Can anyone enlighten me on whether or not ideological divisions (left/right, conservative/liberal) play any significant role in Nigerian politics?
From all the discussions I've been following this does not seem to be an issue at all.

@nferyn, I think it doesn't. The political folks here are just concerned about how to fill their purse with the much they can get from the central government. This is so that they can get enough funds to take care of their siblings up to the fourth generations, when their own remains would have mixed with the ground and probably turn to manure.

There's what is generally referred to as the National Cake. Everyone, leftist, rightist, democrats, republicans and even voodoo politicians only jostle to get to the exalted position of the President of the Federal Republic, where you have unfettered access to the National Cake. That Cake is what matters to everyone here.

Politiking in Nigeria is just like hunting in unknown territory. Anything goes. It's either you get killed or you kill to get to the top.

And how long is the population going to accept this state of affairs?
There is a middle class that want some stability and security, so that their livelyhood and that of their children is sufficiently ensured. Why don't they organise?

There's nothing like middle class again in this country. That was in the past. It's either you're rich, so rich that you can afford to do anything you like, or you're so poor, you can't get fed thrice in a day! It's that bad man.

Also, the unfortunate thing here is that the majority of Nigerians are illiterates. UN stats revealed that about 20-30% of Nigerians are educated to an acceptable degree. The rest, which constitute the majority, are somewhat blind. Some of them even wants to be blind, y'know. 

So, it will take sometime before we get out of this quagmire. And by that time, the National Cake would have been reduced to crumbs.

And what about the influx of money from emmigrants. My wife (and myself by extension) are sending a considerable amount of money to Nigeria? Doesn't that create a middle class? There are a lot of Nigerians abroad.

Well, when I travel around here, and I think you must have been around Nigeria a while too in the past, the people I see are not those who wire money thru money transfers and the likes to their relations. Feel free to class yourself as Middle Class.

And I wonder how much you'd have to send to make up to what you'd call considerable - is it in the millions or billions of dollars range? What fraction of Nigerians abroad constitute the total number of Nigerians in the world?. So, you see, you need to take a look at the total picture.

The bulk of Nigerians do not even know what the web - internet is all about! We are hoping that with time, the information age will catch up with us here, or is it we that needs to catch up with the information age?

Ideologies reign and are adhered to when food, clothing and shelter have been sorted out.
Since the 1940's when Zikism caught the minds of the young men in Lagos, ideologies have been hard to sell.

The Nigerian society is at the most basic of levels. In addition to the corruption that pervades the fabric of soceity, ethnic alliances, cleavages and bonds give access to rights that are supposed to be guaranteed for all. When electricity supply, urban water supply, waste management , educational stability are still not guaranteed.

In a bid to ensure their survival, a good number of the educated minds find their way to other countries ( a minimum of 5m which is roughly equal to the population of Israel).  This alone contributes a great deal to the perpetuation of old and useless ways of thinking hence inhibiting the process of nurturing an ideology.

In summary, because Nigerians are basically divided along ethno-religious lines, political ideologies do not survive and there is no middle class (now or in the making) to sustain any ideology that is propounded.

owo:

Ideologies reign and are adhered to when food, clothing and shelter have been sorted out.
Since the 1940's when Zikism caught the minds of the young men in Lagos, ideologies have been hard to sell.

Shouldn't be the case. With the levels of poverty, a socialist party should find some traction among the masses. Without a sizable middle class, I don't see a place for a classical liberal part though.
Wouldn't it be better to leave governance to local levels of traditional representation? Isn't there more chance of having a true system of checks and balances than with a highly centralised state?

owo:

The Nigerian society is at the most basic of levels. In addition to the corruption that pervades the fabric of soceity, ethnic alliances, cleavages and bonds give access to rights that are supposed to be guaranteed for all. When electricity supply, urban water supply, waste management , educational stability are still not guaranteed.

This should give rise to a left wing political party/alliance. Is there anything of this sort? What about trade unions?

owo:

In a bid to ensure their survival, a good number of the educated minds find their way to other countries ( a minimum of 5m which is roughly equal to the population of Israel). This alone contributes a great deal to the perpetuation of old and useless ways of thinking hence inhibiting the process of nurturing an ideology.

This is what I noticed as well. We've always sent money to be used as investment money, but the pressure to feed the extended family and pay their school fees is higher than putting the money to productive use. Very frustrating for a rational mind like mine.
It also seems like the extended family is expecting those abroad to feed them and wait for the money instead of trying to make the best of what they get. A typical example was when we sent some money to paint my wife's house in Benin City. Even though the person that we wanted to take care of this was unemployed, he rather looked for hiring in external help for the paint job instead of doing it himself. I was furious. We both work full time jobs and we still paint our house ourselves here in Belgium.

owo:

In summary, because Nigerians are basically divided along ethno-religious lines, political ideologies do not survive and there is no middle class (now or in the making) to sustain any ideology that is propounded.

It seems to be a self-perpetuating cycle of dependence. Do you have a more insightful structural analysis for this?

I heard there's this 'Labour Party ' carved out of the trade unions in Nigeria. I hope they'll be able to muster enough courage and strenght to counter the overbearing nature of rottened and expired minds leading the country.

But, our experience here in the past two major elections have shown that what happens at the Polls anytime an election is conducted goes way beyond the minds of the average Nigerian. What with thugism, political jingoism, police assaults, ghana must go bags sharing, ethno-centered manifestos, chicanery from basket-mouths, godfatherism etc etc? We all know that what the electorates wants at the end of the day do not really count. So, evil beings like Chris Uba and Baba Adedibu are foisted on innocent people at the end of the day.

Owo, in his entry said a good number of the educated elites travel out of the country for survival. The rest, really, amount to nothing compared to the great number of people who needs to be educated on how to fight for their rights.

nferyn:

Wouldn't it be better to leave governance to local levels of traditional representation? Isn't there more chance of having a true system of checks and balances than with a highly centralised state?

That's correct. Infact many of the political/economic debates on this forum arise from this fact.
Unfortunately, the current unitary system of governance, created by the military, is one of the major causes of Nigeria's 'mis-development'.
Certainly, local level of governance and mangement of men, materials and resources would translate to net growth. However, those that are currently controlling the central government and those benefitting from it do not want this.They are afraid that they might not be able to survive on their own. This fear is the basis for the current problem in the Niger Delta region and the agitations that have followed. Socialism exists when those in positions of authority as much as appreciate what it is in addition to believing in it. Many of the groups that were coalesced to form Nigeria were under monarchs in pre-independence times. Therefore rulers are glorified and wealth is might. Therefore, socialism with its attendant wealth distribution philosophy is a hard sell when the rulers have not yet had their fill and have not finished oppressing all their enemies

nferyn:

This should give rise to a left wing political party/alliance. Is there anything of this sort? What about trade unions?

There is little of this. The presence of strong ethnic and religious cleavages totally weakens the concept of forming an alliance with another person or group on the basis infrastructure. For as soon as a person from one group mounts the saddle of leadership, his kinsmen begin ensure that they silence every opposition whether the leader's actions are right or not.
This system is what has killed the trade unions, in addition to thier being decimated, chiefly, by the current government due to its opposition to hikes in petroleum product prices.

nferyn:

It seems to be a self-perpetuating cycle of dependence. Do you have a more insightful structural analysis for this?

There have been lots of analysis on this and other problems. The truth is that, apart from a spell (unplanned) of two and a half months, Nigeria has not had a broadminded soul or even a graduate as its leader.
It has therefore been led for 98% of its post independence life by small minded men.

Will it overcome this trend of dependence in the near future?  Certainly not... if current and past trends are anything to go by.

if there is any ideology in nigeria it must be one based on corruption, greed, avarice and godfatherism.

A spell indeed , in the person of:

Chief Ernest Shonekan

owo:

That's correct. Infact many of the political/economic debates on this forum arise from this fact.
Unfortunately, the current unitary system of governance, created by the military, is one of the major causes of Nigeria's 'mis-development'.

Is it really created by the military? Isn't it one of the poisonous legacies the Brits left you with?

owo:

Certainly, local level of governance and mangement of men, materials and resources would translate to net growth. However, those that are currently controlling the central government and those benefitting from it do not want this.They are afraid that they might not be able to survive on their own.

If one or another region can lead the way in self-development, this could change a lot. Probably the best thing to do is not depend on the proceeds from the oil-wealth at all. This wouldn't directly hinder central government anyway.

owo:

This fear is the basis for the current problem in the Niger Delta region and the agitations that have followed. Socialism exists when those in positions of authority as much as appreciate what it is in addition to believing in it. Many of the groups that were coalesced to form Nigeria were under monarchs in pre-independence times.

Formal or informal constitutional monarchies are not that bad. I know the Oba of Benin commands much more respect from his people than the governor of Edo state and as such would have far more legitimacy. A system that is an adaptation of the pre-colonialism systems of governance would be more fitting. Does this also apply to other regions in Nigeria?

owo:

Therefore rulers are glorified and wealth is might. Therefore, socialism with its attendant wealth distribution philosophy is a hard sell when the rulers have not yet had their fill and have not finished oppressing all their enemies

Left wing political formations always base their power on popular support and organisation. Elite groups are not really necessary, educated organisers are.

owo:

There is little of this. The presence of strong ethnic and religious cleavages totally weakens the concept of forming an alliance with another person or group on the basis infrastructure. For as soon as a person from one group mounts the saddle of leadership, his kinsmen begin ensure that they silence every opposition whether the leader's actions are right or not.
This system is what has killed the trade unions, in addition to their being decimated, chiefly, by the current government due to its opposition to hikes in petroleum product prices.

trade unions should rather depend on organisation, education and self reliance in an earlier stage. Without a broad base, their efforts would not lead very far anyway.

owo:

There have been lots of analysis on this and other problems. The truth is that, apart from a spell (unplanned) of two and a half months, Nigeria has not had a broadminded soul or even a graduate as its leader.
It has therefore been led for 98% of its post independence life by small minded men.

A defeatist attitude has never really helped any social movement. What levers of power do those in power hold and how can these be counteracted by an opposition force? Direct confrontation almost always leads to a defeat of those not having the raw power. It's not as if these so-called leaders have broad societal support

owo:

Will it overcome this trend of dependence in the near future? Certainly not... if current and past trends are anything to go by.

Then it has to be done in small steps, not?

PS: I'm thinking out aloud here, if there's somewhere I completely miss the point, let me know

nferyn:

Is it really created by the military? Isn't it one of the poisonous legacies the Brits left you with?

@nferyn Gowon introduced the unitary system at the height of the crisis which followed the overthrow of Ironsi.

The[b] only [/b] reason I'll blame the Brits for our current woes is in their Amalgamation of the Northern & Southern Protectorates. This was the genesis of the problem.

Formal or informal constitutional monarchies are not that bad. I know the Oba of Benin commands much more respect from his people than the governor of Edo state and as such would have far more legitimacy. A system that is an adaptation of the pre-colonialism systems of governance would be more fitting. Does this also apply to other regions in Nigeria?

Most of our monarchies and traditional institutions are either[b] toothless bulldogs or are aiding and abetting crime at the top echelon.[/b] So that either way, our people do not really have a say in their own governance. We just adopt this 'siddon look' attitude to anything that happens. The best most folks do here is to pray to God for help.

Corruption has eaten into the very fabric of our nations existence. It will take eons to heal. All hope is not lost though.

otitoloju:

@nferyn Gowon introduced the unitary system at the height of the crisis which followed the overthrow of Ironsi.

Was it a [b]functional [/b]federalism prior to the military takeover?

ono:

The[b] only [/b] reason I'll blame the Brits for our current woes is in their Amalgamation of the Northern & Southern Protectorates. This was the genesis of the problem.

This is one of the things I did understand

ono:

Most of our monarchies and traditional institutions are either[b] toothless bulldogs or are aiding and abetting crime at the top echelon.[/b] So that either way, our people do not really have a say in their own governance. We just adopt this 'siddon look' attitude to anything that happens. The best most folks do here is to pray to God for help.

What I'm wondering is if these traditional institutions, even though they don't have formal power, are legitimate in the eyes of the constituents? This could be a basis for a ground-roots political organisation

Considering the fact that there are more than 250 ethnic nationalities with their Kings and tradititional beliefs and their people, and also the big problem of language and cultural barriers across ethnic lines in the country, you'd agree with me that it's going to be an onerous task trying to convince one ethnic group to align with others in a country such as Nigeria.

Nowadays, though, I see a lot of marriages getting conducted across ethnic lines. I just hope that this will continue to be on the rise. Hopefully, it will unite the people someday. And with English as the official language of the country - with more people speaking it, one can only hope that more people will come out and speak their minds on how they want to be governed.

There's this mistrust across ethnic lines. For example, the Niger Delta people and their rulers generally believe that the three major ethnic and domineering groups in the country - Yorub, Hausa and Igbo, are all out to milk their lands (Niger Delta) dry. It's evident, though. Now, between the three major ethinc groups, there's this craze for political power at the top - Abuja, amongst them. And like I said earlier, the reasons for this is not far fetched - to have unfettered access to the national cake.

Finally, there are just too few people across ethnic and traditional lines to pose any threat at the centre, populated by the rich, greedy and powerful few.

What I'm wondering is if these traditional institutions, even though they don't have formal power, are legitimate in the eyes of the constituents? This could be a basis for a ground-roots political organization
Posted on: Today at 02:46:32 PMPosted by: nferyn

Nferyn,I like your thought process on this issue. I wish we had lots of Nigerians with like minds.For most of us Nigerians,however, all hope is almost lost. We have been disillusioned for so long.The traditional institution has being corrupted by the politicians-so "he who pays the piper,...." Monies sent home from abroad are to individuals and/or families-most are not really invested even if that were the intention of the sender. I wont talk about my own experience here.But most people at home,just believe and expect a continuous stream of monies from those abroad!
I have always steered clear of politics,may be it is time,the young ones start putting up a resistance,and this may bring some much needed changes in the political terrain.Sadly,though,a lot of young guys are doing much worse than the old politicians in the money grabbing politics we have now!

great thread

otitoloju:

Gowon introduced the unitary system at the height of the crisis which followed the overthrow of Ironsi.

It was Aguiyi Ironsi who abolished the regions and introduced the unitary system. The crises was because of the abolition of the regional system and the aftermath of the January coup. Gowon created the 12 state structure.

nferyn:

Was it a [b]functional [/b]federalism prior to the military takeover?

The regional system in place prior to the 66 coup was actually good for the country. It allowed each region to develop at its own pace. The real power resided in the regions and not the center this was illustrated by the fact that Ahmadu Bello preferred to be the premier of the Northern region and sent his deputy, Balewa to be the prime minister of Nigeria.

nferyn:

Formal or informal constitutional monarchies are not that bad. I know the Oba of Benin commands much more respect from his people than the governor of Edo state and as such would have far more legitimacy. A system that is an adaptation of the pre-colonialism systems of governance would be more fitting. Does this also apply to other regions in Nigeria?

I actually agree with this, the Brits felt the traditional system was good enough and used indirect rule to administer Nigeria. Elements of this still exist today as the government of the day always seeks the support of the traditional rulers.
Unfortunately as abuguy64 pointed out the traditional institution has being corrupted by the politicians, the traditional rulers are paid by the government so their loyalties will always be with the government.

ono:

you'd agree with me that it's going to be an onerous task trying to convince one ethnic group to align with others in a country such as Nigeria.

People do align at the 'top of the food chain' (i.e. the elites). If you look at the history of Nigeria, for any ethnic group to rule the country it had to align itself with another. In the 60s it was the east and the north, during the civil war and Gowon/Muritala's era it was the west and north.

ono:

The[b] only [/b] reason I'll blame the Brits for our current woes is in their Amalgamation of the Northern & Southern Protectorates. This was the genesis of the problem.

well we can blame the Brits for that but i doubt it would have made any difference. The Yorubas and Ibos hardly trust each other, the North has always capitalised on this. The mistake the Yorubas and Ibos have always made is to think they could be the dominant partner in any relationship with the north. They made a grave political miscalculation underestimating the north due to its economic and educational backwardness.

What i blame the Brits for (and this applies to nearly all their colonies) was introducing an imported system of government when they were about to leave. If they had introduced this system many years before they left it would have developed to a point where it could sustain itself when they granted us independence rather than falling apart immediately they left.
Yoweri Museveni, the Ugandan president, during a row over democracy in Uganda, pointed out to Britain that it had been the colonial power in Uganda for more than 70 years yet introduced democracy only as it was about to leave.

I was just thinking along which lines gras-roots political organisations could be formed?
All attempt by benevolent dictators (or even true democratically inclined rulers) seem to fail in most African countries. You cannot have a functional political system with true representation and voicing of the interests of the population if the population is not organised in one way or another. Politics needs to be a theatre where the different intrests of the different strata of the population are mediated and resolved. Without a genuine form of involvement, democracy is empty of substance.

Does anyone have ideas as to how to accomplish this? Even if it would be a long term project.

nferyn:

I was just thinking along which lines gras-roots political organisations could be formed?
All attempt by benevolent dictators (or even true democratically inclined rulers) seem to fail in most African countries. You cannot have a functional political system with true representation and voicing of the interests of the population if the population is not organised in one way or another. Politics needs to be a theatre where the different intrests of the different strata of the population are mediated and resolved. Without a genuine form of involvement, democracy is empty of substance.

Does anyone have ideas as to how to accomplish this? Even if it would be a long term project.

Easier said than done

Only a true social and cultural revolution will lead to any meaningful change in Africa. But will western powers allow Africa its true independence? There is so much at stake.

Will they allow a socio political revolution that will change Africa
- from a cheap producer of raw materials (where prices are determined by the buyer rather than the producer)
- change it from been a dumping ground for obsolete products
- release it from unfair trade tariffs
- from a ready made market for arm exports
- a test laboratory for all types of voodoo economics
- a playground for western multinationals where they can pollute and flout any laws they don't like
-

A few African countries like Ghana, Bukina Faso and Congo all had a brief opportunity for social and political change. Their charismatic leaders were either killed or removed by coups sponsored by outside forces.

Nigerian politrickcians!

Politricks without ideology!
Why did Some groups decide to leave the PDP and form the MDD? Is it really a movement for the defence of democracy or as Danladi Wuyep, special assistant to the former PDP chairman, called it; "an arrogant display of democratic rascality”?

Nigerian politrickcians have over the years introduced the canker of politricks without ideology. A good barometer will be to watch the charade called the presidential debate prior to the 1999 and 2003 presidential elections. What quality of debate did Pres. Obasanjo offer us? The only semblance of ideology in the 2003 electioneering debate was from Pas. Chris Okotie and he did not even get more than 1% of votes cast depsite being the most articulate of the aspirants.

Nigerian politics has degenerated to the level of key political offices being reduced to the "principles" of federal character and the ubiquitous zoning formula. The north and south are presently up in arms on who rules the nation come 2007. However none of the two groups has given us a valid reason for their wanting to rule the nation, all we here is "it is my turn", "zoning is north to south", "no! it is 6 geopolitical zones", "we deserve it", "you have ruled for too long", "we produce the oil" and all other garbage being forced on us.

The recent mass movement of "defenders of democracy" from the PDP to the MDD is a clear case study. Where were these set of people when Tony Anenih misappropriated over N300bn meant for the transport ministry? Why are they now crying over a non-functional railway system after a N100bn lifeline from the federal Govt? Can the likes of Chief Tom Ikimi be classified as "democracy defenders"?
Why has Chief Audu Ogbe suddenly realised that the PDP poses a great danger to democracy after a few years in the saddle as PDP chairman? Shouldn't Gambo Jimeta be in jail alongside former IGP Balogun?
How can the likes of Jim Nwobodo be fighting for genuine democracy?

According to Chief Audu Ogbeh in his letter of resignation from the PDP, “Since our views on democracy and governance no longer coincide, we cannot continue to co-habit under the same umbrella", it will be interesting to know what Chief Ogbeh's views on democracy really are beyond the war against a third term for Pres. Obasanjo.

On the ideological divisions issue, IBB did attempt to introduce this concept into Nigerian politics by creating 2 parties - SDP which was a bit to the left and NRC which was a bit to the right.

It probably would have worked to a certain extent except he had his own hidden agenda.

As stated by Ono, the Amalgamation is the source of a lot of problems. However, forty six years after,it is 'unwise' to blame that for all our woes. We should have gotten up and found a way round that set back. This inability to rise above the amalgamation anomaly was ( and is being) compounded by the ethnic cum corrupt mindedness of those that led us through the barrels of the gun and those that foisted themselves on us.
Above all, the civil war of 1967-1970 which came shortly after independence instilled an unexplainable docility (or cowardice) in the population. It made the general population to be wary of standing-up for their rights even when they were dying for not demanding them.

This docility is the the current curse on the land. It has been exploited and is still being exploited by the powers that be. Forming a group/movement based on an idealogy or even being an idealogue is a taboo to some segments of the population.

Can one region lead the way in self development??... Yes it is possible. But look at the scenario.
A. The current structure of states were not created on the basis of economic feasibility or a great deal of cultural homogenity. The reasons for creating them , among other factors were as diversed as the following
1. Actual need and demand by the people (eg the midwestern state of the first republic)
2. Military ruler's wife place of origin, (eg Asaba as the capital of delta state did not have any clear link with the aspirations of the greater delta people).

B. One of the fundamental laws of the the Federal Government is the land use act. It states in effect that every land and its resources belongs to it (the Government) at any time. Therefore making every citizen a tenant because they (the Central Government) can enter into the land and take possesion at any time after paying some centa for the trees and any tombstone.
Therefore, all the money obtained from any natural resources, go to the Federal Government including the Value added tax. Every constituent state (of course created using the above mentioned criteria) goes to the Fed Govt (the centre) for money every month without which they cannot even pay salaries to their staff not to mention carrying out developmental investments.
Currently, - no state in Nigeria can fulfill 1/10 th of its commitments from its internally generated revenue. The states are therefore mere apendages of the Centre.
- The Police (and its control ) is not in the hands of the state governor. Therefore the meaintenance of peace and security lies with the Centre.

It is therefore 'impossible' for a region or state in Nigeria as presently constituted to set itself on the path of growth


What levers of power do those in power hold and how can these be counteracted by an opposition force?
As explained above, the strangle hold is profound and total. The financial, military, educational and sundry aspects of life are being directly controlled from the centre. Its mind boggling.
For Instance, nobody can have admission to any of the nation's 70 or so universities without going through one central body JAMB. Attempts to add university based tests have just begun this year.
The Opposition that can counteract these forces can, at best, be formed around educated people. However, this group is totally fragmented by their ethnic cleavages. This fragmentation in addition to brain drain is the amin clog in the wheel of having a virile opposition group. There is just no idea (that cannot be overthrown by tribalistic and religious tendencies) around which a good system can be built.

In the light of these, my personal conclusion has remained that, the country should be fragmented into religio-ethnic-economic groupings where the negative forces (mentioned above) cannot (or do not have enough potency)to drown the voice of reason and development.
I have always asked my fellow country men for just the main reason why Nigeria must remain one. Unfortunately, there has never been one sound, unbiased and objective reason.
A confederation of loosely bound states sharing foreign affairs, army etc ... will suit Nigeria better than this incoherent and un-natural union.

Only then will the progressive idealogies have enough pull and become a good magnet for all and sundry in the respective confederating units. As stated in some posts above, it 'worked' briefly in the first republic.

sound arguments owo,

first question:

how do you go about the converting nigeria's present unitary govt (ridiculously tagged a federation) into a confederation seeing that the dominant north are firmly against it (for their own selfish interests)?

Are we really sure that the Urhobo will suddenly turn around and embrace the Itsekiri simply because they now have a "niger delta" regional govt?

Ife and Modakeke? Both amicable parties in the proposed western region?

however i think your suggestion is currently the most workable idea. Let us have maybe 3 or 6 regions with each group or tribe being a local govt or county under the regions.
Let each region have it's own laws (the north can keep sharia is they so love it!) but share a common foreign affairs.

i do not subscribe to the common army idea, each region shld have a standing army or force of it's own that will form the bulk of the national army if need be. it will forestall the ability of one single region suddenly using it's numerical strength in the army from turning the apple cart simply because the arrangement is not favorable to their own greed!

Agree up to this point

owo:

In the light of these, my personal conclusion has remained that, the country should be fragmented into religio-ethnic-economic groupings where the negative forces (mentioned above) cannot (or do not have enough potency)to drown the voice of reason and development.
I have always asked my fellow country men for just the main reason why Nigeria must remain one. Unfortunately, there has never been one sound, unbiased and objective reason.
A confederation of loosely bound states sharing foreign affairs, army etc ... will suit Nigeria better than this incoherent and un-natural union.

Only then will the progressive idealogies have enough pull and become a good magnet for all and sundry in the respective confederating units. As stated in some posts above, it 'worked' briefly in the first republic.

The problem here is that you assume this process could happen in a peaceful way. With the resources at stake it would be all out war as each part of the country fights for whatever it can get. The violence and trauma it will unleash will affect the whole west african region and completely destabilise Cameroun, Togo, Rep of benin, Niger and Ghana.
The population of Nigeria alone makes up about 70% of the total population of West Africa, you don't want to imagine the refugee crises it will create.

if you're looking to the future instead of the past, is it still possible to build up grass-roots political organisations without immediately aspiring to obtain political power.
Maybe it's an inappropriate example, but the the way the Vietnamese could fight military and political oppression under the french and americans was by building up self-support organisations at the village level.

What's your take on this?

@nferyn, I don't know the ethnic configuration in Vietnam, and I think they may not be more than two. As such, I think comparing Vietnam with the Nigerian case may not work. The network of ethno-centered interests in Nigeria is indeed overwhelming.

Bros Ijebuman, it's because there are so many warped vested interests in the Nigerian Polity that we're as at this point in the history of our nation facing all the problems bedevilling us. The other day, one chap in the North said he's ready to declare a Jihad if the Niger Deltans are given total control of their resources. That's one big problem here.
Nferyn, you'd see why we can't make any progress?Nigerians generally see oil as their lifeline. Nothing else matters. Why can't we look at other sources of revenue for us in this country and see how we can put them to better use for all?

Also, Owo rightly observed that there's this palpable fear in everyone that bloodshed will ruin us all. We've been through so many traumatic experience in the hands of law enforcements agancies that our basic rights as humans can be denied and we cannot do anything about it. Read http://www.vanguardngr.com/articles/2002/editorial/ed02022006.html and get to know how our justice system works. The whole thing resulted to the docility Owo is talking about in his entry. I quote Owo:

''This docility is the the current curse on the land. It has been exploited and is still being exploited by the powers that be. Forming a group/movement based on an idealogy or even being an idealogue is a taboo to some segments of the population''

Now, in the light of all these facts, forming grassroots political organisations will really amount to nothing

And like I stated in an earlier post, most Nigerians (the oppressors and the oppressed alike) simply throw up their hands in exasperation and pray to God for help from above.

davidylan:

sound arguments owo,

first question:

how do you go about the converting Nigeria's present unitary govt (ridiculously tagged a federation) into a confederation seeing that the dominant north are firmly against it (for their own selfish interests)?

Are we really sure that the Urhobo will suddenly turn around and embrace the Itsekiri simply because they now have a "Niger delta" regional govt?

Ife and Modakeke? Both amicable parties in the proposed western region?

The process of 'converting' is one that can always be worked at. There are a thousand and one ways once the will is present. For instance, if the energy expended by rulership in curbing the effects and aftermath of fuel price increases in the last 15 years were aimed at restructuring then we would have gone a long way. My views are expressed in the answer to Ijebuman's queries.

Ife and Modakeke? Urhobo and Itsekiri? Aguleri and Umuleri? Junkuns and Tivs?.... and all the likes are, candidly speaking, storms in the teacup compared to the south south or south east against the other parts of Nigeria or the current attacks on economic interests and widespread political killings. We would be foolish to expect 'perfect' graveyard 'peace' neither would we be expecting them to become best of friends overnight. One thing is certain though, insisting that local governments can only be created by the Federal Government triggered or encouraged about 60% of these conflicts. These are the same people that have been living together for over a hundred years. In any case the local Government phraseology and operation can only successfully work in the north where the population density is lower. For a place like Warri/ Effurun, Ughelli etc... the local Government stuff is a total failure.

ijebuman:

Agree up to this pointThe problem here is that you assume this process could happen in a peaceful way. With the resources at stake it would be all out war as each part of the country fights for whatever it can get.

Herein lies the burden on the educated , enlightened and broadminded. Properly understood, Nigeria is terrible poor and sticking to the current arrangement is embarking on perpetuating this gross poverty.
Getting this segment of the populace to see the bigger picture is key to peacefully restructuring.

But which resources are at stake? Oil? Iron Ore? gold? or Men?
Oil will leave us impoverished - Even when we achieve 4 million bpd in 2010 it will not support a minimum wage of N50,000...($360) which is which is still ridiculously low for a family. Nferyn can help us with the minimum wage of Belgium. So why die fighting to keep what will not be enough.
It is not renewable and the world is on its way to fashioning out alternatives.

Iron Ore and Gold are still nonrenewable and will not give as much money either. Ghana is a clear example of what gold cannot do.

Men? In this we have the best of resources. Always renewable and cannot be outdone. We can never have enough space to state the obvious possibilities and wealth and that this resource can engineer. Look at  America, Japan, Taiwan, Britain and Europe generally.

I therefore propose that for Nigeria to 'confederate' peacefully the following steps can be undertaken (in which ever order that is found suitable)
1. Create a buffer period of five years during which the next steps will be implemented.
2. Create arbitrary units either along current religio-geo-political leanings or along better lines
3. Let each village, hamlet, autonomous community, clan, emirate or what ever grouping that naturally exists bring out its representatives. Towns and cities can clearly be divided using equal land areas.
4. Let there be a referendum where each community chooses the federating unit that it wants to belong. A simple majority determining the winner.
5. This will determine the natural boundaries of each unit.
6. Natural representatives can now sit and determine what form of Government they want to run and choose their single representative to the central government. Its their future and they can decide to be what they want to be. Each region should agree on its own constitution run its affairs.
7. Financial contribution to the centre should then be progressively scaled down from 100% to 10% over 5 or 8 years and do same for all areas of National life.
8. Have an overriding and wholly agreed constitution that does not infringe on the rights of the federating unit and insists on basic human rights for all citizens everywhere
9. Ensure that Power and Authority lie in each of the federations.
10. Above all, every unit must be able to have an overall development goal that becomes the rallying point for all and sundry
(Write the vision down so that he that reads he may run with it)

Though not exhaustive, the steps spell out some framework within which a good level of change can be accomplished without much ado. As with every thing that has to do with human beings, the actions, reactions etc cannot be fully modelled or predicted. It therefore behooves on the leader at the time to fashion out ways of overcoming obstacles towards achieving the goal of a growth based confederation.

Separating Nigeria into development based, confederating units is a clear possibility and remains one of the simplest yet comprehensive solution to the National question.

@Ijebuman, your point on the resources issue brings out the harm that a wrong educational / societal value system has done to us. That is the value placed on one human being (whatever his place of origin).
It also highlights our conception of what we call peace.
This understanding states that; Killing people with hunger, ignorance, pothole filled roads, mortuaries called hospitals, pollution etc is living in peace while removing the one cause of all these problems by violent means so that all else will be well is not peace.

It takes some level of 'violence' to maintain real peace. It is why about 20% of the black male population in America have been to jail while that country has violently pursed its enemies into the Pakistani mountains all in a bid to maintain the peace.
It is why Yugoslavia of old could not remain one but had to 'violently' split into four (maybe five) countries.

While not advocating for 'nuclear' warfare.... it is good to state clearly that we are in a state of war because the agents of death are at work in every facet of the country's life even when these agents are perfectly surmountable

The refugees of this war are there in every country of the world, and in every village in West Africa (Even in Sierra Leone and Cote D'Ivoire). If things were as good as they should be, they would have been in Nigeria.

The minimum wage in Belgium is €1163 monthly (third highest in Europe after Luxemburg and the Netherlands)
This would translate to 182.364 Naira monthly or 2.188.368 naira yearly.

Mind you, for all those not aware of it, the cost of living in Europe is far higher as well. A decent family house (like the one we have with 3 bedrooms) costs between €150.000 and €250.000 depending on the location. Basic utilities (water & electricity) cost between€100 and €150 per month. And then you need food, clothes, transportation, medical costs, furniture, insurances (for our family around €275/month), ...