An Igbo President or a President from the Southeast for Nigeria in 2023?
The Media as Conduits of Misinformation
As an undergraduate in the Social Sciences, I learnt that when communicating - oral or written - the 'Sender' has to be cautious that what s/he sends to the 'Receiver' is not misconstrued. I pondered this, and came to realize that the Lesson was just rudimentary Understanding of Communication. The Onus is on both Sender, and Receiver. The Receiver of the Communication might equally be at Fault on how s/he receives it. This is when the Receiver had not paid Attention to Communication sent either by interrupting it where oral thus not having been listening or by interpreting it, whether oral or written, with Reflections unconnected to the Circumstances.
The Dissonance between the Sender and Receiver of Communication is exemplified in the Remonstrations currently in Nigeria about which Nationality1 or "geo-political zone"2 (Region) its 2023 President must emerge from. When I first started hearing about it from Arisetv, and channelstv, it was the Quest for an "Igbo President" that I was constantly familiarised with. Even when these Broadcast Outlets interviewed Guests, it was all about "an Igbo President." Despite airing Broadcasts https://youtu.be/h57Y1BO9P2o (channelstv) and https://youtu.be/LA3y1UxzY2Y (Arisetv), Nigeria's Mediapersons continue to suggest that the Belligerence about where Nigeria's 2023 President must come from is an "Igbo" Nationality Contention. The Broadcasts were Interviews with Southeast Senator Victor Umeh of 'Greater Nigeria Conference' who clarified that the Insistence on a President from the Southeast is not, per se, for an Igbo President. Umeh advised that it is only incidental that the Southeast is "homogeneous[ly]" Igbo. This Enlightenment by Umeh places a different Complexion on the Incitement. Nigeria's Journalists disinclined or unable to follow Victor Umeh's Logic, and Clarification are still screaming "Igbo President" mostly. So, you see, Nigeria's Journalists being the Receivers of Information are not paying Attention to what the Sender, Senator Victor Umeh, is dispatching.
Not new Formula, but dangerous Precedent
Senator Victor Umeh, and those of his thinking argue the compulsory Rotation of the Presidency of Nigeria between the zonal Differentiations of the Country. I am most unable to grasp the Sense. If the Argument were for rotated Presidents to accord with the diverse Nationality Compositions of the Country, I would understand albeit disagree, but zonal Rotation? This is the Difference, i.e., between a Cry for an Igbo President or the Moan for a Southeastern President. Nigerians call these Nationality Compositions “ethnic Groups.” Umeh calls them "ethnic nationalities," whatever that means. Ordinarily, it is curious that the Presidency of the United States of America (USA), a Country whose Polity, Nigerians, especially the Media, easily and quickly point to as emulatory, is not thus rotated among the Zones of the Country. The US has four Time Zones; (1) Eastern Standard, (2) Central Standard, (3) Mountain Standard, and (4) Pacific Standard. These Time Zones identify US Regions, and are approximate to Nigeria's Zones. Now, you laugh? That shows how abominable the Nigerian Madness for rotational Presidents is. Or let us take the 'United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' (UK/Britain). We have four Nations making up the Country. These Nations are equally Zones consonant with Nigeria's Separation into Zones. Have you ever heard anyone contending the Parties rotate the Election of Party Leaders between England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales? We do not directly elect our Prime Ministers (PMs) here. The Leader of the Party with the Majority Seats in our House of Commons becomes the PM. While Nigerians are at it, why are they not also screaming for the Governorship of States to be alternated according to Local Government Areas (LGAs) or are LGAs not also Demarcations; Zones in physical Distinctions? How about the Chair of LGAs shared among the ethnic Distributions in each LGA? See what I mean?
The Attempt to impose a President from the Southeast on Nigerians is Objective not new, it is postured. It is reasoned on the 'zonal Rationale'© of Rotation of the Presidency. It is established, and is the Replay of how a Southwesterner in the Person of retired Army Full-General Olusegun Obasanjo was validated and crowned as the President in 1999, it is pursued. There was an Election, all right, but there might well not have been any since his Presidency was, apparently, foisted upon 'the People'. Whatever the Morality of this Scenario, it compromised the Logic of electoral Politics, and ipso facto set a Precedent not defendable intellectually. This IgboNigeria and YorubaNigeria Whinge for zonal rotational Presidency is an Aberration that cannot be argued as ‘new form’. There is no normative Logic to it. The Benefits to the Zones or to 'Nigeria' itself of this rotational Presidency is not described let alone explained except for Lamentation, and Threats that if this imperious Order is not obeyed, Nigeria will disintegrate. So be it. Disintegration is the best Option for 'Nigeria', but it must be peaceful. Electoral Politics have never been about Competition among disparate Populations or zonal Demarcations of a Country. Electoral Politics have always been elitist Contests between Individuals who might or not come from the same Group whether it is Ethnicity or Gender or Nationality or Race or Zone. You might prefer to see 'Ethnicity' or 'Nationality' in Terms of 'Tribe', I do not really mind inasmuchas you get my picture. Notice in Broadcast https://youtu.be/h57Y1BO9P2o that both Mr Umeh, and Mr Akinbaloye agreed that Nigeria is "blessed" in all its Human-Geographies with Persons "qualified" - whatever that means - to be President. Yet, it is globally evident that Nigeria remains essentially under-developed, i.e., in (1) ‘Fiduciary Morality’©, that is 'Nigeria is financially corrupt, (2) Honesty which is another Way of saying "moral Corruption," "absent Integrity," et cetera, and (3) Infrastructure, things like that. Is there not much original thinking in Nigeria that the least intelligent Person would ask; "why are Nigerians so unable to recognize their manifest Incompetence at reasoning at the basic Level of rationalization, i.e.?" For instance, this 'Dr Pitrus Bogu', 'President Middle Belt Forum' claims that "the Amalgamation of 1914 brought Peoples who were not on the same page together to constitute a nation …" I do not know whether this Man is an academic PhD or honorary. Whichever Way, I do not care. He has simply not demonstrated independent Thought. All he did here https://youtu.be/7nDQvLeX6KQ is tell us the obvious as though new Knowledge, and regurgitate the Miseducation of what signifies a Nation. "Peoples … on the same page …" is not a prerequisite for a Nation. The Imperative is simply that you cannot build a Nation. A Nation pre-exists. You can gather a Nation from Dispersal, and consolidate it, but you cannot create it. See again my Definition of Nation.
So, if Nigeria is saturated with able Minds in Social Organization where is the Difficulty in letting these endowed Individuals challenge themselves on the Basis of Individuality? No, no, Umeh is firm that zonal Rotation in Favour of the “Southeast” in 2023 must prevail for “equity and fairness.” Some, including non-IgboNigerians, have gone further to stamp down that "Equity, Justice, and Fairness" dictate a President "from the Southeast."
"Equity, Justice and Fairness" mandate a Nigerian President from the Southeast in 2023 - What a Load of Tosh
Nigerians, even without a University Degree, believe that by using big English Words, whether common or uncommon, indicates their Grasp of the Language and/or their Level of Education. In most Cases, they are simply verbose or just tautologous or both at the same time. Take the Expression "Equity, Justice, and Fairness." Any of those three Words narrates the same Consciousness in their several ordinary Senses although as I have argued in some of my Writing, 'Justice' does not necessarily bespeak 'Fairness'/'Equity'.3 Certainly, 'Equity' and 'Fairness' identify the same Condition (or Circumstance). Almost as bad as the Nigerian Verbosity, and Tautology is a faulty Grasp of English Grammar.
Anyway, on what Basis is it "fair'' for Nigeria to have a Southeastern President in 2023 or any President by zonal Dispensation for that matter? By which rational Logic4 should electoral Politics, anywhere in the World, earmark the Office of President - any elected Office for that Matter - for any particular Ethnicity or Gender or Nationality or Race or Zone? This is really a 'politico-philosophical' question that I have not come across being asked. In fact, political Practices in Places like the UK will never ask this question because of the Miscalculation that conscious Efforts must be made to include under-represented Segments of Society into the Mainstream. An Example is the 1993 Labour Party 'All Women Shortlist' for the 1997 General Elections. This Option was found unlawful by the Employment Courts in January 1996, but only as it concerned the Sex Discrimination Act 1975. So, in terms of 'meandering-Practices'© in electoral Politics, such sectional Calls for Favoritism as the Call for a Southeast Zone President for Nigeria in 2023, are not unprecedented. The UK Court dismissed such a Preference under a particular Statute, as Chapter IV of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 disavows it. When you listen to Senator Victor Umeh here https://youtu.be/LA3y1UxzY2Y you would find that he is not even able to articulate the Need for the "sharing of power" - whatever that means - but for Sophistry. One would be forgiven for asserting that he has simply lifted the Sense of his Argument from a Source engaging with very different Circumstances. He is so internally-incoherent, and 'circumstantially self contradicting'© He justifies himself and his silly Exhortation by proffering that this "zonal sharing of Power" is enshrined in the Constitution of the 'Peoples Democratic Party' (PDP), i.e.,. Reuben Abati of Artisetv, an Anchor on the same Broadcast supports him here. It is not exactly true that the PDP Constitution has such Dispensation. Section 7.3(c) States "Adhering to the policy of the rotation and zoning of party and public elective offices in pursuance of the principle of equity, justice and fairness." Note that the repetitive "equity, justice and fairness" is now Mantra.
I see no mention of "sharing power" or "sharing of Power" or any such Implication in PDP Document 7.3(c) unless Umeh and Abati are telling me that occupying political Office ipso facto confers Power on the Occupant over 'the People' who have elected the Occupant into that Office. Eye-opening this Understanding of electoral Politics. At any rate, Umeh and Abati both conveniently elect not to apprise their Audiences that this Provision in the PDP Constitution was invalidated by the Court Judgement allowing Goodluck Ebere Jonathan (PhD) to run for the Presidency in 2011 after serving out the Term of the late Umaru Musa Yar'Adua. Chief Judge Lawal Hassan Gunmi of the Federal Capital Territory Abuja ruled that the said Article is 'non justiciable'. 'Non-justiciable' means simply that the Provision cannot be relied upon in a Court of Law. It is not a Legal Contract or a binding Contract of any sort. Even if this Judgement does not exist, the 'Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999' supersedes any Political Party Instrument unless repealed. Abati has a Law Degree I understand. He should not be taught this. The same PDP Constitution is explicit in Section 7(1) that the Nigerian Constitution is supreme: "The Party shall have a manifesto, which, subject to the provisions of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the manifesto of the party shall be implemented …" This is Language that even a first year Student in Law, in any English speaking Jurisdiction, should understand. Abati also holds a PhD. The PhD/DPhil, and the MPhil/PhM are awarded for new Contribution to existing Knowledge. This supposes original thinking. Then again, some secure these Qualifications without credible Efforts. We know this from what they write and/or say. On the Matter of the PDP Clause itself, I find it perplexing ordinarily, and incredibly contemptuous of the Court by still being in the PDP Constitution (2012). Actually, Section 7 is not well written. It is the only Section I read fully. For Instance, the Preamble to 7.3(c) is 7.2 advising that "The Party shall strive to." To "strive to" is not Duty. This Confusion is compounded by Section 7's Inability to distinguish between 'Aims' and 'Objectives' or even identify the Aims and the Objectives.
The wailing for rotational Presidency in Nigeria does not possess any philosophical Validity within electoral Politics. As I keep saying; electoral Politics are about majority validation. If a Person or Group wants to be treated specially, that Entity must seek to obtain the Majority from the Outset of the electoral Competition. Sectorial Demands for differentiation are antithetical to the normative Logic of electoral Politics. Electoral Politics are not Democracy. In Democracy, no Efforts were - past tense - consciously made to include any Segment of Society in the Mainstream. All Segments participated as a Matter of Course. That was the Nature of Direct Democracy that Africans introduced to the World as a form of Government. Yes, it is a Fact that Africans created the Philosophy of Government the Greeks were to identify as "Demokratia'' which interprets roughly as "People Rule." Read Herodotus, and Plutarch on Solon for this. You would need to triangulate what you read from these two with other Pieces of Information out there including 'Establishment-Information'© that is, 'Status-Quo Information'© to appreciate that it was from Kmt, present Day Egypt, that the Greeks stole5 the Practice they named "Demokratia." The anglicisation of "Demokratia'' is 'Democracy'. By which Name the Africans called this System of Government the Greeks thieved from them to convert to electoral Politics, I am not aware. What I do know for certain is that it was Practice that developed into Philosophy. The Greeks were not cognizant of this, but in tinkering with Logic that was not their original Thought, Europeans through the Greeks entrenched their Miscomprehension by Conquest(s). Thus, as far as I am concerned, there is no Democracy - not 'democratic' - Polity anywhere in the World. Voting Officials into Office is emphatically not Democracy. It is electoral Politics. How on earth "People Rule" is tantamount to Elections knocks me out cold.
Philosophy was not something natural to the Greeks hence they misunderstood the African Governance they named 'Demokratia'. They did not comprehend that Philosophy can develop from the Observation of Practice, and vice versa. The earliest Grecian Thinkers, we know from History, understudied Africans. They all spent considerable lengths of time in Kmt (Egypt). Yep, I know; there was that guy "Socrates', yeah? He was Grecian, absolutely, but he was not European. He was not 'Occidental-Caucasian'© Okay, let me submit it the Way you prefer it; he was not 'white'. Take me, i.e., I am British, right? Actually, I am English, but hey, I am racially African. No, thank you; I ain't calling myself that 'B' Word. 'B' Word, 'N' Word; they mean the same Thing only that one is English, the other is Latin. We know that Grecian Herodotus went to Africa some 10 Years after Socrates was born. Do your Deductions from there about Africa, and Ancient Greece. You can debate it all you want, but my Mind is made up. Socrates was unquestionably African. Read up on the guy's physical Features, even as he described himself. Even Grecian Heroes were manufactured from African Folklores. 'Hercules', now a World Hero, was reinvented from the Kmt 'Heracles'. Even 'Homer' is from the Kmt 'H'mer' for 'Griot'. Now, you know why European ('white') Revisionism is always debating which Works were Homer's and which were not, and contriving the Question into a perennial Puzzle. 'Homer' was not a Person, but H'mer, the Oral Storytelling Tradition, transliterated into Grecian, and assumed or deliberately presented to be a Person by European Minds.
Electoral Politics involve Elites competing for Positions, and Victory founded on the 'Majority Principle' whether by 'first past the post' or 'proportional representation' of voting and counting the Vote or whichever of the other existing Methods. It is always determined on 'majority validation'©. Whether the Vote is the individual Vote or is the block Vote, the Logic invariably is Competition among Aspirants from the Word 'go.' It is also the Case, whilst not always stated, that each Competitor for the Votes of 'the People' would be appealing to, and ergo supported by, particular Segments of 'the People'. The Imposition of a Candidate from a particular Segment on the Rest of 'the People' is warped Logic, and it defies the Tenets of electoral Politics.
"The 1999 Nigerian Constitution even as amended is not working": Balderdash
Nigeria's Media should stop airing Repetition of the Balderdash that Nigeria's 1999 Constitution is not working. Any Constitution is an Institution only because 'the People' it governs award it that Status. It is an Instrument that can always be adapted by 'the People' through those they have elected into their Legislatures. If Nigerians do really want their current Constitution revoked in Part or wholly they should vote into Office Aspirants committed to doing this, and vote them out if they subsequently reneged. 'The People' do not even have to wait till the End of any current Election Term to seek Changes. They can ask Legislators to make Changes to the Constitution at any Time, and put them on Notice that those who decide not to be amenable will lose their Seats at the next Election. Electoral Politics are not as unnavigable as Nigerians make them. A ba. Are Nigerians so dimwitted not to recognise that their Bane is not the Presidency (or President), but the National Assembly that has the Power to remove a 'not fit for Purpose' President under any of the Circumstances in Section 143 of the 1999 Constitution? However, Nigerian Legislators will not do this because they care only about their individual Selves, and the Media will not go after the Legislators because they are frightened stiff of the 'Power Intoxication'© of these Legislators against 'the People' in the Atmosphere of knowing that 'the People' are too unsophisticated to realize that they are severally the real 'Power' with what they do with their collective Votes. Go after the 'individual Selves' of your Legislators, and hopefully might get a News Outlet with Spine. It takes the Minor Influence ('minority influence') to mushroom into the Major Influence ('majority influence'). Transformative Changes in Electoral Politics are never top down. Study political Histories - Worldwide - well.
This is just Demagoguery: Listen carefully to Senator Victor Umeh
Victor Umeh is not insisting on an Igbo President, but a President from the Southeast (who happens to be Igbo because of the Human Geography of the Southeast). I want to call this Man a Tribalist, but how can I intellectually do this? The Man is making it clear he is not concerned about his Kin in the other Regions ("Zones") of Nigeria. Yes, there are Igbo in neighbouring Zones, but he is talking about Zones not Nations. Capisci?" So, the Main ain't a Tribalist. He is nonetheless a Demagogue, but why is he one? Why is it more important for him that an Indigene of the Southeast must be President of Nigeria in 2023 instead of an Igbo per se? Look, the Man knows the History of Government in Nigeria when he chooses to. The Head surrounds herself/himself with two Types of inner-circle: (i) Friends who might be from anywhere, and (ii) territorial Associates whether as tribal Kin or zonal Kin. Together this inner-circle wrecks the Nigerian State by whichever Way. We are seeing it happen under Muhammadu Buhari. We have seen it transpire in previous Administrations. We witnessed it when Southeastern Aguiyi Ironsi became Military Head of State after the genocidal Military Coup by Igbo Military Officers against Northern Military Officers, and Politicians. What did Major General Ironsi do in the circa 7 Months he was in Power? He engaged himself fervently with promoting Igbo Military Officers. I do not know to which Zones those Military Officers would belong today. We would have to dig out their Names, and their Towns to find out. Senator Victor Umeh, it is certain, is philosophically close to Ironsi's Practice with his Interest in the 2023 Nigerian President as a Southeasterner. On the Face of it; Southeast Nigeria is where his senatorial Seat is, and would continue to be. It is where he would secure his 'extra-activity'© 'Bread and Butter.' "Onje barao to ma je lo n wa." (Self-Interest). Notice that in https://youtu.be/LA3y1UxzY2Y Umeh kept saying "power sharing" or "sharing Power" and so on and so forth. Such phrasing exposes his Attitude on this 'President from the Southeast' Hoodwinking. So, do not be deceived, People. It ain't about your Emancipation, but Senator Victor Umeh's Empowerment. Does he not emphasize "Power sharing? How is this "Fairness"? However, this is not the total Extent of Umeh's Malady. Notice that Nnamdi Azikiwe was from the Southeast? How about Aguiyi Ironsi? Ah, Odumegwu Ojukwu ko? Now, Umeh wants another whomever from the Southeast. What do I see? I see the Pursued Supremacy of Southeastern Igbo over the other Igbo of IgboNigeria. It is so clear. Igbo have substantial Populations in other Zones neighbouring the Southeast, but under zonal Rotation would be competing with the other Nationalities in those Zones to be President. Get my Drift? When IgboNigeria ceases to be Part of 'Nigeria', and becomes the 'Republic of Biafra', this Discrimination would be obvious for all to see. It is going to be something akin to Sudan/South Sudan, English speaking Cameroun/French speaking Cameroun, et cetera. 'Mark my Words'.
If a Nigerian, notwithstanding wherever s/he is from within the Diversity of Nigeria, is adopted by a Political Party as the presidential Candidate and s/he wins the Office, it should be on the Basis of Individuality not Territoriality espoused by Victor Umeh and ilk. Elections for Office Country-wide or State-wide or Municipality-wide are fundamentally, as in philosophically, entrenched in individual Competition not Group Contest. This affirms and retains 'Fairness'. It is normative Logic. When you say “the Candidate must come from "here" or from "there", you are forcing that "here" or "there", on other "heres" and "theres", and I repeat myself; electoral Politics do not elect the "here" or "there" of an elected Official into Office, but that Official alone. Elected Office does not presume the "here" or "there" of the elected Official as the Incumbent; the Office Holder. This is so basic an Understanding. Electoral Politics do not advocate or accommodate or condone the "here" or "there" of an elected Official in Office other than that Official.
Deceit as an Art of Persuasion
Either by Ignorance or Intension, Senator Victor Umeh misdirected Nigerians, and the World by stating, even though casually, that Nigeria’s first President, Igbo Nnamdi Azikiwe was a “ceremonial President.” In making such a Comment, Umeh was 'constitutionally dishonest'©, historically incorrect, 'legally misrepresentative'© and 'politically destructive'© I have no Sympathy for Umeh if he executed his Disinformation through absent Knowledge. He has the Responsibility to himself, and to his Audience, to acquire the proper Grasp of Attestations he has decided he is an Expert in/on. If he deliberately misled his Audience then he is evidently not trustworthy. In fact, this Man makes a damn good Case for Nigeria’s Divisibility. Did you gather that Victor Umeh, in infinite Duplicity, did not mention Major General Aguiyi Ironsi, Southeastern Igbo as himself, who governed from January to July 1966, as the Military Head of State of Nigeria? See, why Nigeria can never be (sustained or sustainable)? Yes, Nigerians should stop papering the Cracks. “Nigeria” was the Creation of British Colonialism and Imperialism for mercantile Purposes. ‘Nigeria’ from such a foundation cannot all of a sudden become a social Organization intended by ‘God’. Do Nigerians not know how unintelligent they sound with such Bunkum that 'God' created 'Nigeria'? ‘Nigeria’ was an ‘Artificial Abnormality’© manufactured by 'white' Folks. Colonial Nigerians of Igbo, and Yoruba Nationalities deceived themselves that they could make this Imperialist administrative Convenience into a ‘Credible Reality’© of Statehood. The Fulani, and the Hausa collectively and severally were under no such Illusion. Sir Ahmadu Bello, the Sardauna of Sokoto, who was the Premier of the North demonstrated this with his Attitude and Speeches which IgboNigeria, and YorubaNigeria found venomous. Bello knew that the 'Nigeria' devised by Colonialist Great Britain would not work as a socio-geography. It worked as an economic Enterprise, period. It was the Administration of British Possessions of certain trading Posts (Territories). So, perhaps, the Speeches of Ahmadu Bello were not diplomatic, as accused, but they were not incendiary. Bello did not set 'Nigeria' ablaze. Yoruba Chief Obafemi Awolomo did with his Causation of the various Yoruba Riots which led to the January 1966 military Coup that targeted Fulani, and Hausa Military Officers, and Politicians, and Sympathisers instead of the real Culprits of Igbo, and Yoruba Nationalities. This Coup was devised and executed by hate-driven and 'envy-infused'© Southeastern Igbo Military Officers. That IgboNigeria was envy-infused was demonstrated in the 1969 'Ahiara Declaration' when you compare what Flora Louise Shaw, credited with naming 'Nigeria' had to say about the Nationality Compositions of the 'Nigeria' she supposedly christened.
Young Nigerians do need to know how the Geography ‘Nigeria’ came to be, and might then be able to grasp the Incongruity that is 'Nigeria'. This Geography is not the Consequence of ‘Artificial Inevitability’©, but a Collection of British Colonial Trading Posts called the 'Royal Niger Company's Territories'. These were initially not the Properties of the UK Crown. They belonged to the Royal Niger Company albeit operating under the Charter of the British Crown.
I had previously accepted Flora Louise Shaw as renaming the 'Royal Niger Company's Territories' to 'Nigeria'. I had referred to the Article she wrote in 1897 for The Times of London to make this Point because she made it seem as though she created the Name. However, I had also commented that I do not consider Shaw a brilliant Mind or adequately educated. She never explained in that Article how she came about the Name. In the Course of writing this Piece, I typically, did some further Research to ascertain the Veracity of the Information I had in hand. I came across the Contention that the Name 'Nigeria' had been deployed in a Publication of 1862, some 35 Years before Flora Shaw's Use of the Name. The Book is 'Life in the Niger, OR, THE Journal of an African Trader' by William Cole (of Liverpool) published by 'SAUNDERS, OTLEY, and CO' of London. I have now read the Book, and I bring the Attention of my Readers to a relevant Part:
The performance over, the troops retired, each individual as full of dignity and consequence as the "Iron Duke" himself. This is no bad idea of Nigerian warfare; for when a meeting of a rival community takes place for the purpose of trying the force of arms, the matter is generally prolonged to such a period, that all thought of an immediate action ceases, unless a hereditary curse is the cause, when the children of the disputants will hereafter meet, and fight in honour of the dead. [The Emphasis is mine]
So, there we have it. The Description 'Nigerian' was indeed used prior to Flora Louise Shaw. Cole wrote his Book in 1859 and the Manner in which he mentioned 'Nigerian' - a Derivative of 'Nigeria' - would suggest that 'Nigeria' was already in vogue when he wrote it. Thus 'Nigeria' as Description for a certain Territory or some grouped Territories was in circulation 38 Years before Shaw's Newspaper Article purporting to invent the Name. From William Cole also we do not know how the Name 'Nigeria' came about. For those who have proposed that 'Nigeria' was named after the River Niger, I ask: was the 'Republic of the Niger' also named after the River Niger? I suppose you could say it was. After all, the River Niger flows through there too. There is a 'River Niger' in Mexico though. Does the African River Niger also flow through Mexico? The Truth is more the Fact that the Word 'Niger' is Latin for 'black'. 'Niger' for the River is not the Transliteration of an African Word as some have assumed. Anyone who has journeyed over the River Niger in Nigeria, and I have, would appreciate that 'Nigeria' was invented from the Latin 'Niger'. The Deposits of the River Niger are black. While I say 'Nigeria' comes from the Latin 'Niger', it still does have no Meaning with the 'ia' added to it. It is like a Child playing with Letters to make Words. The Republic of the Niger's plain 'Niger' is the one with Essence.
Find below Shaw's Narrative of 'Nigeria' in her Pretence as the Creator of the Name.
In the first place, as the title "Royal Niger Company's Territories" is not only inconvenient to use but to some extent also misleading, it may, be permissible to coin a shorter title for the operation of pagan and Mahomedan States which have been brought by the exertions of the Royal Niger Company within the confines of a British Protectorate and thus need for, the first time in their history to be described as an entity by some general name. … The name "Nigeria" applying to no other portion of Africa may, without offence to any neighbours, be accepted as co-extensive with the territories over which the Royal Niger Company has extended British influence, and may serve to differentiate them equally from the British colonies of Lagos and the Niger Protectorate on the coast and from the French territories of the Upper Niger. … Nigeria contains many widely differing characteristics of climate, country, and inhabitants … The body of the population may, however, fairly be classed in three main divisions. These are pagans, Hausas, and Foulahs [Fulani]. The Pagans are the indigenous inhabitants now driven by successive tides of foreign conquest to take refuge in the mountains or in the countries of the Lower Niger and the coast, where they have sought the protection of European Powers. They are still very numerous, and they represent the lowest civilization of the country. The Hausas … At the beginning of this century … were conquered by the Mahomedan Foulahs, who for about two hundred years had been gradually establishing their domination in the Sudan. The Hausas at that time were pagans, but their civilization claims to be quite as old as that of the Foulahs themselves, and they also came originally into Nigeria from the north, travelling, according to their own traditions, across Africa from Asia. In Nigeria they either drove out or enslaved the original pagan inhabitants and founded several States known geographically as ausaland. … The pure-bred Hausa is perfectly black, but is, of course, of a far higher type than the ordinary negro, and differs from him especially in the fact that he is naturally active, persistent, and industrious. He is essentially a man of peace as the Foulah is a man of war. The Hausa of today is Mahomedan … The Foulah is a Mahomedan Arab, relatively light coloured, of the well-known type. The Foulah domination over various Hausa States in Nigeria was established in the first instance rather by military than by religious superiority, and gradually rulers of the Foulah race began to take the Place of the Hausa Kings. … Within a few years all the petty Kings of the Hausa States were replaced by Foulah Emirs, and the Foulah race was definitely established in the position which it holds today as the dominating race of the entire district. [The Emphases are mine].
Shaw never told us how the Description "Royal Niger Company's Territories" was "misleading." The "Royal Niger Company's Territories" transferred to the British Crown in 1900 in separate Parts as (a) Northern Nigeria Protectorate, and (b) Southern Nigeria Protectorate. I990 is conceivably the Year in which the UK Crown officially adopted the Name 'Nigeria' for the "Royal Niger Company's Territories." In 1914, the Northern, and Southern Protectorates were merged into the Colony and Protectorate of Nigeria.
The constitutional Roles of Nnamdi Azikiwe and Abubakar Tafawa Belewa
‘The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1963’ was very explicit in the following Sections on the Status of the Nigerian President vis-à-vis the Prime Minister. Please note that all the Emphases in the Excerpts below are mine.
Section 34: "There shall be a President of the Republic, who shall be elected to office ... and shall be the Head of State of the Federation and the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federation.”
Section 84(1): "The executive authority of the Federation shall be vested in the President and, subject to the provisions of this constitution, may be exercised by him either directly or through officers subordinate to him".
Section 85: "The executive authority of the Federation shall extend to the execution and maintenance of this constitution and to all matters with respect to which Parliament has for the time being power to make laws".
Section 87(1): "There shall be a Prime Minister of the Federation, who shall be appointed by the President."
Section 87(2): “Whenever the President has occasion to appoint a Prime Minister he shall appoint a member of the House of Representatives who appears to him likely to command the support of the majority of the members of the House."
Section 87(4): “Appointments to the office of Minister of the Government of the Federation other than the office of Prime Minister shall be made by the President, acting in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister".
Nnamdi Azikiwe was the Office Holder of the Executive Presidency of Nigeria from 1963 to 1966. He was an Igbo Man. He was from the Southeast. Senator Victor Umeh is an Igbo Man. He is from the Southeast. Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa was the Prime Minister appointed by Nnamdi Azikiwe. Balewa was from the Northeast. He had minority Percent Fulani Blood in him, like the current President Muhammadu Buhari. Sir Abubakar was never elected Prime Minister in case Umeh and fellow Troublemakers selectively decide not to understand that Part of the Constitution. He was appointed, I reiterate, to the Post by his President, Igbo Nnamdi Azikiwe as instructed by the Constitution of the Nigerian Republic at the Time notwithstanding Southeast Igbo Senator Victor Umeh's and fellow Rabble-Rousers' continuing Distortion of the Truth. Balewa’s elected Office was into the House of Representatives. He was elected into legislative Office, not executive. He was Head of Government, not Executive Head of State. It is weird that our self-celebratory educated IgboNigerians, and YorubaNigerians cannot discern the Difference.
The Excerpts above from ‘The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1963’ are not only confirmatory of the constitutional Relationship between President Nnamdi Azikiwe, and Prime Minister Tafawa Belewa, they robustly expose the Lies of Senator Victor Umeh, and other Mischief-Makers against FulaniNigeria, and HausaNigeria.
Deceit as Art of Persuasion - the Reality
Notice that Umeh referred to the Civil War in his Conversation with Akinbaloye here https://youtu.be/h57Y1BO9P2o as "Accident of the Civil War." Under what Circumstances would this Man be truthful? Conscience, Integrity, and Peace among different Peoples require this Man to stop his manipulative Revision of History. He must desist from his Preoccupation with Disinformation. It is the same Attitude that precipitated the ‘Nigerian Civil War’; the Distortion of Reality. Igbo Aguiyi Ironsi assumed the Rulership of Nigeria in January 1966 after Igbo Military Officers had deliberately murdered Fulani/Hausa6 Military Officers, and Politicians. Instead of prosecuting these Officers, he tucked them in Safety in the Eastern Region under Igbo Military Officer, Colonel Emeka Odumegwu Ojukwu - born in Zungeru (Northcentral), but whose Father was from Nnewi (Southeast) - in addition to promoting Igbo Military Officers. Any honest Onlooker would surmise Ironsi's Actions as Reward for/to the Igbo. In July 1966, Fulani/Hausa Military Officers retaliated. To cut a long Story short, not willing to accept what they initiated in dishing out, the Igbo declared the 'Republic of Biafra' comprising the whole of the Eastern Region in Secession from Nigeria notwithstanding that all in the Region were not Igbo and/or wished to disengage from 'Nigeria'. Nobody in 'Nigeria' talks of this Oppression of the Minorities in the Eastern Region in IgboNigeria forcing them into Rebellion. I was about 10 years old when this War started. We lived in Ebute-Metta at the time, about 10-15 Minutes of my walking to the 'Casino Cinema' bombed by the Biafran Military. I could have been Casualty. My Parents supported the Biafran Cause. They agreed with the Secession. As a Child, I followed suit. Since being an Adult, I realized that my Parents were wrong, in part. I do not mind the Divisibility of Nigeria. In fact, I espouse it, but the Igbo in forcing the whole of the Eastern Region into their Insurrection against 'Nigeria' committed the same Sin(s) they accused 'Nigeria' of exacting against them. I have heard Mr Akin Osuntokun too, an Adviser to President Obasanjo when in Office, use the Description "an Accident" but in Reference to the January 1966 Coup https://youtu.be/_s_sfefYvz0 The Man is said to be a Journalist. While I am certain that Senator Umeh employed the Word "Accident" to describe the Civil War with Intent to falsify Events, I am not sure that Mr Osuntokun knows what the Word means except if he too is craftily misleading Nigerians. 'Accident' is Occurrence that takes everyone by Surprise; everyone including the Protagonists. The 1966 Coup was planned, and then executed. It was an intended Action.
Antagonism involves more than one Party (Entity) whether actively truculent or not. There is always the Truth to any Antagonism no matter how much an Antagonist revises this Truth. It is this Truth that instructs present, and future Relationships among the Antagonists. So, do Senator Victor Umeh and his fellow Revisionists of the Nigerian History from 1914 believe the Fulani/Hausa are oblivious of this History? Ah, I remember; did the Biafran 'Ahiara Declaration' of 1969 not define the Fulani and the Hausa collectively as, "ignorant, decadent and feudalistic … not having emerged from the Middle Ages … servile and submissive. …?" This Declaration was broadcast on Radio Biafra by Colonel - or was he Biafran General by then? - Odumegwu Ojukwu. I heard it because my Mother was listening to it. She stayed tuned to Radio Biafra throughout the War. I cannot remember if I understood all Ojukwu was reading out. If we are all of these Things the Ahiara Declaration diminished us to be - I am of Fulani Stock, by the Way - how can we not be unconscious to how 'Nigeria' came into being? Actually, ask yourselves; which were "servile and submissive", i.e., IgboNigeria, and YorubaNigeria overwhelmed by colonizing European Judeo-Christianity or FulaniNigeria, and HausaNigeria which resisted the Acculturation?
I refer you to how Flora Louise Shaw saw the Peoples of 'Nigeria' in 1897 so that you can see clearly that IgboNigeria, and YorubaNigeria 'consensual-conclusion'© that FulaniNigeria, and HausaNigeria collectively or severally are inferior is simply hallucinatory. Not content with putting themselves on Pedestals - we know the British saw them in 1897 as backward - IgboNigeria, and YorubaNigeria are bent on taking on three Fronts, probably four, in their Bellicosity against FulaniNigeria, not so much HausaNigeria. I am not going to tell them here what these Fronts are. IgboNigeria, and YorubaNigeria really do need to calm down. If they get another Civil War, as they are pushing for, they do not have the Numbers within Nigeria or enjoy the Goodwill of their Kin in neighbouring Countries to prosecute the War successfully. Their discriminatory Dispositions put paid to that. IgboNigeria, and YorubaNigeria have Cause for Separation on the Basis of UK's Manufacture of 'Nigeria'. They have absolutely no Cause to demonize FulaniNigeria (and/or HausaNigeria).
The Shame of Nigerian Politics: Decadence, Opportunism, and Sorrow
It is contemptible, is it not that Nigeria's Politicians are squabbling over which Zone in the Country their next President must come from? They are not contending over Policies on how to develop their Country. I am so saddened that there is a Country in this World that fights over a non 'Common Good' Triviality such as the Rotation of its Presidents along 'territorial segmentation'[s], be it tribal or zonal. It is so disheartening when Exponents of this Mindlessness celebrate it as inspiring to deserve the Accolade "greater …' and the rallying Cry of "together we can." These Individuals should just go take a running jump. They are so unworthy.
It is not surprising why these Politicians are openly sectoral. The average Nigerian is a Sectionalist. It is an inevitable Consequence of the Design of the Country. A Collection of Peoples, whose only Commonality was as trading Posts for Colonialist Great Britain, misdirected themselves that they could transform their mercantile Origin into a substantive social Organization. They could not, and still cannot. Each of the different Peoples constituting the 'Federal Republic of Nigeria' is sovereign in Territory and in Culture. In other Words, each of these Peoples are entrenched in their social Organizations which they are weld to subconsciously even when they are not conscious of this Inseparability with their social Organisations. It is in Recognition of this umbilical Connection that I respond to Pitrus Bogu, above, that you cannot build a Nation because it already exists. It is natural. It is impossible to build a Nation from many Nations. A Nation is inviolable. The trading Posts of the British Empire which accepted their Subjugation into 'Nigeria' were each a Nation or Groups within identifiable Nations. Thus, FulaniNigeria, HausaNigeria, IgboNigeria, and YorubaNigeria can be prejudiced against one another. From philosophical, and social-psychological readings of the History of 'Nigeria' I find nothing wrong with this Prejudice. It is Prejudice occasioned by engineered cohabitation of various Nations causing Resentment of one another. It is the natural State of being. It is a different Thing if such Nations wish to live together, not by saying that they do, but acting that they need to or want to. FulaniNigeria, HausaNigeria, IgboNigeria, and YorubaNigeria do not act that they desire to live within the same Territorial State. Perhaps, certain of them might wish to make up the same Country, but not all of these major four. The other Nations in Nigeria will surely find their Ways when the Divisibility of Nigeria is accepted as inevitable.
It is the Sovereignty of each of the divergent Peoples that enables a Spokesperson of a People to assert without Attestation that another People desire to be the Hegemon among the Peoples or is already the Hegemon. However, such Spokespersons overplay their Hand when they point the Finger of Incapacity or Incapability at the Nigerian Constitution of 1999. No Constitution can make 'Nigeria' work as a Country, and I get very frustrated when 'Nigerians' claim that 'Nigeria' is a Nation or that they want or wish to build it into a Nation. A Country is not necessarily a Nation, and there are not many Countries which can be identifiable as Nations. When was the last time anyone heard the UK call itself a Nation? No, it says 'Country' because it accepted some time back that it comprises the four Nations of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. 'Nigerians' who call 'Nigeria' a Nation are backward in their Understanding of the Makeup of a Nation. The Way forward is Dissolution of the 'Nigeria' Territorial-State, but not by Civil War. Believe me, Biafra - or whatever it is to be called - has Cause, so does Odua - or whatever it is to be called. I suspect that the Fulani, and the Hausa in 'Nigeria' refuse to acknowledge this Reality because of the Oil Resources, and other exploitable natural Resources in the intended Biafra, and Odua Republics. "Ni igba wo ni maku o ni ku" as the Yoruba would philosophize. The Aphorism sounds like a question, but it is really a Statement that the Inevitability cannot be avoided. 'Nigeria' will divide, but please no War.
Incidental
Professor Khalifa Dikwa, Dean of the ‘Borno Elders Forum', should try to adequately articulate himself in the English Language. He mumbles. I intend no Offense.
I want my Readers to never forget that I am (1) of Fulani Origin, and that I believe I am full Fulani - but I might be wrong and will adjust my Nationality if proven wrong, but will never desert the Right of the Fulani to Fairness. Nigerians insist the Fulani are Cattle Rearers yet there are Fulani, not only in 'Nigeria', whose Intellect, and academic Achievements compare with the best in the World. Take me, i.e. Check my Credentials. I allow you, (2) not One for taking Sides. I tell it as I see it within the Compass of extant Information at my Disposal. This tells you I will revise my Position consonant with existing and truthful Information. I am an evolved Human Being not constrained by that worst of Diseases; 'Loyalty' to Group or Person. I prefer to call it 'Disease' rather than 'Condition', but it is really a 'Condition'. By the Way, I write Yoruba - not well, and I apologize - because I grew up in Lagos, and Yoruba is the only African Language I understand. I can speak it - well, in fact - but can never read it, hence my illiterate writing of it.
What exactly does Senator Victor Umeh mean by "ethnic nationalities"? (https://youtu.be/LA3y1UxzY2Y).
I have used the present continuous Tense in this Essay, as in the present Tense, to inform my Readers that I was writing about continuing Attitude and/or Disposition.
Endnote
1My 'Nation' is Group Identity founded on common cultural History, and shared Genealogy. My ‘Nationality' recognizes Belongingness to a Nation.
2I am unable to grasp the Logic of the zoning in the first place, and cannot reason through the Description of "geo-political" in an internal - Intrastate - Context. Quite frankly, I think the Term has been borrowed from the 'International Relations' Lexicon without knowing its Significance.
3See, i.e., (1) dan Iyan, I.P., Applause for British "Fairness and Justice" - An Illusionary Paradise, Amazon, 2013, and (2) dan Iyan, I.P., Justice as Fairness: an Intellectual Faux Pas - 'Fairness' is equalizing, 'Justice' is Disempowering, Amazon, 2014.
4I think I used to say something like "it is illogical" or "it is not logical" or Phrases denoting the same Sense. Then, during my undergraduate Years I came across an academic Argument that there is Logic to all Phenomena. I mulled over this, and I agreed. I cannot remember the Paper though or by whom. I have since moved on with this Understanding of 'Logic' to identify 'normative Logic', 'rational Logic', and 'irrational Logic'. Definitions which assess 'logical' as meaning 'rational' are unsound. They are Misnomers.
5The conventional Word is "borrowed", but how could you "borrow" or have "borrowed" what you did not return or have not returned, but announced as your own?
6Nigerians would normally write Hausa-Fulani suggesting two different Peoples fused as a Nation. This is not strictly true. Yes, there are now Persons who are composed of Fulani and Hausa Bloods, but there are still single Blood Fulani, and single Blood Hausa Persons, if there is any such Thing as 'single Blood' since all Human Beings are mixed to some Extent. I use the Oblique in the Place of 'and' to denote two different Peoples in Association.
Ipemndoh dan Iyan PhM©
AsimauGlobalMedia©
All Rights 2022©
11 May
Comments
Post a Comment