₦airaland Forum

When the Bully Starts Crying: The Obidient Problem.

One of the most revealing things about the Obidient movement is not only what it says, but how it behaves. It is loud when attacking others, but fragile when the same fire is returned. That contradiction is not accidental. It is the psychology of a confused bully-mob.

A normal political movement accepts scrutiny as part of democracy. A bully-mob accepts scrutiny only when it is directed at others. Once attention turns toward its own camp, it begins to squeal about persecution, bias, and unfairness. That is why Obidients can spend months mocking Tinubu, Atiku, Soludo, APC, ADC, NDC, and almost anybody who disagrees with them, yet suddenly become emotional when Peter Obi receives sharp criticism in return. What changed? Nothing — except the direction of the cannon.

That is how mob bullies behave. They do not really believe in free speech, robust debate, or scrutiny as a principle. What they want is a monopoly of aggression. [/i]They want to throw stones without hearing the sound of broken glass behind them. They want the right to mock, insult, and pressure everybody else, but they do not want anybody else to answer in the same language. [i]So they keep trying to occupy two opposite moral positions at once: fearsome aggressor on Monday, helpless victim by Tuesday.

That is why their politics often looks confused. Yesterday, negative attention to Tinubu meant accountability. Today, negative attention to Obi means obsession. Yesterday, sharp criticism was civic courage. Today, it is “too much focus” on a private citizen.

The deeper danger is that this behaviour produces political delusion. Once a movement begins to romanticize all criticism as proof of secret strength, it loses the ability to self-correct. Instead of asking, “Why are people pushing back against us?” it begins to flatter itself with fantasies: “We are too important. They are afraid of us. The attacks prove we already won.”

That is how movements detach from reality. They stop studying voters and begin studying enemies. They stop building persuasion and begin rehearsing victimhood.

In the end, a bully-mob is always shocked by resistance because it mistakes its own noise for moral superiority. But noise is not virtue. Aggression is not argument. And mob energy is not leadership.
The Obidient problem, therefore, is not merely that they are loud. It is that they are loud without symmetry — eager to dish out scrutiny, but unable to digest it when it returns.

CharlesCNG:
When the Bully Starts Crying: The Obidient Problem.

One of the most revealing things about the Obidient movement is not only what it says, but how it behaves. It is loud when attacking others, but fragile when the same fire is returned. That contradiction is not accidental. It is the psychology of a confused bully-mob.

A normal political movement accepts scrutiny as part of democracy. A bully-mob accepts scrutiny only when it is directed at others. Once attention turns toward its own camp, it begins to squeal about persecution, bias, and unfairness. That is why Obidients can spend months mocking Tinubu, Atiku, Soludo, APC, ADC, NDC, and almost anybody who disagrees with them, yet suddenly become emotional when Peter Obi receives sharp criticism in return. What changed? Nothing — except the direction of the cannon.

That is how mob bullies behave. They do not really believe in free speech, robust debate, or scrutiny as a principle. What they want is a monopoly of aggression. [/i]They want to throw stones without hearing the sound of broken glass behind them. They want the right to mock, insult, and pressure everybody else, but they do not want anybody else to answer in the same language. [i]So they keep trying to occupy two opposite moral positions at once: fearsome aggressor on Monday, helpless victim by Tuesday.

That is why their politics often looks confused. Yesterday, negative attention to Tinubu meant accountability. Today, negative attention to Obi means obsession. Yesterday, sharp criticism was civic courage. Today, it is “too much focus” on a private citizen.

The deeper danger is that this behaviour produces political delusion. Once a movement begins to romanticize all criticism as proof of secret strength, it loses the ability to self-correct. Instead of asking, “Why are people pushing back against us?” it begins to flatter itself with fantasies: “We are too important. They are afraid of us. The attacks prove we already won.”

That is how movements detach from reality. They stop studying voters and begin studying enemies. They stop building persuasion and begin rehearsing victimhood.

In the end, a bully-mob is always shocked by resistance because it mistakes its own noise for moral superiority. But noise is not virtue. Aggression is not argument. And mob energy is not leadership.
The Obidient problem, therefore, is not merely that they are loud. It is that they are loud without symmetry — eager to dish out scrutiny, but unable to digest it when it returns.

Name one thing just one that Obidient do or have done that APC guys haven’t done worse

Just one

the system made Obidients who they are
The Nigerian youth has longed for hope even before they were born
But instead of them to find answers in themselves, they rather look for another savior
The Utopia they crave isn’t the work of any politician, it’s in the work of each citizens
America isn’t great because they had a leader that was a saint, it’s because each citizens took responsibility of their immediate community

Just like every worker, you want to amass enough wealth from your line of work therefore politicians will always be politicians as long as we are in democracy
One reason I’ll always applaud Tinubu is the Local Government autonomy
It’s easier to confront your local government official and councilors about the road leading to your house and other basic amenities are easier to demand knowing the amount of allocation disbursed to your LG
Getting your pvc shouldn’t be to wait every 4yrs to make a decision. If in every community, at least 50% has their pvc, it’s easy to to create community group that make demands on how the community should be
Little community groups like that can join hand and make higher demands from Governors till the top

No democratic society is corruption free
But lack of accountability breeds absolute corruption which is the main problem with this country
Politicians just like any other profession will spend your money when you don’t demand accountability about it
Your local government is receiving about 500m in allocation and no one is asking about it
The people that should ask all want to go to Abuja to chase clout. Local chairman will spend it and heaven will not fall

Even VDM can’t account for every money in his NGO
And that doesn’t mean he meant bad for the people the money is supposed to go to

mrvitalis:
Name one thing just one that Obidient do or have done that APC guys haven’t done worse

Just one

My Goodness! You Obidients can deflect for Africa!!. 😁

I know exactly what you are trying to do. It is straight from the Obidient playbook:

Deflect. Derail. Change the subject.

I wrote an article about the behaviour, psychology and tactics of the Obidient movement.

Instead of addressing a single point raised, you immediately jumped to:

But what about APC?"

That is not a rebuttal. It is an escape route.

Whether APC supporters have done worse, better or the same is completely irrelevant to the truth or falsehood of the points I raised.

If I write an article about armed robbery, the response is not:
"Name one thing kidnappers have not done worse."

Address the argument.

Did I misrepresent Obidient behaviour?

Did I invent the abuse culture?

Did I invent the messianic tendencies?

Did I invent the constant persecution complex?

Did I invent the tendency to attack neutrals who refuse to worship Peter Obi?

Those are the questions.

You see, one hallmark of a confused bully-mob is its inability to engage criticism directly.

Everything becomes:
"What about APC?"

"What about Tinubu?"

"What about Buhari?"

Anything except the subject under discussion.

So thank you for beautifully demonstrating one of the very traits the article was describing.

You didn't rebut it.

You performed it. 😂

They will confirm their attributes on this thread.

People wey no dey think again

UrPapa:
the system made Obidients who they are
The Nigerian youth has longed for hope even before they were born
But instead of them to find answers in themselves, they rather look for another savior
The Utopia they crave isn’t the work of any politician, it’s in the work of each citizens
America isn’t great because they had a leader that was a saint, it’s because each citizens took responsibility of their immediate community

Just like every worker, you want to amass enough wealth from your line of work therefore politicians will always be politicians as long as we are in democracy
One reason I’ll always applaud Tinubu is the Local Government autonomy
It’s easier to confront your local government official and councilors about the road leading to your house and other basic amenities are easier to demand knowing the amount of allocation disbursed to your LG
Getting your pvc shouldn’t be to wait every 4yrs to make a decision. If in every community, at least 50% has their pvc, it’s easy to to create community group that make demands on how the community should be
Little community groups like that can join hand and make higher demands from Governors till the top

No democratic society is corruption free
But lack of accountability breeds absolute corruption which is the main problem with this country
Politicians just like any other profession will spend your money when you don’t demand accountability about it
Your local government is receiving about 500m in allocation and no one is asking about it
The people that should ask all want to go to Abuja to chase clout. Local chairman will spend it and heaven will not fall

This is the most intelligent defence of Obidients I have seen so far, but it still proves my point.

Yes, the Nigerian system created mass frustration. Yes, young people are desperate for hope. Yes, citizens must stop waiting for messiahs and start demanding accountability from councillors, chairmen, governors and presidents.

On that, I agree.

And yes, Tinubu deserves credit for pushing local government autonomy. The Supreme Court’s July 2024 judgment affirmed financial autonomy for Nigeria’s 774 local governments and stopped governors from withholding council funds. That is a major accountability tool.

But here is where your argument turns against Obidients.

If the problem is that Nigerian youths keep looking for saviours, then what exactly is the Obi movement?

Is it not the clearest example of political messiah worship?

Peter Obi was sold as the pure redeemer who would magically fix Nigeria. Yet he struggles to articulate specific alternatives beyond “Tinubu bad.” He called existing party structures “structures of criminality,” only to later align with the same old political class he once condemned.

So either Obidients are victims of the same saviour syndrome you described, or Peter Obi exploited their hunger for hope.

You cannot condemn messiah politics generally and exempt the loudest messiah movement in modern Nigerian politics.

That is the contradiction.

Local accountability is the future.

But Obi worship is not accountability.

It is just another version of waiting for one man to save everybody.

CharlesCNG:
This is the most intelligent defence of Obidients I have seen so far, but it still proves my point.

Yes, the Nigerian system created mass frustration. Yes, young people are desperate for hope. Yes, citizens must stop waiting for messiahs and start demanding accountability from councillors, chairmen, governors and presidents.

On that, I agree.

And yes, Tinubu deserves credit for pushing local government autonomy. The Supreme Court’s July 2024 judgment affirmed financial autonomy for Nigeria’s 774 local governments and stopped governors from withholding council funds. That is a major accountability tool.

But here is where your argument turns against Obidients.

If the problem is that Nigerian youths keep looking for saviours, then what exactly is the Obi movement?

Is it not the clearest example of political messiah worship?

Peter Obi was sold as the pure redeemer who would magically fix Nigeria. Yet he struggles to articulate specific alternatives beyond “Tinubu bad.” He called existing party structures “structures of criminality,” only to later align with the same old political class he once condemned.

So either Obidients are victims of the same saviour syndrome you described, or Peter Obi exploited their hunger for hope.

You cannot condemn messiah politics generally and exempt the loudest messiah movement in modern Nigerian politics.

That is the contradiction.

Local accountability is the future.

But Obi worship is not accountability.

It is just another version of waiting for one man to save everybody.

Obi is your nightmare.

HIGHESTPOPORI:
Obi is your nightmare.

Thank you for confirming one of the central points of the article. 😁

The article discussed how many Obidients often respond to criticism not with facts or counterarguments, but with slogans, projections and personality cult reflexes.

I wrote several paragraphs.

Your response was:

"Obi is your nightmare."

That's it.

No rebuttal.

No evidence.

No engagement.

Just a slogan.

Now for the rhetorical question:

Obidients talk about Tinubu morning, afternoon and night. By your logic, does that mean Tinubu is their nightmare?

Of course not.

Discussing, analysing or criticising a politician does not make him your nightmare.

Otherwise, political commentators would spend their lives being haunted by the people they discuss. 😂

My brother, your response is like a student who receives a three-page examination question and answers by writing only his candidate number.

You did not challenge the argument.

You merely illustrated it.

Time of THREAD..

5.15am

CharlesCNG

CharlesCNG:
My Goodness! You Obidients can deflect for Africa!!. 😁

I know exactly what you are trying to do. It is straight from the Obidient playbook:

Deflect. Derail. Change the subject.

I wrote an article about the behaviour, psychology and tactics of the Obidient movement.

Instead of addressing a single point raised, you immediately jumped to:

But what about APC?"

That is not a rebuttal. It is an escape route.

Whether APC supporters have done worse, better or the same is completely irrelevant to the truth or falsehood of the points I raised.

If I write an article about armed robbery, the response is not:
"Name one thing kidnappers have not done worse."

Address the argument.

Did I misrepresent Obidient behaviour?

Did I invent the abuse culture?

Did I invent the messianic tendencies?

Did I invent the constant persecution complex?

Did I invent the tendency to attack neutrals who refuse to worship Peter Obi?

Those are the questions.

You see, one hallmark of a confused bully-mob is its inability to engage criticism directly.

Everything becomes:
"What about APC?"

"What about Tinubu?"

"What about Buhari?"

Anything except the subject under discussion.

So thank you for beautifully demonstrating one of the very traits the article was describing.

You didn't rebut it.

You performed it. 😂

Bros name one thing Obidient do that APC didn’t do

You can’t because there is absolutely none
Apc guys were way worse

CharlesCNG:
Thank you for confirming one of the central points of the article. 😁

The article discussed how many Obidients often respond to criticism not with facts or counterarguments, but with slogans, projections and personality cult reflexes.

I wrote several paragraphs.

Your response was:

"Obi is your nightmare."

That's it.

No rebuttal.

No evidence.

No engagement.

Just a slogan.

Now for the rhetorical question:

Obidients talk about Tinubu morning, afternoon and night. By your logic, does that mean Tinubu is their nightmare?

Of course not.

Discussing, analysing or criticising a politician does not make him your nightmare.

Otherwise, political commentators would spend their lives being haunted by the people they discuss. 😂

My brother, your response is like a student who receives a three-page examination question and answers by writing only his candidate number.

You did not challenge the argument.

You merely illustrated it.

Nobody takes your paid writeups against Obi serious.

HIGHESTPOPORI:
Nobody takes your paid writeups against Obi serious.

arguing with a mad man pays than arguing with an obedient

Imagine what one of your obidient wrote on Twitter yesterday

CharlesCNG:
Thank you for confirming one of the central points of the article. 😁

The article discussed how many Obidients often respond to criticism not with facts or counterarguments, but with slogans, projections and personality cult reflexes.

I wrote several paragraphs.

Your response was:

"Obi is your nightmare."

That's it.

No rebuttal.

No evidence.

No engagement.

Just a slogan.

Now for the rhetorical question:

Obidients talk about Tinubu morning, afternoon and night. By your logic, does that mean Tinubu is their nightmare?

Of course not.

Discussing, analysing or criticising a politician does not make him your nightmare.

Otherwise, political commentators would spend their lives being haunted by the people they discuss. 😂

My brother, your response is like a student who receives a three-page examination question and answers by writing only his candidate number.

You did not challenge the argument.

You merely illustrated it.

guy it's like u r new here n u don't know about those quarter to craze people, the way their brain is wired ehn even a mad man go shock

Just imagine what one of them wrote on Twitter yesterday n those are the same people we argue with everyday

Imagine someone who believe he have sense believe the president will resign n the next person will b obi cos he was the first person to say it


Just imagine reasoning of someone who claim to b sane

CharlesCNG:
When the Bully Starts Crying: The Obidient Problem.

One of the most revealing things about the Obidient movement is not only what it says, but how it behaves. It is loud when attacking others, but fragile when the same fire is returned. That contradiction is not accidental. It is the psychology of a confused bully-mob.

A normal political movement accepts scrutiny as part of democracy. A bully-mob accepts scrutiny only when it is directed at others. Once attention turns toward its own camp, it begins to squeal about persecution, bias, and unfairness. That is why Obidients can spend months mocking Tinubu, Atiku, Soludo, APC, ADC, NDC, and almost anybody who disagrees with them, yet suddenly become emotional when Peter Obi receives sharp criticism in return. What changed? Nothing — except the direction of the cannon.

That is how mob bullies behave. They do not really believe in free speech, robust debate, or scrutiny as a principle. What they want is a monopoly of aggression. [/i]They want to throw stones without hearing the sound of broken glass behind them. They want the right to mock, insult, and pressure everybody else, but they do not want anybody else to answer in the same language. [i]So they keep trying to occupy two opposite moral positions at once: fearsome aggressor on Monday, helpless victim by Tuesday.

That is why their politics often looks confused. Yesterday, negative attention to Tinubu meant accountability. Today, negative attention to Obi means obsession. Yesterday, sharp criticism was civic courage. Today, it is “too much focus” on a private citizen.

The deeper danger is that this behaviour produces political delusion. Once a movement begins to romanticize all criticism as proof of secret strength, it loses the ability to self-correct. Instead of asking, “Why are people pushing back against us?” it begins to flatter itself with fantasies: “We are too important. They are afraid of us. The attacks prove we already won.”

That is how movements detach from reality. They stop studying voters and begin studying enemies. They stop building persuasion and begin rehearsing victimhood.

In the end, a bully-mob is always shocked by resistance because it mistakes its own noise for moral superiority. But noise is not virtue. Aggression is not argument. And mob energy is not leadership.
The Obidient problem, therefore, is not merely that they are loud. It is that they are loud without symmetry — eager to dish out scrutiny, but unable to digest it when it returns.

chai

This comment shows how unintelligent obidents are. So from all the OP carefully articulated this is the senseless question you can deduce ?!

Did the OP talk about what the APC as done or not done ever ?

Did APC ever tell you not to criticise their party or leader like you obidient never want any form of criticism against your Pandora criminal Peter Obi ?

How many times have APC shouted constructive criticism bla bla bla on air screen n wherever?

If you obidient can not take accountability when it is broken down into pieces like the OP Did indount you have intelligence to lead anything in life not just in this country.

mrvitalis:
Name one thing just one that Obidient do or have done that APC guys haven’t done worse

Just one

HIGHESTPOPORI:
Obi is your nightmare.

At least make it a bit difficult for him to use your post to prove his point.

Ah ah, dem forbid una Obidients to dey use uná brain.

Sonyboom:
This comment shows how unintelligent obidents are. So from all the OP carefully articulated this is the senseless question you can deduce ?!

Did the OP talk about what the APC as done or not done ever ?

Did APC ever tell you not to criticise their party or leader like you obidient never want any form of criticism against your Pandora criminal Peter Obi ?

How many times have APC shouted constructive criticism bla bla bla on air screen n wherever?

If you obidient can not take accountability when it is broken down into pieces like the OP Did indount you have intelligence to lead anything in life not just in this country.

What ever Obidient are doing APC did worse to Jonathan so lack the moral authority to condemn Obidient

You are obviously not smart enough to understand this

esnbrutality:
Time of THREAD..

5.15am

CharlesCNG

😂😂😂

So after several paragraphs, examples and arguments, your rebuttal is now... the time stamp?

My brother, thank you for proving another point from the article.

When some Obidients cannot challenge the substance, they begin examining the curtains, the font size, the profile picture, the time of posting and the weather conditions.

The article was about Obidient behaviour.

Your response was about 5:15am.

That is like receiving a court judgment and responding to the colour of the judge's tie.

At least we now know the article landed exactly where it was supposed to. 😁

mrvitalis:
What ever Obidient are doing APC did worse to Jonathan so lack the moral authority to condemn Obidient

You are obviously not smart enough to understand this

My Friend, the irony is spectacular. 😁

You say I am "not smart enough," yet your entire argument is a textbook example of a logical fallacy.

Let's test it.

If APC supporters behaved badly toward Jonathan, does that automatically mean Obidients cannot behave badly today?

If a thief stole yesterday, does that mean today's thief becomes innocent?

If one student cheated in WAEC, does that mean another student cannot be accused of cheating?

You see the problem?

You have not challenged a single point in the article.

You have merely shouted, "What about APC?"

That is not reasoning.

That is deflection wearing borrowed clothes.

The article was about Obidient behaviour.

Your response is about Jonathan.

That is like a doctor diagnosing malaria and the patient responding with the history of yellow fever in 1987. 😂

And as for being "not smart enough," my brother, when a man cannot answer the argument and starts discussing another topic entirely, he should be careful about issuing IQ certificates.

You have not rebutted the article.

You have demonstrated it.

Thank you for your cooperation.

CharlesCNG:
My Friend, the irony is spectacular. 😁

You say I am "not smart enough," yet your entire argument is a textbook example of a logical fallacy.

Let's test it.

If APC supporters behaved badly toward Jonathan, does that automatically mean Obidients cannot behave badly today?

If a thief stole yesterday, does that mean today's thief becomes innocent?

If one student cheated in WAEC, does that mean another student cannot be accused of cheating?

You see the problem?

You have not challenged a single point in the article.

You have merely shouted, "What about APC?"

That is not reasoning.

That is deflection wearing borrowed clothes.

The article was about Obidient behaviour.

Your response is about Jonathan.

That is like a doctor diagnosing malaria and the patient responding with the history of yellow fever in 1987. 😂

And as for being "not smart enough," my brother, when a man cannot answer the argument and starts discussing another topic entirely, he should be careful about issuing IQ certificates.

You have not rebutted the article.

You have demonstrated it.

Thank you for your cooperation.

If anyone should condem Obidient it’s definitely shouldn’t be APC supporters you have zero moral right to that effect

You still do worse today than Obidient

How can you criticize someone or a group you are worse than

Make it make sense

HIGHESTPOPORI:
Nobody takes your paid writeups against Obi serious.

Nobody takes it serious?

Interesting. Did you conduct a national survey or you just interviewed your emotions? 😁

And if nobody takes it serious, why are you here taking it personally?

Also, "paid writeup" is not a rebuttal. It is what people say when the argument hits a nerve.

You have not disproved the article.

You have merely acted out the chapter on Obidient deflection. 😂

The Obidient movement is built on lies, bullying and violence.
No candidate connected to it can go anywhere in Nigeria.

mrvitalis:
If anyone should condem Obidient it’s definitely shouldn’t be APC supporters you have zero moral right to that effect

You still do worse today than Obidient

How can you criticize someone or a group you are worse than

Make it make sense

My brother, this is one of the strangest arguments I have seen. 😁

By your logic, only saints can criticize sinners.

So if a doctor smokes, he cannot warn people about lung cancer?

If a former thief condemns stealing, we should ignore him?

If a man slips on a banana peel, he loses the right to warn others about slippery floors?

You see how quickly the argument collapses.

The article was about Obidient behaviour.

Your response is: "But APC!"

That is not a rebuttal. That is intellectual hide-and-seek.

Even if I generously assume APC supporters are worse, how does that make the observations about Obidients false?

Did that suddenly make the abuse culture disappear?

Did it make the messiah complex vanish?

Did it make the intolerance go away?

You are arguing like a student caught cheating who responds by saying another student cheated more.

Fine.

The other student may be guilty too.

You are still guilty.

As our elders say, another man's headache does not cure your fever. 😂

The more I read some of these responses, the more convinced I become that the article touched a nerve.

Because instead of disproving it, many of you keep acting it out in real time.

Stop crying like a toddler, APC sai buharists cum bulabans were the most toxic political rabble-rousers in 2014 prior to 2015.

You set the standards for hate politics, during those years. You are only crying now, because the same template is being used against you and you can't stand it.

Tinubu is getting kicked out by next year. No crumb-induced or sponsored gibberish can change that.

CharlesCNG:
When the Bully Starts Crying: The Obidient Problem.

One of the most revealing things about the Obidient movement is not only what it says, but how it behaves. It is loud when attacking others, but fragile when the same fire is returned. That contradiction is not accidental. It is the psychology of a confused bully-mob.

A normal political movement accepts scrutiny as part of democracy. A bully-mob accepts scrutiny only when it is directed at others. Once attention turns toward its own camp, it begins to squeal about persecution, bias, and unfairness. That is why Obidients can spend months mocking Tinubu, Atiku, Soludo, APC, ADC, NDC, and almost anybody who disagrees with them, yet suddenly become emotional when Peter Obi receives sharp criticism in return. What changed? Nothing — except the direction of the cannon.

That is how mob bullies behave. They do not really believe in free speech, robust debate, or scrutiny as a principle. What they want is a monopoly of aggression. [/i]They want to throw stones without hearing the sound of broken glass behind them. They want the right to mock, insult, and pressure everybody else, but they do not want anybody else to answer in the same language. [i]So they keep trying to occupy two opposite moral positions at once: fearsome aggressor on Monday, helpless victim by Tuesday.

That is why their politics often looks confused. Yesterday, negative attention to Tinubu meant accountability. Today, negative attention to Obi means obsession. Yesterday, sharp criticism was civic courage. Today, it is “too much focus” on a private citizen.

The deeper danger is that this behaviour produces political delusion. Once a movement begins to romanticize all criticism as proof of secret strength, it loses the ability to self-correct. Instead of asking, “Why are people pushing back against us?” it begins to flatter itself with fantasies: “We are too important. They are afraid of us. The attacks prove we already won.”

That is how movements detach from reality. They stop studying voters and begin studying enemies. They stop building persuasion and begin rehearsing victimhood.

In the end, a bully-mob is always shocked by resistance because it mistakes its own noise for moral superiority. But noise is not virtue. Aggression is not argument. And mob energy is not leadership.
The Obidient problem, therefore, is not merely that they are loud. It is that they are loud without symmetry — eager to dish out scrutiny, but unable to digest it when it returns.

They are the Black version of Adolf Hitler's Nazis

CharlesCNG:
When the Bully Starts Crying: The Obidient Problem.

One of the most revealing things about the Obidient movement is not only what it says, but how it behaves. It is loud when attacking others, but fragile when the same fire is returned. That contradiction is not accidental. It is the psychology of a confused bully-mob.

A normal political movement accepts scrutiny as part of democracy. A bully-mob accepts scrutiny only when it is directed at others. Once attention turns toward its own camp, it begins to squeal about persecution, bias, and unfairness. That is why Obidients can spend months mocking Tinubu, Atiku, Soludo, APC, ADC, NDC, and almost anybody who disagrees with them, yet suddenly become emotional when Peter Obi receives sharp criticism in return. What changed? Nothing — except the direction of the cannon.

That is how mob bullies behave. They do not really believe in free speech, robust debate, or scrutiny as a principle. What they want is a monopoly of aggression. [/i]They want to throw stones without hearing the sound of broken glass behind them. They want the right to mock, insult, and pressure everybody else, but they do not want anybody else to answer in the same language. [i]So they keep trying to occupy two opposite moral positions at once: fearsome aggressor on Monday, helpless victim by Tuesday.

That is why their politics often looks confused. Yesterday, negative attention to Tinubu meant accountability. Today, negative attention to Obi means obsession. Yesterday, sharp criticism was civic courage. Today, it is “too much focus” on a private citizen.

The deeper danger is that this behaviour produces political delusion. Once a movement begins to romanticize all criticism as proof of secret strength, it loses the ability to self-correct. Instead of asking, “Why are people pushing back against us?” it begins to flatter itself with fantasies: “We are too important. They are afraid of us. The attacks prove we already won.”

That is how movements detach from reality. They stop studying voters and begin studying enemies. They stop building persuasion and begin rehearsing victimhood.

In the end, a bully-mob is always shocked by resistance because it mistakes its own noise for moral superiority. But noise is not virtue. Aggression is not argument. And mob energy is not leadership.
The Obidient problem, therefore, is not merely that they are loud. It is that they are loud without symmetry — eager to dish out scrutiny, but unable to digest it when it returns.

The weak,feeble responses of the usual suspects to this logical original post only serves as an emphasis of the truth therein.

CharlesCNG:
My brother, this is one of the strangest arguments I have seen. 😁

By your logic, only saints can criticize sinners.

So if a doctor smokes, he cannot warn people about lung cancer?

If a former thief condemns stealing, we should ignore him?

If a man slips on a banana peel, he loses the right to warn others about slippery floors?

You see how quickly the argument collapses.

The article was about Obidient behaviour.

Your response is: "But APC!"

That is not a rebuttal. That is intellectual hide-and-seek.

Even if I generously assume APC supporters are worse, how does that make the observations about Obidients false?

Did that suddenly make the abuse culture disappear?

Did it make the messiah complex vanish?

Did it make the intolerance go away?

You are arguing like a student caught cheating who responds by saying another student cheated more.

Fine.

The other student may be guilty too.

You are still guilty.

As our elders say, another man's headache does not cure your fever. 😂

The more I read some of these responses, the more convinced I become that the article touched a nerve.

Because instead of disproving it, many of you keep acting it out in real time.

Has APC accepted it has done bad or worse than Obidient ? Have they ?

They claim to be good yet worse than Obidient they complain about

Hallucinations..

Did you see demons while writing this Nonsense?

CharlesCNG:
😂😂😂

So after several paragraphs, examples and arguments, your rebuttal is now... the time stamp?

My brother, thank you for proving another point from the article.

When some Obidients cannot challenge the substance, they begin examining the curtains, the font size, the profile picture, the time of posting and the weather conditions.

The article was about Obidient behaviour.

Your response was about 5:15am.

That is like receiving a court judgment and responding to the colour of the judge's tie.

At least we now know the article landed exactly where it was supposed to. 😁