Sometimes it seems like societies and nations need conflict or uncontrolled chaos in order to change. If you look at it carefully, you will observe that most of the major change (mostly positive) that happen to most nations occour at a time of conflict. Conflicts/wars e.t.c brings out the best and worst in people. It chanllenges the human mind to come up with better ways of living and developing, great discoveries and inventions happened in times of conflict, in generall, society as a whole, takes a step forward in bettering it self, which if not of the situation (conflict) wouldn't have happened. Examples

1. The bolshevik revolution in russia 1917. It brought down the czars and lead to the creation of the soviet union. even though an oppresive regime, but the industrial, economic, agricultural e.t.c developement that russia realised as a result of that chaotic period is huge.

2. The cultural revolution in China. China is what it is today(mostly) because of that event. If it hadn't taken place, i don't think china will be the same.
3. The american war of independence
4. As a result of the Iran revolution, iran - iraq war, and numerous sanctions , Iran today can manufacture their own everything military, even well advanced in nuclear science.

Even in Nigeria, as a result of the fuel subsidy chaos, boko haram, e.t.c I sense a attitude towards change. Nigeria police is changing for the better(slowly but surely), People won't take "crap" from government anymore, and government won't dare try the people again, subsidy probe, e.t.c My point is things are happening.

So my overall questions is, Does conflict and chaos need to happen for change to occour? Should we see the current situation in Nigeria as a prelude to a better future? Why did Nigeria remain stagnant and unable to change during peaceful times?