Nigeria at 64, where individual comfort trumps national greatness (1)  

DAMILARE EBENIZA

Damilare Ebeniza studied Political Science and International Relations in Nigeria, Benin Republic, and France, with a research focus on Nigerian history, economy, and foreign politics. He has experience as a conference interpreter and external relations management across Chad, Niger, Mali, and Guinea Conakry, for governmental, regional and international organisations in West Africa. He is an analyst for West African Democracy Radio in Dakar, Senegal and actively contributes to critical dialogues shaping the region’s socio-political landscape. Proficient in French, English, and four additional non-Nigerian African languages, he embodies a commitment to cross-cultural understanding and effective communication. He can be reached via comment@businessamlive.com 

If you survey the opinions of leading intellectuals today on the question of what is ailing our nation 64 years after its establishment, the overwhelming majority will say bad governance, corruption, weak institutions. In the mind of these highly credentialed Nigerians, the solutions range from electoral reform, to electing the right leaders, to regionalism, to true federalism, to restructuring, to a new constitution. And these are among the most restrained.

The extremists among them advocate quite loudly in recent years for the outright dissolution of the union. Concepts like Yoruba nation, IPOB or Miyetti Allah have made their way into the list of vocabularies for our public discourse.

Whatever the solution our intellectuals or opinion leaders offer however, they all agree that Nigeria is not working as expected, and, what needs to change, is not our attitude as Nigerians, but the structure of the Country. Some believe our Country is on the brink of collapse and that our options to avert this impending doom are limited. We either take their medicine, or watch the disease kill us all. This is our Zeitgeist.

Nigerian intellectual elites are in a cave of their own making and, having lost the capacity to escape from it, they are desperately trying to lure those with unsophisticated credentials like the rest of us. The misery of life in a cave is a sense of powerlessness that raises mere blame into worthy citizen participation in the affairs of the city.  Since part of what makes life in a cave bearable is the fortress of lies those who live in it build around themselves, such lies constantly need fresh angles. Nigerian elites have, for so long, believed some comforting lies about themselves and their country, that now, they cannot tell apart the truth from falsehood. 

In this article, I seek to convince you the reader that our economy is not broken, that our nation is not on the brink of collapse, that with all its problems, our politics is not broken. That what is broken in Nigeria today is reality itself. That, as Karl Popper puts it, if we can stop prophesying about our future, we may be able to create it.

Let me begin with Nigeria as a national project.

Ten months before our Independence, Sir Harold McMillan, The British Prime Minister visited Nigeria. During a discussion in Lagos with Sir James Roberston, the last Governor General of Nigeria, the Prime Minister asked: ‘Are these people ready to govern themselves?’ 

The past 64 years was our attempt to answer that question.  Anyone who read the speech delivered in 1947 by Sir Authur Richards, the Governor of Nigeria during the first ever gathering of those whose children are now referred to as Nigerians, will know that, while our path has not been the smoothest as a Nation, Nigeria has come a long way.

Like any large-scale political project human beings have embarked on throughout history, Nigeria is an idea. The idea of building the largest, most prosperous black nation in history from ethnically diverse groups without resorting to conquest. While there are many other national projects on the African continent today, Nigeria is, by far, the most ambitious. The Nigerian National Project is our attempt to build something those who came before us could not dream of. The last generations of Africans who were as free as we are today, had little wealth but they built those great empires we all are proud of. They chose greatness over personal comfort. This is what this moment in history demands from us but, on a scale never before imagined. 

From 1960 to 1967, political authority in Nigeria was in flux. The civil war and the multiple military coups are all attempts by The Nigerian Military elites to claim power following the departure of the British. The last 25 years have been our most sustained effort yet at political stability. We have managed to change those who exercise power without resulting to violence. To some, of course, this is slow progress. It is progress, nonetheless.

A sustained democratic process is, however, not an end in itself. Democracy was supposed to be a tool to expand and deepen the meaning of citizenship in Nigeria. The military ceded power to civilians; not so few men can claim the country for themselves.  We adopted democracy because this is the only way known to humans to involve as many people as possible in the most consequential decisions of their country.  

In the last 10 years however, the Nigerian elites seem to have forgotten those the system left behind. And they are the majority in this nation today. Like the military before them, our political, religious, business elites, that is those who have succeeded in the current system, have forgotten the bulk of our population.  The biggest challenge for any Nigerian leader in this century would remain how to extend and deepen the value proposition of citizenship in Nigeria.

To better illustrate why reality itself is broken in Nigeria, I took the liberty to quote at length a speech delivered by Roman Herzog, the President of Germany on 26 April 1997. 

‘Anyone who wants to postpone or impede reform in these major areas should know that the German people as a whole will have to pay, and the price will be high. I warn anybody who might be contemplating delaying or even blocking these reforms for political reasons that it is, above all, the jobless who will pay the price.

All political parties and social groups lament with one voice the great problem of high unemployment. If they really mean what they say, I expect them to act – quickly and decisively! We must show greater resolve in addressing these issues! We simply cannot allow our political institutions to suffer self-inflicted gridlock.….

All too often, the urgent need for change is simply side-stepped by appealing to the state; this has practically become the national knee-jerk response. But the higher our expectations of the government, the easier it is to be disappointed – not just because our public coffers are low. The government and its institutions are often simply not equal to the complexity of modern life, with all of its borderline and special cases – nor can they be.

The state today suffers from the myth that its resources are inexhaustible. In short, the citizens ask too much of the government, while, for its part, the government asks too much of its citizens. The heavier the tax burden, the more is expected of the government – which then has no choice but to borrow more or raise taxes even more. When borrowing is too high, all that is left is radical surgery to balance the budget, with painful economic consequences. It becomes a vicious circle.

This ritualistic appeal to the state goes hand in hand, as I see it, with a dangerous decline in people’s commitment to the common good. When taxes are high, it is too easy to think that merely by paying them you have met your obligations to society in full. The individual urge to profit at society’s expense has virtually become a national pastime. What have things come to when a person is admired if he succeeds in milking the social welfare system, knows the most ingenious ways of evading taxes, and cashes in on the widest range of subsidies? People justify this behaviour by pointing the finger at others: everybody’s doing it, they say, so why shouldn’t I?

In light of all these problems, I wonder if we are even debating the right issues. Let’s start with the basics. The world around us has become increasingly complex, so we are forced to seek different and more elaborate solutions. But the issues that are most hotly debated are precisely the ones about which our citizens are most uninformed.

Surveys show that only a minority is aware of what the major reform initiatives are all about. This confirms a failure of imagination on the part of those who should know better: the politicians who too easily get bogged down in detail and fail to clarify the broad programmatic outlines; the media, to whom cheap headlines often matter more than straightforward information; the experts who think it beneath them to be straight and “tell it like it is.”

Instead, we indulge in forecasts of doom. With almost every new discovery we ask first what risks and dangers it will bring, not what opportunities it will present. Nearly every hint of reform comes under instant suspicion as an attack on the welfare state. …, the discussion is distorted beyond recognition: sometimes politicised, sometimes just oversimplified. Debates like this no longer lead to decisions. 

…..

Self-styled experts with advanced degrees are invited to speak out about anything at all, as long as they portray these things darkly and frighten as many people as possible. Mock battles are fought out in political or academic circles until the average citizen is hopelessly confused. In these debates, quality is often discarded in favour of verbal brutality, belligerent language, and intellectual fisticuffs. This is all happening at a time when people are already worried about the radical changes they are experiencing, at the very time when citizens who lack expertise on particular topics should be able to depend on outside guidance. I call for restraint: words can injure and destroy our sense of community. We cannot afford this in the long run, especially when we are more dependent than ever on a sense of community.

Are our educated elites still capable of climbing out of the trenches of dogma and making any decisions at all? Who is supposed to set society’s course: those with an elected mandate to do so, or those who are most successful in stirring up public opinion? Representing special interests is, of course, a legitimate activity. But time and again, we see this or that group blocking long-overdue decisions by the uncompromising defence of its own special interests. I urge everyone to act more responsibly!

….

Our political, business, media, and social leaders may recognise what is right. But I do not have the sense that they are able or willing to put their insights into practice. At times, they may well find themselves forced, for a change, to go against public opinion. The situation in Germany today is such that we can no longer always afford to choose the path of least resistance.

Indeed, I believe that, when faced with fundamental challenges to our survival, the only winners will be those who are really prepared to lead, those whose honest beliefs matter more than getting or keeping political, economic, or media power. We must never underestimate the common sense or wisdom of the people. On the big issues, they will reward those who maintain a steady course. Our elites must provide leadership on vital reform issues rather than lag behind!

The elite must justify themselves through achievement and decisiveness and be role models worthy of emulation. I also expect them to speak in plain language! Leaders – no matter whom they are leading – must be candid with those who follow them, even when it is an unpleasant task. 

….

I could go on indefinitely about the problems we face, but, as I said before, what we need now is action, not analysis. Let me now turn to the question of what must be done. I believe we need a new social contract for the future. All the social entitlements that have accumulated over the years – and I do mean all of them – must be up for discussion. Everybody must contribute to this discussion. Merely making demands contributes nothing. It does not matter if those are demands of the employers, the trade unions, the state, the political parties, the government, or the political opposition, depending on where you are coming from.

[…]

The tasks that face us are daunting. People feel overwhelmed by the flood of change, all of it coming at once. That is understandable, for we have built up an enormous backlog of neglected reforms. It will take strength and effort to drive renewal forward, and too much time has already been lost. But nobody should forget that in technologically sophisticated societies, permanent innovation is a never-ending task. The world is on the move; it will not wait for Germany.

Now we must get to work. I call upon all our citizens to assume greater personal responsibility. I am counting on a renewal of spirit. And I trust in our creative power. Let us believe in ourselves again. Our best years are yet to come.’

Very few speeches by foreign leaders describe with such crude candour the situation in Nigeria today than the speech quoted above. But if President Bola Ahmed Tinubu had delivered a message like this on October 1st, he would have been accused of dereliction of duty.

• business a.m. commits to publishing a diversity of views, opinions and comments. It, therefore, welcomes your reaction to this and any of our articles via email: comment@businessamlive.com