₦airaland Forum

CreativeOrbit:
Your argument misses the entire point. Nobody claimed Nigeria fits perfectly into Western ideological labels; the reference to 'left' and 'right' was analytical, not cultural. Political science uses these frameworks to classify ideological behavior, not to impose Western identity. So dismissing them as 'absurd' only exposes a shallow understanding of comparative political analysis.

What’s truly absurd is pretending Nigeria’s political chaos defies ideological discussion, when the same politicians freely borrow Western-style constitutions, democratic institutions, and economic models. You can’t enjoy Western governance structures and then cry 'Western construct' when ideology is discussed. That’s intellectual inconsistency at best and lazy deflection at worst.

The point stands: APC and PDP are ideologically hollow shells driven by opportunism, not principle. And if you can’t distinguish them, it’s not because 'left and right' are Western ideas—it’s because both parties have no spine, no coherence, and no ideological compass to begin with.

Oh. But you can pick and choose from among western ideals. There are no rules.

I mean... If Left and Right works for the Nigerian context, then you'll be able to easily categorise the existing parties along those lines. But you can't.

Meanwhile, the APC is clearly an association of tribalist. The PDP, on the other hand, is rudderless and doesn't know what it is doing. But you can't accuse them of being as tribalistic as the APC.

olyrayy:
I don't think Buhari had any goal. Except to warm chair.



This is untrue. The truly nationalist PDP leaders were Obasanjo and Yar'Adua. Jonathan was a bit clannish. And... The Obasanjo administatration was very effective. Primarily because it didn't really care about the tribe of a person as long as they could do the job.

Compare that with someone like Buhari who would put his kinsmen in a position whether or not he was fit.

Obasanjo sacked lots of military officers when he got into power, some of those officers had a history of coup plotting but there were others who were sacked simply so that it wouldnt look like Obasanjo was favouring the South.

Yaradua got elected primarily because he was a Northerner and because he was the younger brother of Late Shehu Yaradua who was killed by Abacha.

Goodluck was elected because of Niger Delta crisis and him being vice to Yaradua.

None of the candidates had any solid political base like Buhari or Tinubu.

Without Buhari majority of Nigerians wouldnt be using Opay or Palmpay and would instead be relying on the unstable Nigerian banks.

Without Buhari Nnamdi Kanu wouldnt be locked up, he would either be roaming around unfiltered or worse - killed.

olyrayy:
Oh. But you can pick and choose from among western ideals. There are no rules.

I mean... If Left and Right works for the Nigerian context, then you'll be able to easily categorise the existing parties along those lines. But you can't.

Meanwhile, the APC is clearly an association of tribalist. The PDP, on the other hand, is rudderless and doesn't know what it is doing. But you can't accuse them of being as tribalistic as the APC.

You’re missing the crux of my argument. I’m not defending the APC—or Tinubu for that matter—nor am I attempting to fit Nigeria neatly into a Western ideological box. My point was that political behavior, even in hybrid democracies like Nigeria’s, can still be analyzed through ideological frameworks. That’s not “picking and choosing Western ideals”; it’s applying universal analytical tools to understand our political dysfunction.

You’re absolutely right that APC is tribalistic and PDP is directionless—but that only reinforces my argument. Both lack ideological grounding, operating instead on patronage, ethnicity, and personal ambition. That vacuum is precisely why ideological classification becomes difficult—it’s not because the framework is irrelevant, but because our political actors have no coherent ideology to measure against it.

So let’s be clear: I have no allegiance to APC, PDP, or Tinubu. My concern is Nigeria’s political decay and the intellectual laziness that prevents us from diagnosing it with the same analytical rigor we apply to other democracies.

CreativeOrbit:
You’re missing the crux of my argument. I’m not defending the APC—or Tinubu for that matter—nor am I attempting to fit Nigeria neatly into a Western ideological box. My point was that political behavior, even in hybrid democracies like Nigeria’s, can still be analyzed through ideological frameworks. That’s not “picking and choosing Western ideals”; it’s applying universal analytical tools to understand our political dysfunction.

You’re absolutely right that APC is tribalistic and PDP is directionless—but that only reinforces my argument. Both lack ideological grounding, operating instead on patronage, ethnicity, and personal ambition. That vacuum is precisely why ideological classification becomes difficult—it’s not because the framework is irrelevant, but because our political actors have no coherent ideology to measure against it.

So let’s be clear: I have no allegiance to APC, PDP, or Tinubu. My concern is Nigeria’s political decay and the intellectual laziness that prevents us from diagnosing it with the same analytical rigor we apply to other democracies.

That's the thing. You think that since none of the major parties espouse Western left-right ideology, then they lack ideologies.

Meanwhile, they espouse ideologies (tribalism/nationalism), but because those ideologies don't fit into a Western box, you don't recognize them as ideologies.

olyrayy:
That's the thing. You think that since none of the major parties espouse Western left-right ideology, then they lack ideologies.

Meanwhile, they espouse ideologies (tribalism/nationalism), but because those ideologies don't fit into a Western box, you don't recognize them as ideologies.

You make a fair point, but tribalism and nationalism in Nigeria function more as instruments of power than as coherent ideologies.

An ideology, properly speaking, offers a structured worldview, policy direction, and moral or economic philosophy—none of which tribal politics provides.

What we see is not an alternative ideological framework but the absence of one, replaced by identity-based opportunism.

Recognizing that distinction isn’t Western bias—it’s intellectual precision.

CreativeOrbit:
You make a fair point, but tribalism and nationalism in Nigeria function more as instruments of power than as coherent ideologies.

That's how ideologies work everywhere in the world.

CreativeOrbit:
An ideology, properly speaking, offers a structured worldview, policy direction, and moral or economic philosophy—none of which tribal politics provides.

According to who?

And besides, who says tribal/national politics don't provide that. The Yoruba ronus definitely have enough policy suggestions/direction. Even a moral/economic philosophy too.

I still think you look down on it because it is uniquely Nigerian and not foreign.

And who is that one person always liking your posts sef.