₦airaland Forum

I think monarchy is may be the best system of government. It allows for a leader to dedicate their entire life to serve you whereas in a presidential system, leaders only have a few years in office and can be easily influenced or even installed by the corrupt wealthy individuals. Going deeper, in a monarchy, the current monarch can pick an heir from birth and prepare them from the earliest stage of life to become a capable ruler. The heir also has a first-person view to the reigning monarch's rule; they are able to learn directly, every day, by watching them lead. Monarchy gives us the best prospects for a great leader. What do you think?

So far there is a committee above the King that can overrule him or her on anything and also be able to sack him or her without notice or ceremony it can work

lawani:
So far there is a committee above the King that can overrule him or her on anything and also be able to sack him or her without notice or ceremony it can work

Indeed there will definitely need to be very rigorous protocols in place to prevent corruption!

I think monarchy in Christian/secular countries is ceremonial unlike Muslim monarchy in which they use Quran and Sharia.
Does UK king have eny big say in government runnings?

Re think am well

Yes. Monarchy would work. But then again whatever will work will work. It's a complicated matter.

Monarchs in Nigeria have been totally demystified by first, past military governments and now the political class. They have since lost the prestige they once had.
People of questionable character now jostle for recognition as high chiefs as traditional rulers, so where do we begin?

olowofariwo:
I think monarchy in Christian/secular countries is ceremonial unlike Muslim monarchy in which they use Quran and Sharia.
Does UK king have eny big say in government runnings?

Hi, you are correct. The UK monarchy is mainly ceremonial, Parliament and the Prime Minister run the. country. What I am suggesting is different from that or the monarchy in Muslim countries. The monarchy I am suggesting is quite different — not a powerless figurehead like in the UK, nor a religious monarchy like in Saudi Arabia. The monarchy I envision would involve real preparation from birth — in statecraft, diplomacy, economics, governance and everything needed to rule the nation.

steadygo:
I think monarchy is may be the best system of government. It allows for a leader to dedicate their entire life to serve you whereas in a presidential system, leaders only have a few years in office and can be easily influenced or even installed by the corrupt wealthy individuals. Going deeper, in a monarchy, the current monarch can pick an heir from birth and prepare them from the earliest stage of life to become a capable ruler. The heir also has a first-person view to the reigning monarch's rule; they are able to learn directly, every day, by watching them lead. Monarchy gives us the best prospects for a great leader. What do you think?

You want monarchy in a country that's not a nation? ... Lmaooo where have you seen that happen before?

Solution to Nigeria is simply what the British advice us to do in 1956 ... Divide Nigeria into 10 regions of semi independent regions let everyone grow at their own pace ...

But nah we don't want the obvious solution we are looking for imaginary solutions

steadygo:
I think monarchy is may be the best system of government. It allows for a leader to dedicate their entire life to serve you whereas in a presidential system, leaders only have a few years in office and can be easily influenced or even installed by the corrupt wealthy individuals. Going deeper, in a monarchy, the current monarch can pick an heir from birth and prepare them from the earliest stage of life to become a capable ruler. The heir also has a first-person view to the reigning monarch's rule; they are able to learn directly, every day, by watching them lead. Monarchy gives us the best prospects for a great leader. What do you think?

They don't deserve it. None of them was able to protect their land and people against the British. They are just occupying ceremonial positions till they are all abolished

Rossikk:
We had such in the olden days. They were called the Oyo Mesi in Yorubaland.

If the Oba was deemed by them to be messing up or incompetent, they would send him a message giving him 1 week to kill himself, or someone would do it for him!

Of course in this modern era it will be a less harsh punishment for bad leadership that we will use. But the checks WILL be there.

We ALSO need to revive, update and standardise our TRADITIONAL RELIGION.

This whole thing of just abandoning our entire spiritual heritage garnered over thousands of years simply because some white criminals invaded with guns and bombs a mere century ago, to impose their “white man Jesus” on us, is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE.

It was not all the time they asked an offending king to commit suicide. It depends on the offense. They often just remove the King. There were kings in Oyo and IJESA that were sacked and later recalled again. In Oyo, Sango's elder brother was sacked and Sango was put there. Sango later entered the ground or disappeared and his brother was recalled to become Alaafin once again.

Religion did not exist on Earth before Christianity. All cultures had their spirituality and they adhered to it. Hopefully the whole world will return to that era of spiritual peace and tranquility

MEEVEET:
You want monarchy in a country that's not a nation? ... Lmaooo where have you seen that happen before?

Solution to Nigeria is simply what the British advice us to do in 1956 ... Divide Nigeria into 10 regions of semi independent regions let everyone grow at their own pace ...

But nah we don't want the obvious solution we are looking for imaginary solutions

And when Nigeria is divided into different regions what system of leadership would we use in those regions? I am referring to reviving the current system of monarchy we practice in the different regions of Nigeria and updating it to improve effectiveness and reduce corruption. Furthermore, if Nigeria is divided into smaller regions, independent yet working together as one country for their benefit — it would still need some kind of "overseeing house" that will be able to supersede the authority of the various monarchs on matters of economic benefit to the whole nation. I believe an updated monarchy system similar to what I have described in my original poster would be the best system for this "overseeing house" as well as for the various regions or tribes.

Day169:
Monarchs in Nigeria have been totally demystified by first past military governments and now the political class. They have since lost the prestige they once had.
People of questionable character now jostle for recognition as high chiefs as traditional rulers, so where do we begin?

Hi. You make a very good point. I do not think we can start with the monarchs as they are. That does not necessarily mean we have to throw all the current monarchs out from the get go. We would however need to set and enforce clear standards of what it means to be a monarch in a new and reformed system. If the monarchs refuse to live up to these rules that serve their people, then they have no use to be in power and should be made to step down.

steadygo:
I think monarchy is may be the best system of government. It allows for a leader to dedicate their entire life to serve you whereas in a presidential system, leaders only have a few years in office and can be easily influenced or even installed by the corrupt wealthy individuals. Going deeper, in a monarchy, the current monarch can pick an heir from birth and prepare them from the earliest stage of life to become a capable ruler. The heir also has a first-person view to the reigning monarch's rule; they are able to learn directly, every day, by watching them lead. Monarchy gives us the best prospects for a great leader. What do you think?

Ah yes, at last someone has finally recognized my destiny.

As a Norwegian, I graciously accept your invitation to become King of Nigeria. It’s only logical. My Viking ancestors were practically born with crowns and axes, and the word “viking” already contains “king,” so clearly, fate has spoken.

Don’t worry, I’ll rule benevolently. I will sit on a golden throne made of melted down generators, declare NEPA illegal, and ensure that all roads are paved before my coronation feast of suya and lutefisk. I will also knight the first person who teaches the entire country how to pronounce “Svalbard.”

Norway has absolutely nothing Nigeria needs except snow, fish, and unsolicited opinions, but I’ll bring them anyway. By the time I’m done, Nigeria will have the punctuality of Scandinavia, the bravery of Vikings, and the calm patience of someone who has queued for JAMB results.

As my first royal culinary decree, Nigerian jollof rice shall be officially recognized as the best in the world. Let Ghana say whatever it wants. The crown has spoken.

Of course, every great kingdom needs entertainment, so I will appoint a royal jester. Preferably someone who thinks monarchy is the solution to Nigeria’s problems. At least they are already experienced in telling jokes.

Please prepare the crown, the royal palace, and a ceremonial goat. My longship is already parked at Tarkwa Bay.

Royal Decrees of the Kingdom of Nigeriask

By the authority vested in me by my Viking blood and impeccable sense of drama, I hereby issue the following decrees for the amusement, terror, and occasional enlightenment of my subjects:

Sex shall be a spectator sport. All participants must wear matching velvet capes and top hats. Commentary shall be provided by the royal jester. Tickets are mandatory. Popcorn will be served.

All cows must learn to waltz. Those who refuse shall be conscripted into the Royal Ballet of Bovine Elegance.

Nap time is compulsory at 3 PM daily. Anyone caught refusing a nap shall be sentenced to reading Norse poetry aloud while standing on one foot.

Every citizen must own at least one ridiculous hat. The more feathers, bells, and glitter, the higher your social standing.

All meetings must begin with a dramatic entrance. Failure to do so results in immediate exile to the ceremonial goat pen.

Royal proclamations shall be delivered via interpretive dance whenever possible. Traditional speech is considered barbaric and highly uncivilized.

All official disputes shall be settled by competitive yodeling. Judges will be appointed by the royal jester.

Nigerian jollof rice remains the official food of the kingdom. Anyone caught questioning this shall be forced to eat only lutefisk for one month.

Sunday mornings are reserved for dragon riding. Helmets and mandatory Viking war cries are required. Failure to comply will be met with royal eye-rolls and sarcastic applause.

Every citizen must bow to my longship upon sight. It has feelings too and deserves recognition for its loyalty.

These decrees are final, binding, and utterly ridiculous. Any complaints should be addressed to the royal jester, who is legally required to laugh at you.

Long live the Kingdom of Nigeriask 👑🛡️🛶

Monarchy system of governance is a total failure. If it worked, we wouldn't have had the likes of King Charles.

odejimioflagos:
Monarchy system of governance is a total failure. If it worked, we wouldn't have had the likes of King Charles.

Ah yes, clearly monarchy has failed… just look at King Charles. But fear not, for I am not English, and my reign comes with slightly more Viking flair. All hail King Sven, master of axes, longships, and possibly slightly better judgment than a man who spent decades waiting for a title.

Who’s ready for mandatory jollof feasts and compulsory nap times in my kingdom?

The monarchy system is a good alternative to democracy.

HgAkpobomeEr:
The monarchy system is a good alternative to democracy.

A monarchy sounds romantic until you remember one critical detail: Nigeria is not a homogenous country. You do not have one people with one identity who see themselves first as Nigerians. You have multiple ethnic blocs, each with its own history, heroes, grievances, and suspicion of the others. Now imagine placing a crown on just one head. What happens next?

If the king is Yoruba, the Igbo will scream marginalization.
If the king is Hausa Fulani, the South will accuse him of domination.
If the king is Igbo, the North will demand secession before breakfast.
If you rotate the crown, every tribe will still see the king as a temporary enemy in a robe.

Monarchy depends on one thing Nigeria does not have: a unified cultural loyalty. Monarchies survive when the citizens believe the crown represents everyone. Nigerians do not even trust each other over rice recipes, talk less of eternal national allegiance.

In fact, Nigeria would not have a king. Nigeria would have a tribal warlord with a better wardrobe.

And here is the irony: the same people shouting for monarchy are the same ones who cannot tolerate a governor from another tribe. You want a king? A permanent ruler? In a country where people argue over flags, names, borders, language, food, history, and even the correct way to pray?

A monarchy in Nigeria would last three weeks before:

One tribe claims the king is biased,
Another calls for self determination,
Someone somewhere shouts "not my king,"
And the South East forms a committee to create their own crown.

Unless of course, they make me king.

I have no tribe here, no ancestral enemies, no uncle waiting for a contract, and no hidden agenda. My only loyalty would be to my throne, my royal goat, and ensuring no one cooks jollof rice without a license.

In summary: monarchy in Nigeria is impossible, impractical, and guaranteed to collapse faster than NEPA power supply… unless King Sven rules. In that case, everybody gets suya and nobody fights. Problem solved.

The supporters of monarchy system should go and reside in countries where monarchy system is being practiced.

Why are they not advocating for the same system in other regions of Nigeria?

Fenrir:
A monarchy sounds romantic until you remember one critical detail: Nigeria is not a homogenous country. You do not have one people with one identity who see themselves first as Nigerians. You have multiple ethnic blocs, each with its own history, heroes, grievances, and suspicion of the others. Now imagine placing a crown on just one head. What happens next?

If the king is Yoruba, the Igbo will scream marginalization.
If the king is Hausa Fulani, the South will accuse him of domination.
If the king is Igbo, the North will demand secession before breakfast.
If you rotate the crown, every tribe will still see the king as a temporary enemy in a robe.

Monarchy depends on one thing Nigeria does not have: a unified cultural loyalty. Monarchies survive when the citizens believe the crown represents everyone. Nigerians do not even trust each other over rice recipes, talk less of eternal national allegiance.

In fact, Nigeria would not have a king. Nigeria would have a tribal warlord with a better wardrobe.

And here is the irony: the same people shouting for monarchy are the same ones who cannot tolerate a governor from another tribe. You want a king? A permanent ruler? In a country where people argue over flags, names, borders, language, food, history, and even the correct way to pray?

A monarchy in Nigeria would last three weeks before:

One tribe claims the king is biased,
Another calls for self determination,
Someone somewhere shouts "not my king,"
And the South East forms a committee to create their own crown.

Unless of course, they make me king.

I have no tribe here, no ancestral enemies, no uncle waiting for a contract, and no hidden agenda. My only loyalty would be to my throne, my royal goat, and ensuring no one cooks jollof rice without a license.

In summary: monarchy in Nigeria is impossible, impractical, and guaranteed to collapse faster than NEPA power supply… unless King Sven rules. In that case, everybody gets suya and nobody fights. Problem solved.

Yes, of course a single king cannot rule of Nigeria. My post was to imply our forms of monarchy before colonization, which was not a single king but multiple kings across many independent tribes. I think that system worked better and when I think of it, I see no reason why it cannot be updated to work today as opposed to the western form of democracy we have now. I do think that even across all tribes of Nigeria and their monarchies or traditional systems for tribes which do not have monarchies, we still will need a unifying system. And I suspect a monarchy-like system will also be better for such a unifying system.

I take your suggestion of being the ruler of Nigeria as a joke.

steadygo:
Yes, of course a single king cannot rule of Nigeria. My post was to imply our forms of monarchy before colonization, which was not a single king but multiple kings across many independent tribes. I think that system worked better and when I think of it, I see no reason why it cannot be updated to work today as opposed to the western form of democracy we have now. I do think that even across all tribes of Nigeria and their monarchies or traditional systems for tribes which do not have monarchies, we still will need a unifying system. And I suspect a monarchy-like system will also be better for such a unifying system.

I take your suggestion of being the ruler of Nigeria as a joke.

Steadygo,

You are accidentally far more honest than you realize.

You say you took my coronation as a joke, yet your reply is the punchline because you have positioned yourself as exactly what I implied the jester who takes himself seriously.

A jester doesn’t know he is the entertainment.
He thinks he is part of the throne room because he stands near the king.
He mistakes proximity for power.

That is you.

Now, let us dismantle your argument piece by piece.

1. Your “multiple monarchies” already exist and already failed

You speak as though Nigeria has no kings and needs new ones.

Are you unaware of what country you live in?

You already have

Obas
Ezes
Obis
Emirs
Tor Tiv
Amanayabo
Olu
Sarki
And dozens of equivalents across over 371 tribes

Nigeria is a monarchy farm.
There are more crowns than functioning roads.

If traditional authority were the magical solution you imagine, Nigeria would be utopia by now.

Instead, what do these kings do

Fight over land
Collect homage
Meddle in marriages
Sell endorsements to politicians
Turn culture into commerce
Weaponize identity for influence

Your proposed return to monarchy is not innovation. It is expanding a system that is already failing on a tribal scale into a national catastrophe.

2. You want a unifying monarch in a country where tribes cannot tolerate each other

You proved my point without realizing it

“I suspect we will still need a unifying system”

Nigeria cannot unify around

Language
Religion
History
National holidays
A flag
A name
Even the pronunciation of jollof

Yet somehow your solution is

“Let’s crown more kings”

That is not politics.
It is cosplay with consequences.

3. Your worldview is not monarchist. It is tribal isolationism wearing royal perfume

Your every reply follows the same pattern

Attack the outsider
Prioritize tribe over logic
Use culture as a shield from accountability
Pretend criticism equals disrespect

That is not the mindset of a monarchist.

It is the mindset of a gatekeeper terrified of foreign scrutiny.

Your rhetoric reveals the truth

You do not want a king.
You want a tribal referee who silences perspectives you dislike.

A monarchy cannot exist in a mind that treats every foreign thought as an invasion.

That is not unity.

That is xenophobia with grammar.

4. Monarchies require trust. Nigeria has suspicion baked into its DNA

Historical monarchies thrived because subjects believed

The king represented them
The throne was sacred
Identity flowed upward

In Nigeria identity flows sideways

People are Yoruba first, Igbo first, Hausa first, Fulani first and Nigerian only during football matches or visa applications.

Your argument collapses on contact with reality.

You are trying to build a skyscraper on quicksand and ego.

5. The checkmate

You unintentionally confirmed the original claim

Nigeria does not reject monarchy because it is Western.

Nigeria rejects monarchy because Nigerians cannot agree on who deserves to rule even in theory.

Your response proves it

You could not engage the argument without attacking identity.
You could not debate without defending tribe.
You could not imagine leadership without suspicion of outsiders.

A nation that cannot tolerate criticism cannot enthrone a king.

And the man who reacts to foreign presence like a territorial rooster is not proposing monarchy.

He is auditioning for head jester.


Your suggestion is not visionary.
It is nostalgia dipped in insecurity.

You do not defend monarchy.

You defend a tribal echo chamber where unfamiliar voices must be mocked, minimized, or dismissed.

A king needs loyalty.
A jester needs an audience.
Your replies make clear which one you are.

The jester is always the loudest in the hall because he is the only one who fears silence.

Ji

steadygo:
I think monarchy is may be the best system of government. It allows for a leader to dedicate their entire life to serve you whereas in a presidential system, leaders only have a few years in office and can be easily influenced or even installed by the corrupt wealthy individuals. Going deeper, in a monarchy, the current monarch can pick an heir from birth and prepare them from the earliest stage of life to become a capable ruler. The heir also has a first-person view to the reigning monarch's rule; they are able to learn directly, every day, by watching them lead. Monarchy gives us the best prospects for a great leader. What do you think?

Some of you sha

Una never allow Igbo president, then think an Igbo king who would pick an Igbo heir?

Nigeria has never had monarchy system so what're you trying to bring back

mrvitalis:
Ji
Some of you sha

Una never allow Igbo president, then think an Igbo king who would pick an Igbo heir?

Hey, rent a gob.
Keyboard warrior, where's this video call?

lawani:
So far there is a committee above the King that can overrule him or her on anything and also be able to sack him or her without notice or ceremony it can work

But we had that in the past!

It was called the Oyo Mesi.

A council of powerful chiefs and traditional priests that would be watching you like hawks if you are the Oba.

Any sign of nonsense or corruption from you, and then would send you an AROKO message (message of objects) featuring an order for you to commit suicide, or be sent to the great beyond by force!!

Of course this system if re-adopted, will be less harsh than olden times, as per the king, but it can still work..

Then again, the reason they ordered him to commit suicide was to prevent him from plotting against the new king.....

Kemetian:
But we had that in the past!

It was called the Oyo Mesi.

A council of powerful chiefs and traditional priests that would be watching you like hawks if you are the Oba.

Any sign of nonsense or corruption from you, and then would send you an AROKO message (message of objects) featuring an order for you to commit suicide, or be sent to the great beyond by force!!

Of course this system if re-adopted, will be less harsh than olden times, as per the king, but it can still work..

Then again, the reason they ordered him to commit suicide was to prevent him from plotting against the new king.....

Usually the king would be given a covered calabash with a parrot's egg inside.
Once the king opens the calabash and sees the egg his soul is taken.

What if a heir apparent ascends the throne early in life but become deviant, vain and self absorbed with power rather than serving the people, what become of that 'kingdom'?
.. no be "gobe" be dat??

Kemetian:
But we had that in the past!

It was called the Oyo Mesi.

A council of powerful chiefs and traditional priests that would be watching you like hawks if you are the Oba.

Any sign of nonsense or corruption from you, and then would send you an AROKO message (message of objects) featuring an order for you to commit suicide, or be sent to the great beyond by force!!

Of course this system if re-adopted, will be less harsh than olden times, as per the king, but it can still work..

Then again, the reason they ordered him to commit suicide was to prevent him from plotting against the new king.....

Yes the Oyomesi was the highest council of the Ogboni in Oyo. In Ijesa it is the Agba Ijesa. Every free man in Yoruba land belonged to the Ogboni. However it is not really true that the only way to remove or depose a King is to ask him to commit suicide. You will be asked to commit suicide only if you as a king committed a comeasurate crime. The elder brother of Sango was replaced with Sango but was later recalled after Sango's demise. I have forgotten his name. The same thing was common in Ijesa. If you see the Ijesa king list you will see some names occurring more than once. They were sacked and later recalled.

steadygo:
And when Nigeria is divided into different regions what system of leadership would we use in those regions? I am referring to reviving the current system of monarchy we practice in the different regions of Nigeria and updating it to improve effectiveness and reduce corruption. Furthermore, if Nigeria is divided into smaller regions, independent yet working together as one country for their benefit — it would still need some kind of "overseeing house" that will be able to supersede the authority of the various monarchs on matters of economic benefit to the whole nation. I believe an updated monarchy system similar to what I have described in my original poster would be the best system for this "overseeing house" as well as for the various regions or tribes.

Monarchy cannot work for regions. Take South West for example: who will be the paramount ruler of that entire region? Is it Ooni or Alaafin? What do you expect of other Kings in that region? The Soun, Timi of Ede, Akran of Badagry, Awujale of Ijebu, Alake of Egba?

Do you think these monarchs will submit to be under any other king as chiefs?

Monarchy can only work for a very small region of people with the same ideology.

The other way to have a sole king is by going to wars and battles.

Democracy is still the better option.