Is Democracy really the most ideal political setting most befitting for Africa?

Four years of political tenure. Two years of which is set apart for politicking and plotting for the next general elections!

Is 4 years really enough for fundamental change in socio-economic and ethno-religious harmony?

I have made a casual look at individual Western societies and observed that the leading western countries were built on benevolent absolute rulership.

France, Germany, Great Britain and to the East Russia and China were all pioneered by an absolute monarchy with little or no recourse to be bound by council's decision.

What is France without a King Henry, or Britain without the crown, or German without Hitler (?) Or Russia without Lenin.

Mugabe stands as a possible pointer to the unsuitability of an absolute rulership in Africa, but do we have a democrat in Africa who has left any legacy as a recompense for the suitability of African democracy?

I think Military dictatorship is best for Africans, a lot of Africans behave like animals, what they need is a whip in the back to put them in place, Buhari succeeded as military head of state for the short time he was president because he was military, there are certain decisions I believe he would have taken now for the good of the nation but cannot due to democratic procedures of legislative assent and all that.

Democracy has to do with Preserving the Liberties and Rights of every one in accordance with the Cultures,Morals, Morales, Sentiments, Emotions and Conventions and Constitution of a people among themselves. On the Nigerian Scene, Awolowo and his late son's age mate OBJ are
DEMOCRAT s

Democracy ought to be the best form of government, i really do not know why our leaders are failing us.

Never has, never will. Not with d type of people occupying our political space, not with d structure Nigeria operates on and indeed not with d deep seated suspicion and hatred different tribes and ethnicities currently harbour against each other. And d most germane on all indices is that democracy will work effectively in a society that prioritizes educating her citizenry. That bit remains sacrosanct and unnegotiable!

orisa37:
Democracy has to do with Preserving the Liberties and Rights of every one in accordance with the Cultures,Morals, Morales, Sentiments, Emotions and Conventions and Constitution of a people among themselves. On the Nigerian Scene, Awolowo and his late son's age mate OBJ are
DEMOCRAT s

did they leave structural and institutional legacy behind?

Apart from the much touted freedom of expression, I am yet to see what Nigerian democracy has offered Nigeria. Successive government have had one form of problem or the other. OBJ had northern, sharia violence and militancy, Yar dua inherited militancy and the beginning of boko haram, GEJ had full blown boko haram, PMB inherited Boko haram and resurrected Biafra and militancy insurrection. One can imagine the humongous amount of money spent on security because of these problems in the last 17 years and the attendant corruption following it. Not forgetting the maitasine in the reign of Shagari.
Most of the insecurity problems did not exist during any of the military regimes. When any started, they were crushed immediately. The only people who felt insecure during military regimes were politicians and fellow military members who the ruling personnel felt were treats to their power. The press were another victims of military rule, other than that, ordinary citizens went about their lives easily. Robbery was also lower then because there was no proliferation of arms. Some senior officers did not have access to arms so as not to plot coup not to talk of rag tag militia.
However, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

As forAwolowo, ask them in Cocoa House. OBJ built the National Theatre. OBJ introduced E_Government, brought in GSM, Smart Cell phones and other electronic devices that go along with excellent global communication. OBJ is a Majestic Manager of Managers and people and one that compares favorable with Churchill, Eisenhower, Montgomery etc. OBJ is an excellent Soldier, a Nationalist, a Patriot and a Gentleman.. I am still living to see which Nigerian Military dead or alive will match OBJs achievements. OBJ is the first Nigerian and indeed the first African to be elected President of the World Forum of Ex Presidents. OBJ is awesome and lovely in Power. I pray to live and watch him become the General Overseer of the Sanctuary of God of Nigeria soon. He is destined to unite Islam, Christians and other Religions together under the Sanctuary of God of Nigeria.

Democracy is not for developing countries, none of these big countries practice democracy when they're developing. its after they develop their place , they'll remember democracy and start shouting rule of law.but when they're buying slaves to build up their countries with free labour they didn't remember rule of law.chinese are doing their own now we're condemning them,after 50yrs they'll develop finish and introduce democracy and we'll still be where we are . Take out democracy and introduce death penalty and see this country takes a better shape.

Capital NO!

orisa37:
As forAwolowo, ask them in Cocoa House. OBJ built the National Theatre. OBJ introduced E_Government, brought in GSM, Smart Cell phones and other electronic devices that go along with excellent global communication. OBJ is a Majestic Manager of Managers and people and one that compares favorable with Churchill, Eisenhower, Montgomery etc. OBJ is an excellent Soldier, a Nationalist, a Patriot and a Gentleman.. I am still living to see which Nigerian Military dead or alive will match OBJs achievements. OBJ is the first Nigerian and indeed the first African to be elected President of the World Forum of Ex Presidents. OBJ is awesome and lovely in Power. I pray to live and watch him become the General Overseer of the Sanctuary of God of Nigeria soon. He is destined to unite Islam, Christians and other Religions together under the Sanctuary of God of Nigeria.

Abeg when you are done with the calabash pass it to me make me sef drink from the source so as to feel HIGH like you. Imagine the way you polished Obasanjo with golden kiwi Polish like this....

Let me finish this vintage. I'll buy yours fresh from the vine.

Lezzlie:
Is Democracy really the most ideal political setting most befitting for Africa?

Four years of political tenure. Two years of which is set apart for politicking and plotting for the next general elections!

Is 4 years really enough for fundamental change in socio-economic and ethno-religious harmony?

I have made a casual look at individual Western societies and observed that the leading western countries were built on benevolent absolute rulership.

France, Germany, Great Britain and to the East Russia and China were all pioneered by an absolute monarchy with little or no recourse to be bound by council's decision.

What is France without a King Henry, or Britain without the crown, or German without Hitler (?) Or Russia without Lenin.

Mugabe stands as a possible pointer to the unsuitability of an absolute rulership in Africa, but do we have a democrat in Africa who has left any legacy as a recompense for the suitability of African democracy?

I believe Nelson Mandela, Thomas Sankara, Mommar Gaddafi fell under this category.

The problem is not democracy per se, it has always been on the part of the one who lead. In a heterogeneous society like ours, that have be raped by religion and tribal bigotry, couple with all manner of hypocrisy and acute narrow mindedness, I'll say democracy is D.O.A as it relates to Africa.

ShaqFu:
I believe Nelson Mandela, Thomas Sankara, Mommar Gaddafi fell under this category.

The problem is not democracy per se, it has always been on the part of the one who lead. In a heterogeneous society like ours, that have be raped by religion and tribal bigotry, couple with all manner of hypocrisy and acute narrow mindedness, I'll say democracy is D.O.A as it relates to Africa.

I don't really feel there's been any African leader that has positively altered the nationhood in a renaissance.

Mandela was a freedom fighter. He goes down in history as one of the greatest African freedom fighters. It ends there.

Let's compare with King Henry of France, in the 15th century or so, France has no clear demarcated national boarders and was lacking in technology, the arts, music, military etc.

King Henry travelled across Europe, persuading, in words and through monetary appeasement, all the best brains in science, arts, military craft, language to becone Friench citizens and marry in france.

That was the renaissance of the french industrial revolution that she still stands on today.


Gaddafi was a terrorist and did nothing for lybia other than pay them oil money as a recompense for his obsession with political debauchery. He really shouldn't be in that list.


Sankara Was a incorruptible rebel soldier and a hero. But like most African military men, their ideal of national building is solely focused on the political font.

The Lenin's and King Henry's transformed their countries in all facets of development, militarily, technologically, economically and instil a fierce sense of nationalism in their citizens.

That's why the average Russian don't mind starving to see Russia back into the international power play as a strong voice. There are many Sankara's in Europe but pairing him to the Lenin's and Henry's is a mismatch.



I find the unmodified adoption of Western democracy unsuitable for the African socio-cultural and socio-economic terrain. Our ethno-religious nature makes it unadaptable.

Lezzlie:
I don't really feel there's been any African leader that has positively altered the nationhood in a renaissance.

Mandela was a freedom fighter. He goes down in history as one of the greatest African freedom fighters. It ends there.

Let's compare with King Henry of France, in the 15th century or so, France has no clear demarcated national boarders and was lacking in technology, the arts, music, military etc.

King Henry travelled across Europe, persuading, in words and through monetary appeasement, all the best brains in science, arts, military craft, language to becone Friench citizens and marry in france.

That was the renaissance of the french industrial revolution that she still stands on today.


Gaddafi was a terrorist and did nothing for lybia other than pay them oil money as a recompense for his obsession with political debauchery. He really shouldn't be in that list.


Sankara Was a incorruptible rebel soldier and a hero. But like most African military men, their ideal of national building is solely focused on the political font.

The Lenin's and King Henry's transformed their countries in all facets of development, militarily, technologically, economically and instil a fierce sense of nationalism in their citizens.

That's why the average Russian don't mind starving to see Russia back into the international power play as a strong voice. There are many Sankara's in Europe but pairing him to the Lenin's and Henry's is a mismatch.



I find the unmodified adoption of Western democracy unsuitable for the African socio-cultural and socio-economic terrain. Our ethno-religious nature makes it unadaptable.

'African renaissance' is something that is virtually impossible, because of the way we Africans are structured, mentally, religiously and tribalistically.

Sankara if he had live long, I believe with every bone in my body that he would alter the consciousness of the people of Burkina Faso, and Africa as a whole.

His political and economic ideals stem from classic Maoism, at its finest. He truly understood that without economic development, political development is just a farce, he held the same belief with Kwame Nkrumah.

Gaddafi Was an african strong man who truly understood that if Africa had any hope of being self sufficient, Africa must unite and quell all the influence of western imperialism. To think you called him a terrorist is an insult to Africa.

Why do you think the West had him eliminated, if not that they felt he's a threat to their interest in Africa.

Now, I'm sure you know the same way Lenin seized power from the tsars was no better than what Sankara, or Gaddafi did? If you've studied lenism, you'll have to say he still bore some resemblance to Maoism, and both had a lot to do with zero tolerance for opposition and opposing ideology.

ShaqFu:
'African renaissance' is something that is virtually impossible, because of the way we Africans are structured, mentally, religiously and tribalistically.

Sankara if he had live long, I believe with every bone in my body that he would alter the consciousness of the people of Burkina Faso, and Africa as a whole.

His political and economic ideals stem from classic Maoism, at its finest. He truly understood that without economic development, political development is just a farce, he held the same belief with Kwame Nkrumah.

Gaddafi Was an african strong man who truly understood that if Africa had any hope of being self sufficient, Africa must unite and quell all the influence of western imperialism. To think you called him a terrorist is an insult to Africa.

Why do you think the West had him eliminated, if not that they felt he's a threat to their interest in Africa.

Now, I'm sure you know the same way Lenin seized power from the tsars was no better than what Sankara, or Gaddafi did? If you've studied lenism, you'll have to say he still bore some resemblance to Maoism, and both had a lot to do with zero tolerance for opposition and opposing ideology.

Lenin's method of seizing power may be anti-establishment, I do not broaden my submissions into the political morality of his political emergence. I narrowed it down to his legacy as regards Russia and Europe.

Ghadafi failed Lybia in the same degree he failed Africa. His opposition to Western imperialism doesn't automatically translates into an African political martyr!

He is solely responsible for the destabilisation of several African countries. Were it not for the size and power of Nigeria, he was ready to poke his nose here in the calling of the division of this country. The Chadian uprising of the early 80's was sponsored by him.

He called for the merger of all African countries into a single block with him as president. The nerd!!!

With a population of about 5 million or there about, and having vast oil reserves and having rules Lybia authoritatively for over 2 decades, Lybia should be at par with the Scandinavian countries of Europe. But Lybia pales in comparison to Saudi Arabia or the UAE.

Anti Western rhetorics isn't a time-lasting legacy. Matter of fact, it's the shortest route to emotional politicking.

Lezzlie:
Lenin's method of seizing power may be anti-establishment, I do not broaden my submissions into the political morality of his political emergence. I narrowed it down to his legacy as regards Russia and Europe.

Ghadafi failed Lybia in the same degree he failed Africa. His opposition to Western imperialism doesn't automatically translates into an African political martyr!

He is solely responsible for the destabilisation of several African countries. Were it not for the size and power of Nigeria, he was ready to poke his nose here in the calling of the division of this country. The Chadian uprising of the early 80's was sponsored by him.

He called for the merger of all African countries into a single block with him as president. The nerd!!!

With a population of about 5 million or there about, and having vast oil reserves and having rules Lybia authoritatively for over 2 decades, Lybia should be at par with the Scandinavian countries of Europe. But Lybia pales in comparison to Saudi Arabia or the UAE.

Anti Western rhetorics isn't a time-lasting legacy. Matter of fact, it's the shortest route to emotional politicking.

Good, then if you're narrowing it down to just Lenin's legacy as regard Russia and Europe, surely you should do the same with Sankara, to say the least.

I admit, Gaddafi's methods were not all that praise worthy, but still the same, the man was a force to be reckoned with. Him calling for a United state of Africa with him as the president is what many African leaders would do in they were in his position. At least in terms of governance and personal impact in Africa and the world, which Nigerian leader come close to him? (Gaddafi) please don't mention Yar'Adua or Jonathan or even OBJ.

A man is a man, despite his idiosyncrasies. Tell me, which African country is at par with 'most Scandinavian countries,' South Africa?

ShaqFu:
Good, then if you're narrowing it down to just Lenin's legacy as regard Russia and Europe, surely you should do the same with Sankara, to say the least.

I admit, Gaddafi's methods were not all that praise worthy, but still the same, the man was a force to be reckoned with. Him calling for a United state of Africa with him as the president is what many African leaders would do in they were in his position. At least in terms of governance and personal impact in Africa and the world, which Nigerian leader come close to him? (Gaddafi) please don't mention Yar'Adua or Jonathan or even OBJ.

A man is a man, despite his idiosyncrasies. Tell me, which African country is at par with 'most Scandinavian countries,' South Africa?

Of course Sankara was a hero, he just didn't live long enough to have a deep rooted legacy to have a far-reaching effect.

Gaddafi goes down as one who had a personal agenda and an political egomaniac!!!

Posterity has never viewed him positively even with western imperialism put side by side.

Let hope for future historians.

Lezzlie:
Is Democracy really the most ideal political setting most befitting for Africa?

Four years of political tenure. Two years of which is set apart for politicking and plotting for the next general elections!

Is 4 years really enough for fundamental change in socio-economic and ethno-religious harmony?

I have made a casual look at individual Western societies and observed that the leading western countries were built on benevolent absolute rulership.

France, Germany, Great Britain and to the East Russia and China were all pioneered by an absolute monarchy with little or no recourse to be bound by council's decision.

What is France without a King Henry, or Britain without the crown, or German without Hitler (?) Or Russia without Lenin.

Mugabe stands as a possible pointer to the unsuitability of an absolute rulership in Africa, but do we have a democrat in Africa who has left any legacy as a recompense for the suitability of African democracy?

I don't think Democracy is the problem per se. I think that the system of Government has a lot to do with it. Taking Nigeria for example, we should not be practicing this unitary system. Geo-political zones or regions should be created and they should be they federating units. The faliure of many African countries to practice the right type of democracy and system of Government is the problem

attackgat:


I don't think Democracy is the problem per se. I think that the system of Government has a lot to do with it. Taking Nigeria for example, we should not be practicing this unitary system. Geo-political zones or regions should be created and they should be they federating units. The faliure of many African countries to practice the right type of democracy and system of Government is the problem

I like the fact that you described our type of government as unitary. Because the federalism we ascribe to it is nothing but a facade.

So you thing a true federalism is the way to go demarcated along religious lines?

Lezzlie:
I like the fact that you described our type of government as unitary. Because the federalism we ascribe to it is nothing but a facade.

So you thing a true federalism is the way to go demarcated along religious lines?

Not along religious lines but along tribal affiliation

attackgat:



Not along religious lines but along tribal affiliation

But there are no true tribal lines in Nigeria.

Lezzlie:
But there are no true tribal lines in Nigeria.

How is that? I'm Igbo and I know where Igboland starts and ends

Lezzlie:
Of course Sankara was a hero, he just didn't live long enough to have a deep rooted legacy to have a far-reaching effect.

Gaddafi goes down as one who had a personal agenda and an political egomaniac!!!

Posterity has never viewed him positively even with western imperialism put side by side.

Let hope for future historians.

I believe know you, as I know, that posterity has always been written by the wielders of western imperialism.

attackgat:


How is that? I'm Igbo and I know where Igboland starts and ends

Igboland stretches from the heartland of the east into the South-South of Delta state, Rivers state and a tiny fragment of Edo state.

It will be difficult to fragment a federalism on tribal lines now. Maybe before the civil war would have been more Ideal.

ShaqFu:
I believe know you, as I know, that posterity has always been written by the wielders of western imperialism.

Lolz, Joe!!

Lezzlie:

Lolz, Joe!!

WTF? Who's Joe? Surely you have me confuse with someone else. LOL.

ShaqFu:
WTF? Who's Joe? Surely you have me confuse with someone else. LOL.

It's weekend, WTF!!! Isn't a little typo or oversight expected?

Lezzlie:
It's weekend, WTF!!! Isn't a little typo or oversight expected?

So weekend is when you're liable to make mistake right? Well don't make the mistake of impregnating doveeda. LOL.

ShaqFu:
So weekend is when you're liable to make mistake right? Well don't make the mistake of impregnating doveeda. LOL.

If she comes within a cubic feet, all the blood in me runs stale.

Lezzlie:
If she comes within a cubic feet, all the blood in me runs stale.

LOL.

Lezzlie:
But there are no true tribal lines in Nigeria.

The problem clearly is which yardstick to be used to divide the nation into federation units..... Is it along religious line or tribal affiliation?

Really complicated I think.....