take realities of different peoples' inclinations into account.


Also, I wouldn't call Mali, Songhai, Axum, or Nubia, village empires. Mali, for example had several major cities and multiple vassal kingdoms.


Below is a Portuguese depiction of part of the kingdom of Kongo, a very large state, with a centralized system:



Clearly, not a "village empire."

@PhysicsQED: WTF happened to all those states? Today, they pretty much have nothing. Just kinda surprising they have nothing to show for what they once had.

eku_bear:

@PhysicsQED: WTF happened to all those states?  Today, they pretty much have nothing. Just kinda surprising they have nothing to show for what they once had.

Kingdoms and empires fall. And some are brought down forcibly if they fail to do what the Ethiopians originally did or, to a much greater extent, what the Japanese did and attempt to modernize and acquire outside technology and knowledge.

As for the kingdom of Kongo in particular it tore itself apart with internal strife, before the modern era, much like what happened in modern times in the actual Congo.       So they approached the modern era, and the time of colonialism very far from their past height, and with little to show for their respectable past.


I wrote something here (#4):

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-497272.256.html#msg6585592

that is relevant to this question. Most of those empires just reached their heights and fell.

I'm not sure whether democracy, traditional or modern, or monarchy is superior in ability to keep empires/kingdoms/states going and prosperous for longer periods of time, but I do believe democracy is superior in preventing civil war or other internal conflict.

PhysicsMHD:


Kingdoms and empires fall. And some are brought down forcibly if they fail to do what the Ethiopians originally did or, to a much greater extent, what the Japanese did and attempt to modernize and acquire outside technology and knowledge.

As for the kingdom of Kongo in particular it tore itself apart with internal strife, before the modern era, much like what happened in modern times in the actual Congo.       So they approached the modern era, and the time of colonialism very far from their past height, and with little to show for their respectable past.


I wrote something here (#4):

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-497272.256.html#msg6585592

that is relevant to this question. Most of those empires just reached their heights and fell.

I'm not sure whether democracy, traditional or modern, or monarchy is superior in ability to keep empires/kingdoms/states going and prosperous for longer periods of time, but I do believe democracy is superior in preventing civil war or other internal conflict.

You bring up some points that I wish to discuss. But it would be best if we discussed that on another thread. Why wasn't many of the African pre-colonial states able to modernize and keep their independence from the Europeans. The Ethiopians were able to do this, by modernizing their military. What made them so special?

And I have always been a fan of Japanese history in how they were able to modernize during the Meiji Era. After throwing off the yoke of the Tokugawa Shogunate, the former Japanese samurai were able to transform their nation into an Asian powerhouse.

After defeating the Russians navy in the Russo-Japanese War in 1905, Japan's rise was steady. It even reached the point that they could challenge the United States military might in the Pacific. And this only took 50 years!