NIGERIA: CIVILITY & THE NEED FOR CONSEQUENTIAL SOCIAL COMMUNICATION©
(a.k.a., THE IMPORTANCE OF "HOW" YOU SAY THINGS!)©
-Attorney Patryk Utulu

One of the greatest generational experiences of my parents – passed to me, and endlessly valuable – is the notion that HOW you say things can define, devalue or destroy the points you seek to make. In other words, civility is a core element of consequential social communication. Naturally, not everyone would agree. Depending on place, position or point of view, reasonable people can disagree. For example, it’s been argued that no one could or should be expected to always be civil. It’s also been said that some people are just not receptive to politeness; therefore it’s useless to be polite to those who are habitually rude. Then there are those who rely on the eye-for-an-eye defense that the other-side-did-it-first. And let’s not forget the favorite defense that some people are beneath contempt. This is the self-justifying argument that there are people who just don’t deserve respect.

Is rudeness always a deal-breaker? Not necessarily. But civility is a priceless social lubricant. It is easier to forget defeat than to forgive humiliation. A soft fallacy – repeated so often it’s starting to sounds like universal truth – is the notion that victory belongs to, and is written by, victors exclusively. Less famed but equally valid notion is that victims control not only how to interpret humiliation, but also, how their children inherit grievances. Since no war is truly over until peace is won, the will and ill-will of victors and victims, respectively, are inextricably linked in any dialogue for future peaceful coexistence.

MOUTH OR MALIGNANT MICROPHONE: The intriguing question is how do you compel an open market to sing with one voice? As a communications Equalizer the Internet unleashed the transformative power of mouth to microphone media. The interesting thing about microphones is that its mindless power can be harnessed to sing melody, spread malady or inject malignancy. In boosting freer flow of information and commentary the Internet fed stridency by enabling, simultaneously, open comments by nameless persons. Information used to be a two-sided coin of give and take. But globalized Internet has turned it into a universal coin without standard or format. The Internet leveled the playing field and turned billions of humanity into social commentators. Yet it created no visible template to guide the resultant market of ideas. It enhanced contact, communication and consultation but it also empowered people with a reservoir of spite and pettiness to misrepresent parochialism as enlightened commentary.

TALKS BEFORE “THE TALKS”: There are those who believe that you never enter the same river twice. As a political starting point persuasion, and not logic, would be needed if the above statement is to be seen as a genuine desire to turn the national political page rather than as an arrogant refusal to address prior injustices. In this scenario, communication, civility and comity will be indispensable elements, and doubly so, where Nigeria is the subject matter! As a nation born not of indigenous will, but through imperial fiat for colonial administrative convenience, Nigeria will always experience the tensions of its conceptual fault lines. But after 99 years (1861-1960) of colonial occupation, and slightly over a half century of arrested development in political experimentation, Nigeria is ripe for adult conversation on public policy, plurality, national priorities and constitutional governance.

Politics has always been a zero sum game in Nigeria. Although reliable census data isn’t readily available anecdotal evidence strongly suggests that, population-wise, Nigeria is spread about “50-50” between traditional South and North. A matching population tends to suggest balance, but balance doesn’t always equate stability. “East” versus “West” tensions will always be a feature of the Nigerian South, and despite initial political success Nigerian North is neither monolithic nor homogenous. Whereas even population has led to balance in some nations, in Nigeria a political observer gets the impression that the nation is like a two-headed snake: always lots of activities, but no productive movement.
Some nations easily submit to leaders and shepherds. To lead Nigeria is to herd cats, and it isn’t by accident that there are very few cat shepherds in history. The nation’s constitutional diabetes, cronyism, multi-ethnicity, multi-religiosity, rising secularity, YOYO capitalism, inequality and lack of social safety-net programs almost always guarantees that every Nigerian is born with politics in the bloodstream. But history is the study of the future so context should demonstrate that Nigeria’s You-On-Your-Own capitalism and constant crises of leadership isn’t unique. In 1861, as America drifted towards civil war Southerners asserted a God-given right to own slaves just as Northerners, with equal belief, claimed God’s mandate to free the slaves. Torn between the impulse to sustain slavery and prevent the breakup of America [the South’s demand] AND the awareness that abolishing slavery and ending the free labor that pillared the South’s economic infrastructure [the North’s demand] might break up the nation, Pres Lincoln famously advised both sides to stop claiming that GOD was on their side but instead, to ask themselves if THEY were on God’s side. History has repeatedly shown that gods have inspired wars but there’s yet no evidence that the gods ever came down to referee men’s follies in the battlefield. So, those Nigerians who casually call for a new civil war must realize that no one comes out a winner!

DIALOGUE OR DAMAGOGUERY: There is a rising demand for national political dialogue. Some have preemptively named it the “Sovereign National Constitutional Conference,” “Conference of Sovereign Ethnic Nationalities,” etc. What’s in a name, Shakespeare famously asked? The answer: a lot of nothing! Yes, names and titles have power. Some have the power to define people (Arewa, Biafra, Oduduwa, etc.); the power to unite (Super Eagles); the power to cause anxiety (Boko Haram); and even the power to induce contemptuous yawn (the Village Idiot). The name ultimately selected for Nigeria’s national dialogue may have political symbolism or social significance. But a name shouldn’t be a deal-breaker. Names define and therefore, limits. Names inspire but they are not self-fulfilling prophecies. Simply naming it National Peaceful Co-Existence Conference will not magically bring peace and social harmony

Nor will a conference produce consensus without genuine dialogue. National conferences are mere opportunities. Intrigue, bad faith, high-handedness or winner-takes-all attitude on the part of big tribes will either abort the conception of peaceful co-existence or strangle any semblance of peace in its cradle. The tone of a national dialogue must be hopeful and optimistic without being unrealistic. For example, I could have titled this article as, (1) Nigeria: Death of Consequential Social Communication, or (2) Nigeria: Bankruptcy of Civility in Civil Discussion, or (3) Nigeria: Futility of Rants and Empty Rhetoric, etc. But in deciding against such “negative” titles I hoped my optimism would reflect my faith in Nigeria’s future. Those who claim electoral or functional leadership of Nigeria must practice strategic communication. If civility is a two way street it devalues entire Legislative proceedings and cheapens the image of Nigeria when senators fall asleep or engage in disruptive conversation – on national television – while a fellow senator is formally addressing the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

LIGHT AND LIGHTENING: Despite sharing similar elements and sound the difference between (electric) light and (pre-thunder) lightening is as fundamental as the difference between tears and rainfall. And so is the difference between governing and politicking. Political acts must further the art of governing. The question should always be: what can we accomplish? When? How? The Nigerian masses have a role to play in the destiny of their own nation because despite exaggerated pretensions all politicians seek accolade and public approval. Withholding of public approval is the most effective weapon in moderating the excesses of public figures. Any public official who claims that envy does not hurt should know that neither gods nor kings are immune from the debilitating effects of public ridicule. The Nigerian public can show that the quality of speech is not enhanced by shouting it from rooftops, and that political brinksmanship is no substitute for genuine dialogue about how to make Nigeria a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and socially pluralistic society that offers its citizens more than the same circle of leaders who wall up their mansions and are too afraid to even show up in their own villages.
A national dialogue won’t solve all problems. We live in the age of global microphones and all tribes are afflicted with the group-think that they deserve more than their current share of the national pie. Representatives will be pressured to strike while each tribe’s perceive iron is hot. But dialogue and mediation lack hot iron’s plasticity. Leadership requires focus, compromise and the uncommon courage to tell one’s own supporters that even opponents have legitimate claims. But like porcupines, leaders must mate carefully. They will not have unlimited time but haste does not always produce speed, and haste without speed is unproductive activity. Nigeria is not destined to failure as long as leaders know that, without reciprocity, no one can hold on to respect given by others. It is possible to tell a person to go to hell in such a way that he actually looks forward to it. But first, proper decorum must be observed.

“ATTACK” ISSUES, NOT PEOPLE: As a Strategic Communications Consultant people often asked me: how do you talk to someone who isn’t interested in listening? Start by making your points in neutral terms. How? Identify and address the “issues” and not “persons.” The essence of communication is to be heard. The goal is to convey a viewpoint and elicit productive feedback. Unless you are a comedian looking for quick laughs or a provocateur whose thrill is to annoy others you should say things in ways that invite feedback. Assertive, conclusory statements (e.g., Hausas are wicked) only shuts the door to positive feedback. Or, elicit emotional counter-attacks. Instead of saying “Ibo businessmen are destroying this nation,” you should say, “one problem in our nation is the behavior of the business class.” There is a subtle but fundamental difference between the two statements. The first has accusatory finality, doesn’t invite debate and nothing short of broad agreement will satisfy the speaker. Any “Ibo” will feel targeted. The second statement invites comments on the negative impact of business men. Any Nigerian – even Ibo businessmen – can join the discussion. Everyone gets a chance to say “where” and “why” it’s happening. The discussants may even figure out “how” to stop the mischief.

Are Nigerians irredeemably tribalistic? Nigerians are not unique in demonstrating tribal preferences. Bias, cronyism, tribalism, regionalism, racism, etc. are global problems. They undermine the goal of building a merit-based society. But humanity is still a work in progress. Man is a naturally fearful animal. Fear, insecurity and distrust are encoded in our DNA. Our overriding impulse is “Fight” or “Flight” – an impulse that is even stronger than our need of sustenance, shelter, sleep or sex. We fear new things. We fear strange things. We fret when things fail to follow the familiar natural order we built or inherited. So we ease our fears through social organization. By seeking comfort in family, community, tribes, clubs, religion, party politics, etc. In family and tribal settings familiar coping mechanisms helps us to deal with bias and social injuries. For this reason social injustice within families and tribes do not generate the same emotion and publicity as when it happens in the national context. Like a tree that fell in the forest when no one is watching we can only speculate that it made some noise. This happens in human communities worldwide: the formation and nurturing of EU is the clearest example that Europeans, after thousands of years of ruinous wars against – and amongst – themselves, finally figured it out!

SELFISHNESS OR SOVEREIGNTY: Nigeria has had conceptual and historical imperfections…as well as self-inflicted wounds. But imperfect or not, Nigeria is our own Fatherland. The only one we have. So, it is worth fighting for and worth saving. Otherwise, what is the value of patriotism if one cannot fight for the soul of his nation even when it is inconvenient? Yes, Nigeria has had varying degrees of atrocious political leaderships since October 1, 1960. But people deserve the leaders they get. Nigerians have NEVER truly asked for productive leadership. The beginning of the end of impunity and irresponsible leadership starts the day our need for good roads, clean affordable water, reliable electricity and security for life/property becomes stronger than our need to have our own tribesman in the Presidency. Nigerians are strong dynamic people, and if they have been victims, it has been only to the extent that selfishness, greed and tribal affiliations still have primacy over the quest for personal dignity. A child cannot kill his parents and then plead for sympathy on account of being an orphan.

THE OTHER SIDE OF MIDNIGHT: Sidney Sheldon would probably have agreed that the true essence of commentary is NOT to win arguments but to contribute productively to ongoing conversation. That’s my role. Nigeria’s vexing problems of constitutional governance, rural/urban development and modalities for co-existence cannot be wished away. Intractable problems invite temptation to simply kick the ball down road. But no one can permanently avoid sleep because of the fear of nightmares. A good faith national dialogue will do the nation a world of good. Its success or failure will not be measured by which tribes made the cleverest arguments or humiliated its adversaries more. History will judge the nation on initiatives, consensus reached, problems solved and good faith post-conference implementation.

Sovereign national dialogue offers nations the chance to re-set priorities. Democracy as government “of, for, by” the people is the dream we offer High School students and freshmen undergraduates. Fairly free elections are necessary and, ideally a true majority will rule. But the true price of majoritarian legitimacy is the protection of minorities. In other words, “how” the Ruling Party acts and treats its opponents and its citizens matters. Many of you have me to speak to the nature of Majority Rule. A ruling majority need not be monolithic or even homogenous. It could – and in Nigeria’s case, should – consist of diverse groups and interests. Because of its numerical diversity a Nigerian ruling majority dominated by homogenous signifiers (e.g. language, tribe or region) will always be in search of political legitimacy.

How a nation prepares for a sovereign national dialogue? Issues, timeline and rules of participation are determinative. The Government must resist the urge to “go straight to The Talks.” First, hold “Talks” about The Talks. The People must be actively invited to indicate what is important to them. My detailed treatise is elsewhere but, for ease of reference, here’s a simplified version of what’s needed:
1. List out the entire VEXING issues (a wish list of grievances, dashed-hopes, wishes, etc.)
2. Articulate each group’s DEMANDS (internal discussion, brain storming, etc.)
3. Anticipate what people on the opposite sides WOULD demand (avoid surprises, etc.)
4. Itemize COMPROMISABLE negotiation points (things you MAY give up for peace)
5. List opponents’ RED LINES (they’ll give up something to protect what they’ll NEVER give up)
6. Compress expectations (negotiations succeed only if you have room for compromise, etc.)

Quick Note: ASUU-Federal Government of Nigeria wahala is solvable. At Strategic Communications Center my colleagues and I have extensively analyzed it, amid strategy sessions. Surprisingly, ASUU and FGN’s positions are closer than the parties realize. It’s a tough solvable problem but the parties must want to resolve it. They must enter into negotiation, and then ask for ideas on strategic solutions if they need it. The road to negotiation and compromise cannot be treated like an infectious disease.

Lao Tzu had the right template:
Watch your thoughts for they soon become your Words
Watch your words for they soon become your Actions
Watch your actions for they soon become your Habits
Watch your habits for they soon become your Character
Watch your character for they soon become your Destiny

Nigeria is in need of consequential social communication. Solving inter-personal, community or national problems takes civility, good faith and intellectual flexibility. Anyone who, instead, offers intransigence, banality, sophistry and rhetoric will only end up talking to the man-in-the-mirror: HIMSELF.

Patryk Utulu is a U.S.-based attorney and Strategic Communications Consultant
[All Rights Reserved. All materials subject to Copyright Privileges and Immunities]