₦airaland Forum

InyinyaAgbaOku:
Not true. It is not the colonials that told me I have more in common with Nsukka, Nnewi than Oyo or Hausa. Back in the days , people know where similarities in customs stopped.

But knowing that you had more in common with Nsukka than Oyo would not necessarily make you align with Nsukka to fight Oyo town if Oyo town attacked your town, in the old days, would it?

You would do that TODAY automatically because you have been told that you and Nsukka are of ''one people''. ''Igbos''.

Plus you would despise not just the the town of Oyo which attacked you (as would be the case in pre-colonial times). You would despise ''Yoruba people'' as a 'whole', seeing it as a ''Yoruba attack'', or ''an attack by Yorubas''.

In fact, you might even go and retaliate, NOT against Oyo town, but against Ijebu, or Owo, or Oshogbo, or even Ilorin, since to you (by virtue of colonial indoctrination) they are all culpable, and they're all the same, being ''Yorubas''.

Any where in 'Yorubaland' would qualify as a legitimate target for reprisals in your eyes.

That is why language-based ethnicization is evil and alien to us. It actually turns logic on its head.

Sure, the above scenario is simplified, but the point should be pretty clear.

NimrodEndOfDays:
I don't bear any grudge with no tribe. But I will if that tribe is determined to suppress my cultural identity and quest for a way of life that suits me or my tribe. We can be trade partners and friends from afar. We don't necessarily have to be country men.

More colonialist ''ethnic group'' thinking.

''My tribe''. ''Your tribe''.

All rubbish.

There is no ''tribe'' looking to ''suppress [your] cultural identity and quest for a way of life...''.

There may be an oligarchy of people numbering a few hundred who happen to speak Hausa, who do have such nefarious intents. But HOW does that translate to being the wishes of 60 million Hausa speakers in the country?

Do you think the average 'Hausa man' walks around thinking he must suppress 'Igbos' from having ''their'' way of life?

I put it to you that 99.99% of 'Hausas' do not give a second's thought to whatever happens to you or your ''way of life''.

But Ethnicization, which leads to TRIBALISM, makes you think they do.

That is why language-based ethnic group-ism is so poisonous and alien to us.

It makes you stereotype and hate whole groups of people, who have absolutely NOTHING to do with anything troubling you. People who would be perfectly nice and helpful individuals who would be hospitable to you if you ever encountered them, in true African tradition.

Tribalism makes you coat ALL those people - millions of them - with one negative brush.

Tragic.

The true African way of identifying external threats is by focusing on the actual perpetrators (lineage) of whatever evil you identify, (in this case, the oligarchy members) NOT by concluding that all the people who speak the same language as the perpetrators are in a conspiracy against you!

How can the North always be at the helms of leadership when they cannot even provide basic education for their people?

How are ''the North'' always at the helm of leadership? Jonathan was in power for 5 years before Buhari was elected. OBJ was in power for many years before that. What are you talking about? Buhari is in power now but won't be there forever. Nigeria is a democracy.

NimrodEndOfDays:
This by far is the dumbest post I have seen in recent times on Nairaland. To even think that he tried to articulate garbage and sell it off as an intellectual piece is mind boggling. How do you as an African, believe in a contraption that was created solely for business? Do you even think your interest were captured when merging a highly unproductive and less educated North with a progressive and highly educated south? Some times it is bizarre how the mind of some people work in this day and age. Like someone wrote above, the best bet is to create states based of similar ethnic groups and with their different flags. If along the line these countries have a need to merge or form an alliance with others, it is all well and good. No Nation should be forced to be with people who don't share cultural values with them.its that simple

Do you realise that southerners and northerners traded for millennia before the colonial era?

The fact that MILLIONS of Igbos are settled peacefully and profitably in the NORTH today, is a direct REBUKE of your claim that there is this huge, unbridgeable cultural gulf between the north and south.

It's another colonial-created myth. You still see them as an ethnic bloc. As ''Hausas'' etc.

That's why you have that stereotype about them. About their collective.

In a de-ethnicized nation, you would not see them as one bloc, but would simply address the specific trouble spots in question, say Bornu.

Or Hadeija.

Or Zaria.

Your mind wouldn't go ''Northerners!', or worse, ''these Hausa-Fulani people!

siereleone ,Liberia,Myanmar,Nepal, are all colonial entities and third world shitholes like Nigeria. Botswana(Tswana land ) is an ethno state like Japan ,South Korea, Lithuania,Netherlands,etc.

Botswana is every bit a colonial entity as any of those other nations. Its borders are not of the original Tswana people, who only constitute the majority in Botswana, not the entire population, which has another 5 or so language groups added by the British to form ''Botswana''.

Oh, and Burundi is 85% Hutu.

Almost fully mono-ethnic.

Why are they not like Singapore or even Rwanda?

Burkina Faso is 52% Mossi. 6 other groups number between 1% and 8% each.

This is similar to what a 'Biafran Republic' would look like demographically.

Burkina Faso, despite this near ethnic homogeneity, has seen very little progress as a nation.

Beachside:
I will keep busting your bubble. You are easy.
Rwanda is 90 percent Hutu .There's negligible difference between Hutu and Tutsi. And Rwanda landmass is the same size as Cross river state. Singapore landmass is same size as Eket Town or Onitsha town . Those nations would be shitholes if part of Congo or Malyasia.
Fast developing countries like Botswana(Tswana land),Namibia and Rwanda are ethno states. And who ever said all ethnic nations being autonomous states within a confederation is not real unity and independence ? I think you are from an Igbo community considered inferior , that's why you feel a need to dissolve people's heritage. Do you think Scottish,Lithuanian,Swedes ,Norwegian,and Irish should give up their ethnicity for a fictitious entity?
Nigeria is a failed state with a bleak future, inhabited by toads like you. I think people like you should have your status stripped and deported back to your shithole.

It is more than easy to point out a handful of successes in a sea of failure, when naming successful small states. Singapore. Why not Cambodia? Nepal? Laos? Myanmar? Yemen? Sri Lanka? That is the real level of that region. Singapore was chosen by western powers to be the capitalist financial centre it is, and funded/supported accordingly. That is why it is different from its aforementioned neighbours.

Same as Africa. Rwanda and Botswana are exceptions in a sea of small state paralysis, as seen in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Eritrea, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Equatorial Guinea, Burundi, Benin Republic, Chad, Gambia, Burkina Faso, Togo...

So statistically, each of the newly balkanized states of a broken up Nigeria would have around a 10% chance of success. And a 90% chance of joining the above list of unviable entities.

Here's a study on the benefits of a LARGE country compared to SMALL

What are the benefits of having a large size? First, the per capita costs of
many public goods are lower in larger countries, where more taxpayers can pay
for them. Think, for instance, of defense, a monetary and financial system, a
judicial system, infrastructure for communication, police and crime prevention,
public health, embassies, and national parks just to name a few.

In many cases, parts of the costs of public goods are independent of the number of users/tax
payers, or grow less than proportionally, thus the per capita costs of many public
goods is declining with the number of taxpayers. Alesina and Wacziarg (1998)
document that the share of governments spending over GDP is decreasing with
GDP; that is, smaller countries have larger governments, even after controlling
for several other determinants of government size.

Second, a larger country (in terms of population and national product) is
less subject to foreign aggression. Thus, safety is a public good that increases
with country size. Also, related to the “size of government” argument here,
smaller countries may have to spend proportionally more for defense than larger
countries given the economies of scale in defense spending.

Empirically the relationship between country size and share of spending of defense is affected
by the fact that small countries can enter into military alliances, but in general,
size brings about more safety.

In addition, if a small country enters a military coalition with a larger one, the latter may provide defense, but it may extract
some form of compensation, direct or indirect, from the smaller partner.

Third, the size of the country affects the size of their markets. To the extent
that larger economies and larger market increase productivity, then larger
counties should be richer. In fact, a large literature on “endogenous growth”
emphasizes the benefits of scale. Fourth, large countries can provide “insurance”
to their regions....''

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6e88/5141c31dbcb9083a19e3cd3d223fe70fdd45.pdf

Now that we see that language-based ethnic groupings are artificial, and that breaking up into such groups offers no guarantee of stability or progress in the new nations, why don't we do the opposite?

Simply remain as Nigerians.

Go bigger instead of going smaller.

Sure, Nigeria is a colonial creation, but it's operating no worse than our old, warring, lineage-based fiefdoms did. Those systems did succumb to slavery and colonialism after all, showing their inherent structural weakness.

Nigeria has more potential to create the mass of wealth and collective ingenuity needed to propel us all to the next level, plus the centralized system of administrative control needed to visualize and actualize that reality.

There also needs to be a national policy of DELETING language-based ethnicity from our consciousness. No more ''Igbos'', or ''Yorubas'', or ''Hausas'', or ''Hausa-Fulani'' (an absurd, ultra-colonialist nonsense).

ALL traditional loyalties and affinities will be based on lineage and nothing else. Just like it was in the days of our fathers.

After 10 - 15 years of teaching this new, TRUE paradigm to our people, tribalism and disunity will be eliminated from our shores, fostering true equality of every person in this country.

This policy of 'de-ethnicization' is not as far-fetched as it may sound to some.

Rwanda is doing something very similar. And their country today is the 2nd fastest growing economy in the world.

InyinyaAgbaOku:
In that case, of makes sense for Ondo people to agitate for secession. But even at that folks like you will still bring reasons to say no to such no matter what. At least , the groups you mentioned up there share a lot of things in common so it's not out of place for them to have an ethnicity. What is worse is the actual countries created by the Europeans that you are defending .

But NOTHING in our past suggests that language-based ethnic groupings will work. The most bloody and frequent warring was done WITHIN those same language groupings. The Yoruba civil wars were horrendous. The Igbo-speaking chiefdoms operated as independent countries. When diplomacy broke down in a crisis with another community speaking the same Igbo, war broke out. With huge casualties!

So, on what basis are you now saying that there is an ''ethnic group'' called Igbo?

Or one called Yoruba?

They are colonial creations.

There are people we classify today as 'Edo people', whose ancestors fought against the Benin Kingdom in many wars! But courtesy of British colonialism, they are now classified, based on the fact they speak one language, as ''the Edo people''. One people! One ''ethnic group''. They are not! And never saw themselves as such. All they ever were were ''Edo-speaking peoples'', not ''Edo people''. Same applies to so-called ''Igbo people'', ''Yorubas'', ''Hausas'', etc etc. All colonial creations.

InyinyaAgbaOku:
What is even more colonial is the concept of 'Nigeria'. The same crap you are defending .

At least, the word Igbo existed before colonialism eg Igboukwu, lots of places in Igbo land are called AmaIgbo, names like Igbokwe, Igboaja, etc. And phrases like Olu na Igbo.
Now, can you tell us the place of Nigeria in our history ?

We all know Nigeria is a colonial construct. The point is, even if we break up Nigeria, there is no basis for doing so along our present 'ethnic' lines of 'Igbo', 'Yoruba', Hausa', etc, since those are not legitimate pre-colonial identity groupings.

It also means that current hatreds and rivalries that are based on those artificial identity blocs are colonially derived and should be discarded.

maiunguwar:
This rosicky of a .guy should be apprehended and used as a human sacrifice at the okpolokoevi shrine

We understand. That is your primitive barbarity showing itself. Dumb, air-head spear chucker.

henryobinna:
utter bull..shi..t

I stopped reading when said you start talking trash about Igbo identity bla bla bla...

You lack knowledge to discuss how a people should be grouped or are grouped.

Errr....It is actually not rocket science. It is your low intelligence and mental laziness that prevents you from grasping a pretty easy concept. Go back to playing Naira Marley and dancing Zanku and leave history and genetics out of your sphere.

0m0nnakoda:
A wannabe intellectual who has no one to tell him the bitter truth that he is a dullard

Sure. Pea brain. Don't shut your lips and learn what is being discussed first before criticising.

0m0nnakoda:
What is on display here is the inability to reason in an unintelligent individual who is very opinionated

Let us examine the proposition that Yoruba identity did not exist before Nigeria
Even if that were to be the case does that mean there was no other identity?
No
There were Ijebus,Ekiti, Egba,Ondo,Ijesha,Igbomina and so on.
They had kings and Kingdoms
Can you have a Kingdom without identity?
They had their own monarchies and systems of succession.
The Ijebu e.g. do not circumcise their women
The Oyo have their own tribal marks very distinct from Ondos


Among the Igbos there were Aros and Ngwas among others with a very strong sense of identity
Or is it the Ijaw or the Urhobo that do not know who they are?
This is just Nigeria
We are not talking of Zulus,Kikuyus,or Mandingoes

How anyone in their right senses can say ethnic identification is unAfrican is shocking

The slave trade lasted centuries. People raided and sold OTHERS as slaves for generations

Why are you so dumb? When the hell did I say there was ''no other identity'' outside the artificial ''Yoruba'' identity? Or claim that people ''did not know who they were''?

Don't put your stupid lying words in my mouth and then seek to argue against what I did not say.

It was PRECISELY my point that Identity was based on LINEAGE and such organic factors, and not on shared language, something you've proceeded to prove by mentioning the above legitimate pre-colonial identity groupings, and then claimed I was saying they didn't exist!!!

Maybe it's your low IQ that's bothering you. Or maybe you're actually a fraud.

Again: My ENTIRE point in this whole thread is that pre-colonial Nigerians identified themselves according to those lineage-based groupings you mentioned, eg, ''Ijebus, Ekiti, Egba, Ondo, Ijesha, Igbomina'' etc, and NOT as ''Yorubas'', or ''Igbos'' or ''Hausas'' etc etc, which are artificial, language-based, colonialist-created identity blocs.

Good grief..

If not for racial inferiority complex and low self esteem, what would concern a modern Nigerian youth in 2020 with ''what Lord Lugard said about'' ANYTHING?

Op, get you head out of Lord Lugard's ass and find something useful to contribute to society, ok?

Rubbish.

Beachside:
You are an old fool with lack of insight . You reason like the monkey you are.

An African is a monkey to a brainwashed slave.

We understand..

0m0nnakoda:
Save us the beer parlour science and fake studies 99.9 %?
What does that mean?
You think you are in a beer parlour.
There is not 99.9 % genetic similarity between brothers of the same parents so stop trying to spread fake studies

Don't be dumb. Did you even go through the link? These studies were conducted by scholars, not motor park touts.


http://venturesafrica.com/controversies-trail-canadian-prime-ministers-visit-to-africa/

https://newsrescue.com/yoruba-are-99-adangbe-study/#axzz4EytOCs6T

AfrokanGod:
The institution of marriage as outlived its purpose...

The trouble with that idea is that it deprives one of the parents of custody of the kids, unless of course they are cohabiting indefinitely.

Beachside:
All indices point to the fact that Nigeria is a failed state with an even bleaker future with the caliber of it's citizenry. The educational and social systems are failure. That's what happens when people fail to look at the foundation and causes of things and also fail to use their brains to do the right thing .

Dude please carry your nonsense elsewhere. Don't go and hustle like your mates. Mr failed state.

Antivirus92:
There are many things that are put into consideration before a group of people are considered an ethnic group - language, tradition, religion, proximity, physical appearance etc

Considered by whom? That is the question!

Certainly not by our ancestors!

The only thing that bound a people together as one in the past was lineage. Tracing themselves to a common ancestor.

Anything else was irrelevant. If people of one lineage happened to speak one language, or one dialect of a language, fine. But it was not the language or dialect they spoke that united them. It was the lineage.

In decentralized societies like 'Igboland', if you were of a different lineage, say from a community that settled 20 miles away, you considered them more a less a foreign country, despite the fact that you both spoke Igbo.

That is how it was before the colonial era.

Remember in Things Fall Apart?

Umuofia and Mbaino?

These two communities were NEIGHBOURS, but they actually acted like they were two different countries:

Excerpts:


''Ogbuefi Ezeugo was a powerful orator and was always chosen to speak on such occasions. He moved his hand over his white head and stroked his white beard. He then adjusted his cloth, which was passed under his right arm-pit and tied above his left shoulder.

“Umuofia kwenu”, he bellowed a fifth time, and the crowd yelled in answer. And then suddenly like one possessed he shot out his left hand and pointed in the direction of Mbaino, and said through gleaming white teeth firmly clenched: “Those sons of wild animals have dared to murder a daughter of Umuofia.”

He threw his head down and gnashed his teeth, and allowed a murmur of suppressed anger to sweep the crowd. When he began again, the anger on his face was gone and in its place a sort of smile hovered, more terrible and more sinister than the anger. And in a clear unemotional voice he told Umuofia how their daughter had gone to market at Mbaino and had been killed. That woman, said Ezeugo, was the wife of Ogbuefi Udo, and he pointed to a man who sat near him with a bowed head. The crowd then shouted with anger and thirst for blood.''

-Things Fall Apart, China Achebe


See, these are clearly not ''one people'', or people of ''one ethnic group''.

Such a concept was totally alien to them.

^^I don't think you understand..

Antivirus92:
i don't think igbos and yorubas are related apart from their languages belonging to the same language family,,,
i've stayed in the north and i was amazed how some words coincidentally sound alike while having a similar meaning in both igbo and hausa,,
some fews words sounding alike is not a good parameter to measure ancestry

So what does it measure then? First of all, that study I posted above shows 99.9% genetic similarity between ''Yoruba'' and ''Igbo'' people.

So language is just a tiny criteria in the measure.

Look man. Our original history goes all the way back to Egypt, Nubia, and the so-called Middle East.

Our originally united people spoke a common language there, and migrated southwards from those lands in antiquity, fleeing desertification and foreign invasions from Assyria, then Greece, then Rome, then finally Arabs. 'Igbos' may have come via East Africa, and northern Cameroun, while 'Yorubas' appear to have taken a more direct route from Egypt and Nubia (Sudan).

As we fled we split into various groupings, each of which settled briefly in various lands on its southern journey. Centuries later they finally all landed in the southern Nigerian forest regions, well away from the foreign invaders and arid deserts. (The Sahara was once a fertile, peopled region by the way)

On their newly settled regions, they now speak different languages, which are somehow mysteriously similar, using the exact same words and terminology for most common terms!

But the elders know the ancient connections, even if the rabble don't.

0m0nnakoda:
And Africa is all about Yorubas?
You are not well informed on this subject, that much is evident immediately.
Just remove the term African because it is impossible to define here.


Anyhow there is no other way of existence other than ethnic identity anywhere on earth.
There are strong and weak affinities but affinities exist.
During the slave trade for example this was very important.
Hence we have tribal marks.
Even your Yoruba example is wrong.
There were identities like Ekiti,Ijebu,Egba etc and that is why the term EMPIRE is used to describe Oyo.
That is why they have Orikis
They saw themselves as nations and the YORUBA originally were the Oyo. What colonisation did was to extend that term to Ekitis,Ijebus,etc who all previously used it to refer to Oyo
The Fulani identity is of existential importance to their nomadic ways, ditto for the Masai.
Even in Calabar province there is clear identity awareness

This one is just arguing with himself.

Please, take your problem to the various world class researchers who wrote Encyclopeadia Britannicca and other respected sources. They've told you the deal. Stay there arguing with the wind.

PlayerMeji:
Ok, but which came first?

The chicken or the egg?

The language or the people?

The people!!!!!

Look, do you realise that 'Igbos' and 'Yorubas' are merely part of a much larger, ancient group that dispersed at some point in the past and found themselves in separate settlements, altering slightly over centuries of separation, the original common language they once spoke?

In fact, Igbo and Yoruba are virtually the same language, with a few pronunciation variations and word additions from other external cultural encounters.

LANGUAGE SIMILARITIES


Igbo Yoruba

Onu (mouth) Enu (mouth)

Imi (nose) Imu (nose)

Nti (ear) Eti (ear)

Gini (what) Kini (what)

Mbala (backyard) Abala (backyard)

Iba (fever) Iba (fever)

Agba (calabash) Igba (Calabash)

Okute (stone) Okuta (stone)

Aga (barren) Agan (barren)

Ise (amen) Ase (amen)

Ejime/Ejima (twin) Ejire (twin)

Osi (he said) Oso (he said)

Ka (big) Ga (big)

Siri (said) Soro (said)

Miri (water) Omi (water)

Odinma (it is good) Oda (it is good)

Ewu (goat) Ewure (goat)

Awi (grey hair) Ewu (grey hair)

Okunrin (man) Okenye (man)

Obinrin (woman) Aborun (woman)

Owambe (it is there) Onoeba (it is there)

Eniyan (person who..) Onye (person who...)

Were Eniyan (mad person) Onye Ara (madness)

Enyin (elephant) Erin (elephant)

Dimkpa (strong man) Igiripa (strong man)

Wambi (come here) Bia eba (come here)

Kurombe (go away) Puoneba (go away)

Kene (greet) Ki (greet)

Alusi (the gods) Orisa (the gods)

Ifufu (wind) Efufu (wind)

Nata (return) Pada (return)

Ofe (soup) Obe (soup)

Nwu (die) Ku (die)

Anwu (sun) Oorun (sun)

Ebe (place) Ibi (place)

Akpara (basket) Akpere (basket)

Ifena aku (what time it is) Akoko (time)

Aru (abomination) irira (abomination)

Ebe kibi (where do you live?) Ibo longbe (where do you live?)

Giwa kwan (and you?) Iwo nko (and you?)

Udu miri (water pot) Odu omi (water pot)

Ebe (where?) Ibo (where?)

Let it ( ko) Let it (ko)




Yoruba Are 99.9% Genetically Identical To Igbos – Study


Genetic research finds that there is little genetic difference between most African ethnic groups and less so when they are closer together. A study published in the Bio Medical Center found there was little evidence for significant population substructure in the four major West African ethnic groups, the Yoruba and Igbo of Nigeria and Akan and Gaa-Adangbe of Ghana.


The findings, according to the team, “although not entirely surprising given the geographical proximity of these groups, provide important insights into the genetic relationships between the ethnic groups studied and confirm previous results that showed close genetic relationship between most studied West African groups.”

The study was conducted by Adebowale Adeyemo, Guanjie Chen2, Yuanxiu Chen and Charles Rotimi of the University of Ibadan, National Human Genome Center and Howard university. Analysis of Molecular Variance, AMOVA was used.

Adebowale et al made the shocking discovery that whereas there was 99.9% within-population variance, the between-population variance was less than 0.1%. This means that Yorubas, Igbos, Gaa and Akan are 99.9% similar as populations, while within each of the groups there are differences/variations between individuals as high as 99%, i.e. One Igbo may be 99% variant to another Igbo, or one Yoruba to another Yoruba.

http://newsrescue.com/yoruba-are-99-adangbe-study/#axzz4EytOCs6T



In other words, FUNDAMENTALLY SPEAKING, greater genetic differences exist within the ethnic groups than between them!

This was why shared language was NEVER a unifying factor to our ancestors!!

It is a 100% colonial concept!!!

0m0nnakoda:
You also introduce vague or meaningless terms that you need to define

What does it mean to
"Practise language based ethnicity " That may make plenty of sense in your mind but it means nothing to me
How do we recognise this when we see it?

Simply identifying yourself with an ethnic group in the African context is practising language based ethnicity.

For instance, calling yourself a Yoruba man, is practising language based ethnicity. A foreign concept to Africa.

In reality there is no such thing as a 'Yoruba man'. There is only a Yoruba-speaking man.

Same applies to the other European-created ''ethnic groups'' we have today in Nigeria and Africa, which we call ''tribes''.

Group formation on the basis of shared language is an imported, European concept.

This is not just about Igbos, even though Igbos draw attention because of IPOB's ethnicity-based secession ideology.

But here's what research equally says about Yorubas:

''The Yoruba have shared a common language and culture for centuries but were probably never a single political unit. They seem to have migrated from the east to their present lands west of the lower Niger River more than a millennium ago.''

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Yoruba


The same is true of Hausas:

''Because of their wide geographical distribution and intermarriage and interaction with different peoples, the Hausa are a heterogeneous people, with a variety of cultural and physical features as well as diverse histories.'' [In plain English, they are not One people]

https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences-and-law/anthropology-and-archaeology/people/hausa


Same is true of the Edo people:

''Edo-speaking peoples include not only the Edo proper but also the Ishan, the Etsako, the Ivbiosakon, the Akoko Edo, the Ineme, the Urhobo, and the Isoko.'' [in plain English, there's nothing like an ''Edo ethnic group'' or ''Edo tribe''. What we have are ''Edo-speaking peoples'']


https://www.encyclopedia.com/places/asia/japanese-political-geography/edo
.
.

It goes on and on...

Nigerians, Isn't it a shame that the white man knows your history better than you?

And then some of us, when we try to educate you, we are met by abuse and curses?

Why are you allergic to the truth?

Which is that THERE IS NO BASIS for the ethnicity you practise today.

ZERO BASIS.

It's all a colonial CON JOB to divide us.

And boy did they succeed.

Read those quotes above one more time.

They are telling you (in so much big grammar) that before they invaded & colonised you, you did not differentiate yourselves on ethnic basis!

Not only that. You did not identify yourselves on ethnic basis.

Heck, our ancestors likely considered it an abomination to do so.

Every day you wake up, and see yourself as an ''Igbo man'', or a ''Yoruba man'', or a ''Hausa man'', especially in opposition to other so-called ''ethnic groups'', you are simply acting out the colonialist's agenda. The agenda of Babylon. You are being a slave and a robot to European political machination. A very TRIBUTE to European social engineering, and a vivid, sad demonstration of your colonial conquest and conditioning.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff_7HsTYHnw

0m0nnakoda:
You haven't thought this one through

Is the concept of Africanness valid?


What does it mean?

How can we talk about what is not African?

We can talk of it in terms of what people on the continent we call 'Africa' practised before the colonial takeover of the land.

If we didn't practise language-based ethnicity and consequent tribalism till they introduced it, then the practice is unAfrican.

Obergilgamesh11:
Ummunem, onye a bu onye fulani akwuru ugwo k'obute ogbaghara n'etiti mba ndi ozo. Mana, o dara ada. You have failed. Firstly, your arguments have no leg to stand on. The colonizers didn't introduce ethnicity, they simply observed and documented it. Even before colonial times in the 1700s, Igbo slaves in the Americas already identified as Igbos (Eboe). They didn't need any white man telling them what to call themselves.
There was nothing like Germany until mid to late 19th century when the different peoples were unified by Bismarck. What you had were Bayerns, Prussians, Swabians, Sorbians etc. Was that also a "tokunbo" identity given than it was the ancient Romans who observed and documented the Alemanni or Germania ethnicity? I don't expect you to know these or have any answer to them given the kind of half baked quasi intellectuals been churned out by the conveyor belt of the "higher" institutions of the Zoo, administered by the Fulani.
A great preponderance of Igbos worldwide are beginning to wake up. The Igbo and Biafran consciousness is inexorably heading to a crescendo and there's nothing anyone can do about it.
There are now Igbos in very high places in every single country on our mother planet; Japanese Igbos, Canadian Igbos, American Igbos, German Igbos, Italian Igbos, Spanish Igbos, Finnish Igbos, Danish Igbos, Austrian Igbos etc etc. Some are mixed race and even upto the 3rd generation, but they all still retain and identify with their Igboness.
MARK MY WORDS, when Igbos finally reach a consensus(which is not too distant given the current happenings), we will push for a separate nation and if you the Fulani try once again the 67-70 debacle to stop us, you will be endangering your very existence at least in the geographic space called Nigeria. There will be nowhere to hide and nobody to come to your aid as the geopolitical and economic climate of the 60's are no longer what is obtainable. Your time and resources should be better channeled towards planning for the aftermath than being here on a faceless forum fighting a losing battle.
Be Warned!

I thought you were intelligent and sophisticated until you showed your level by making assumptions as to where I was from, while knowing zilch about me. You're no different from any street IPOB urchin therefore. Disgusting.

I've no idea what brought in Germany to all this.

Utterly irrelevant to what occurred in Africa.

If Igbo slaves ''self identified'' according to an ethnic group, why was the term ''eboes'' used in slave era documents, and not IGBOS? Was it them that named themselves ''Eboes'' or was it the white man?

Of course it was the white man, based on the fact that they spoke the Igbo language.

That doesn't mean the original populations the slaves left in Africa identified themselves as ''Igbo people'', much less ''eboes''.

''Before European colonization, the Igbo were not united as a single people but lived in autonomous local communities.''

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Igbo

Funny how the white man knows your own history better than you.

danvon:
Yes but unlike you white people are not saying we should return back to the days of the Inquisition they understand history a little bit

They still conduct human sacrifice. Such as the recent sacrifice of 1 million Iraqis by a US president who stated he was asked by God to invade Iraq and Afhghanistan.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/06/bush.shtml

There you've said it Our ancestors fought each other before colonialism and they didn't see themselves as one people

But how do you know they were one people?

The idea of African unity was also invented by Whites when they were trying to justify their racism, we are all the same to them

I said language was NOT a basis for ethnicity in precolonial times.

Language was not what united people, and language difference was not what separated people or led to animosity between groups, as is the case today.

helinues:
After advising you people to move to Biafraland?

If not for pokenosing, you guys shouldn't be here cos this is a forum for Nigerians created by a Nigerian

They are not smart enough to build a website bro.

I'm sure they still see it as oyibo magic.

g0tze:
[s][/s]This post was created to spite the igbo nation.

Cancelling out words means nothing.

They can still be read.

If the TRUTH about your past ''spites'' you, then it's obvious you've got a problem with your past, and accepting your heritage.

That heritage does not support the hateful person you've become, based on language differences, a colonial-wrought demarcation.

danvon:
Yes and the Igbos is not an ethnic group but also an amalgamation of peoples



So was it colonialism that made Hausas to invade the Yaribas?

Those were not ''ethnic'' based wars, but normal wars of conquest between rival powerful regions, fuelled in that instance by the imported Arab religion, and accompanying evangelist motives by the invaders.

Your talking as if Africa was a land of great peace and unity before colonialism

Tell that to Anthony Joshua proud of being a Yoruba explain to him that his tribalism is useless if tribalism was so deadly for us how come it has still stayed and survived?

This is a very false misrepresentation of your ancestors, did you know your ancestors saw nothing wrong with Human sacrifice?

How do YOU know there is something wrong with 'human sacrifice'?

Have you ever sought to understand the philosophy behind it?

Or even research its prevalence?

The white man just came and said ''we'' conducted human sacrifice. And that colours your understanding of ALL African religion, including when and where no such practices existed.

The white man killed over religion.. It was called the Inquiisition. The Crusades. Nice names for murder in the name of religion.

Previously integrated people... i drop my pen

Why do you drop your pen?

Did you ever hear about ''Igbos'' versus ''Yoruba'' wars or enmity in pre-colonial times?

Conflicts were often between neighbouring clans who spoke the same language, but apparently DID NOT see themselves as ''one people'', or they wouldn't fight such bloody wars against each other.

NimrodEndOfDays:
A very dumb and unintelligent post. The more you keep reading things like these the more people get dumber. I can bet my 2 cents that the OP is paid to do this job and probably one of the numerous people who have other handles to cause disaffection amongst those who have chosen to forge forward with their destinies. No matter how hard they try to continually enslave us with their rethorics, many Igbos are waking up to their responsibility of knowing who they are and being proud of it. Those who have chosen to be slaves to the Fulani people,I cannot quarrel with your choice of being in perpetual servitude. But endeavor not to drag the Igbos along on the path of self destruction. We are a Nation and a people who are born free and it would remain that way. Stop trying to make us reason in the slavish manner which your fathers have trained you to be it would never work. We are freeborns and have a right to self determination.

If Biafra is about ''Igbos'' why do you keep adding the Delta region to your phantom map?

Surely it's not because of their multi-billion dollar oil deposits?

Methinks you are manipulating the imported 'tribe' concept for oil and gas - based ambitions.

danvon:
You can as well tell Chinese the concept of belonging to a nation is unasian

Mind you Japan Taiwan and China were once together

Now you said Biafra is a Portuguese name but Nigeria itself is gotten from Britain the name Yoruba is a hausa name, people are always named by outsiders

Tribalism is not a Western invention it's a social one, people need groups to satisfy their wants the bigger the wants the more complex the group... In the olden days there were small wants so there were smaller groups like clan etc but as they grew the clan grew bigger

Now what if tribe is a Western invention the phone you are using is also a Western invention but should you get rid of it.

I wonder if your even in Africa at all, look at the xenophobia in South Africa look at Boko Haram in the north how on Earth do you expect people to come together to solve their problems without becoming national or tribal

Read books and stop getting wisdom from kai kai

You're the one who reasons like a drunkard.

The Chinese are not an ethnic group, but an amalgamation of peoples.

Ethnic groups did not arise in Africa ''out of necessity''.

It was the white man that came in and told YOU that you were ''an Igbo man''. And separated you through stroke of a pen, from a ''Yoruba man''. and an ''Hausa man'', many of whom were hitherto your known blood relatives!

Comparing it to using a phone is ignorant. A phone is helpful. Tribalism is the opposite.

You don't have to use EVERY import they send you. You have the ability to decide which to discard, based on their impact on your society.

TRIBALISM IS UNAFRICAN

DE-TRIBALIZATION is AFRICAN.

Living as a detribalized person means going back to the ways of our ancestors, who judged a man not by the language he spoke, but by the content of his character.

Seeing yourself as a ''Yoruba man'' or an ''Igbo man'' is playing out the Divide and Rule agenda of colonizers, whose aim was always to bring disunity among previously integrated peoples, in order to exploit the continent.