Disruptive Political Engineering: My Thoughts on the Emerging Youth-based Political Parties, By Semiu A. Akanmu

During our conversation at the formal inauguration of Oyo state branch of Movement Against Corruption and Injustice (MACI), commending Barr. Bankole Solomon's initiative, I remarked that "his is a disruption to the elitist face of human rights activism". MACI is directly relating with the masses using the language they understand, and its activities are self-funded. I submitted, in a later Facebook update, that "it is by similar disruption that we can change our political process and landscape". 

Just as Uber and AirnB, and many other technology products, have disrupted the traditional and conventional approaches to social services (Uber disrupted transportation, and AirnB disrupted hospitality), there must be a disruption in our political engineering process before the desired result can be achieved. The present process is one of profiteering, political patronage, and nepotism, oiled by prebendal political culture. This current system must be torn and rebuilt. 

The failed Buhari experiment has further cleared any illusion of hope from PDP, APC, among others; their political architecture and the products they will continuously be delivering. What we can have from this present crop of political groups (not parties, of course) are tokens in the garb of SURE-P, N-Power, while the children of the elites and power brokers will continue enjoying preferential treatment and access to public vault. 

None of the present power actors will deliver inclusive political institutions that will devolve power, equitably distribute political rights, and ensure fiscal federalism. None of them will engineer prosperity through inclusive economic institutions where accessing loan facility will not be exclusive privilege of the legal rogues called Senators, while genuine enterprises are killed with obnoxious interest rates. 

It is against this backdrop that I vehemently believe that there must be disruption -a non-conventional, anti-status quo, anti-traditional approach -in our political engineering. It is on this basis I am giving Tope Fasua's Abundant Nigeria Renewal Party (ANRP) and Onyeka Nwelue's Progress Party (PP) a benefit of attention, as possibly the long-awaited disruption. 

 However, the basis of this mobilization must disregard age stratification, and transcend our justifiable anger against the Buhari's government. Also, we must deeply understand the "long walk to freedom", in Nelson Mandela's words. There must be a creative disruption in our current political engineering process, a redefinition of our political culture, a remodel of our political architecture. This is the only path to real democracy and economic prosperity. 

But in toeing this path, age is never a unifying force; the propeller must go beyond Buhari's failure; and lastly, we must acknowledge the thorns on this long walk to freedom. These are what I summarised as (a) Age, (b) Beyond Buhari-induced anger, and (c) Our Long Walk to Freedom -gathering my thoughts.

Political parties are formed on the basis of ideals, policy direction and sociopolitical and economic ideology. Never on age. It is ageist to dismiss older Nigerians in this revolutionary cause, and petty to think the young ones are exclusive demography of progressive elements, thus have the magic wand. Even though we might leverage on the larger population of the youths, for political advantage, our political agenda must not deride the elders, nor must it wear arrogant apron. As a cultured Yoruba, I know too well that "the source of Yoruba civilization (Ile-Ife) was founded by the wisdom of both the old and young".

Again, even though our punctured hope by the hitherto saint and anti-corruption czar, Buhari, is enough to invoke anger that will fell Jericho's wall, this emergence of a political disruption must go beyond Buhari-induced anger. We must transform the agony to organised movement that will permeate all strata of the society. We must understand that our desired Nigeria is by structural and systemic change, not by replacing who wears the tag of "C in C".

Lastly, this journey is a long walk to freedom. Wrestling power from the organised elite group armed with all state apparatus, and deep pocket, will not be a walk in the park. It is a journey for the strong-willed, not faint-hearted. Its yield is not low hanging and will certainly take time.

All the same, we have started. I have registered for ANRP!
 

You can also register here!!

The Struggle between National Interest and Ethnicised Politics, By Semiu A. Akanmu

 In Nigeria, at convocation of every national discourse, at every agitation of causes for national growth and development, ethnicised politics is always a default virus. It corrupts the reasoning of the citizenry; it diverts attention from core issues of national interest to mundanities and banalities; it changes the supposed narrative of pan-Nigeria conversation to one where practitioners of ethnicised politics are more interested in the “Fulani” of the herdsmen than the killings, and as an antithesis, one where accused ethnic affiliates sweat profusely in defence of their ethnicity more than condemning the criminality. The triumph of ethnicity over security in the last conversation that trailed the murderous activities of herdsmen, in Nigeria, is unfortunate.

In this, our Press is the first culprit. Agenda-setting theory in political communication explains the strength of the Press in tele-guiding the populace on what to talk and think about. One can imagine what the conversation would have been if “Nigerian herdsmen kill four, injure two” is the screaming headline with no highlight of the needless ethnic affiliation of the criminals. The sore losers of the last election, irrespective of their ethnic affiliations, were also catalysts that aided the agenda of the fifth columnists. It was an intentional narrativist colouration to paint President Buhari, being a Fulani, as an accomplice and abettor in the crime perpetrated by the herdsmen –using the brush of ethnicised politics. In between, there were sincere outbursts from Nigerians who were scandalized by habitual sluggishness to national emergencies that this administration is known for.

Let us be clear: “Fulani” herdsmen do not kill host communities, mostly farmers, or destroy their crops and plantations, because they are Fulani. They do so, quite unfortunately, because they are herdsmen. It is, traditionally, a struggle for economic survival between two asymbiotic “professions”. From the Massai and Pokot people of Kenya, Turkana in Uganda, and the Fulani in North and West Africa, the pastoralists’ struggle for survival have always been with havoc unleashed on farmers, and crops mangled.

With proliferation of fire arms through our loose borders, self-defence against cattle rustlers, herdsmen are now armed, and as a consequence, the fights that were earlier fought with bow and arrow are now fought with AK47. In all, the Fulani affiliation of the Nigerian herdsmen is a non-entity in solving the crisis; it is a non-variable in understanding the historical tension; it is not an alibi against stemming their criminal activities, prosecuting and punishing the perpetrators. It is just for a purpose: Ethnicised politics to further highlight our fault lines. This, predictably, shifted a discussion of national interest, supposedly to centre on proactive countermeasures against continuous experience of such killings, to ethnic characterisation of the victims and the culprits, and culpability of the Nigeria state.

We are yet to hear the last of herdsmen-farmer friction. Hashtags and “Boycott Beef” campaign will not solve it either. With the ravaging consequences of climate change, desertification of the Northern Nigeria, movement of herdsmen to Southern Nigeria is inevitable. Without discounting the fact that the Nigeria police must keep eyes on the criminals among the herdsmen, a state-backed grazing architecture will significantly stem the herdsmen-farmer dagger-to-heart, and present our country as one that has exited the 17^th century.

This, therefore, rationally necessitates deeper engagement with the proposed National grazing reserve bill. There are possibly contentious provisions in the bill; there could be nerve-straining clauses, especially for a country of mutual suspicion among its components regions. Nevertheless, it is a step better than no step. If we de-ethnicise national debate around this bill, we will surely actualize one that promotes national interest by solving the herdsmen-farmer crisis that is gradually replacing the depleting Boko Haram menace.

A ki je meji po, l’aba Alade: Re-understanding Yoruba Philosophical Thought on Scarcity and Resource Allocation, By Semiu A. Akanmu

Eunice, Precious and Taofeeq are friends whose certain challenges in life endeavours –what my other spiritual friends will call trials –propelled the need to re-understand “A ki je meji po, l’aba Alade” Yoruba philosophical thought. Eunice and Precious’ cases are similar, though with different causative factors. Taofeeq’s was quite different. But all are unified at a point where lessons on scarcity and resources allocation are indispensable. 

Eunice is a slim lady, elegant, intelligent and with an impeccable command of English language. Many would like to attribute her communication prowess to her field of study: Eunice is a graduate of Mass Communication with Second Class Upper Division grade. I disagree because I have seen a graduate of English language who could not write complainant statement in pure English language without giving a substantial part to Pidgin. I believe Eunice is just a language nerd. Eunice would be 40 years old this year. To her, because she is still single, she is facing trial. May be from certain spiritual principalities! Precious’ body structure is the opposite of Eunice’s. She is a typical example of what is called, in street lingo, “Orobo to cute”. She manages balances being plump with being sporty. Precious will be having her PhD in Human Development in few months. Similar to Eunice, Precious will be 43 years old in May, this year. She is also single. From my close interaction with both ladies, their morals – cultural and Christian faith-driven –are worthwhile, and their credibility is not in doubt. 

Taofeeq, being a guy, probably wouldn’t be enlisting late marriage (or being single) as trial. He is married, though, and the marriage is blessed with kids. He controls a small enterprise of 20 – 25 employees. At an age of 36 years, the confectionery company he laboured to build from scratch, starting from years of baking apprenticeship, now fetches him an annual net profit of Five Million Naira. His fixed assets –building, machines and bakery equipment –value at Ten Million Naira. Taofeeq is a secondary school certificate holder. He could not afford a university education when he ought to, and this necessitated his exploration of other means of livelihood. To him, his inability to get a degree when his mates did is a trial, on which he still groans. 

In all my respective discussions with these three persons –Eunice, Precious, and Taofeeq –I had ensured we re-engaged and re-understood “A ki je meji po, l’aba Alade” Yoruba philosophical thought on scarcity and resource allocation, in view of demystifying the spiritual attachment they have given to their scarcity-induced experiences. These are experiences they all do not want to take responsibilities, or accept fate, for their resources’ allocation preferences. 

Eunice, a Nigerian, in the midst of blacks, has always been dreaming of marrying a White guy. When the dream of leaving the shores of Nigeria, at least to afford her the opportunity of meeting Oyinbo, becomes bleaker, she resolved to “manage” a black guy, but one that is lanky, tall, and preferably with “six packs” abs. Eunice has now resorted to fate; she is ready to go for “anything husband”, in as much she will be loved. But at 40, her chances of marrying a single guy are almost non-existent. She is not yet in term with polygamy, nor has she agreed to marry a widower or divorcee, who, most likely, would have had children from previous relationship. She never prayed for step-children. In all, Eunice has achieved being a dream pursuer. 

Precious had advances from men expressing their love and intentions of marriage immediately she completed her first degree. She turned all offers down. She was afraid of dream killers. She wanted to be a scholar, an academic, and a human development expert of international repute. She believed marriage, especially with men of superiority complex, would defeat her dream.  As she is now rounding up her PhD, with fair number of academic journals and conference proceedings to her resume, and with a teaching job in a university, Precious is living up to her dream, but she still alleges that inability to marry till now is a trial caused by certain principalities. 

Taofeeq wouldn’t want to appraise the progress he has made from another perspective: one that compares his financial status and standard of living with that of his mates who got their degrees when they ought to. Taofeeq was learning bread baking, while his mates were learning binomials. His mates are either employed, or unemployed. In Nigeria, few of his age mates could match his financial strength acquired through legitimate earnings. Still, Taofeeq is bothered of being one that has no degree appellation to flaunt. 

To the Eunice, Precious and Taofeeq: A ki je meji po, l’aba Alade. You cannot eat your cake and still have it. Aba Alade (Alade’s village) is a metaphor for a livelihood with limited resources. If our lesson in elementary Economics is still valid, the insatiability of human wants and the limitations of resources (material and immaterial) will always be responsible for scarcity. This will require systematic allocation of our resources. We probably will not be able to have it two ways. We will have to set your scale of preference; we will have to choose what our forgone alternative will be. We must be happy with our decision, after all. We must not place responsibility of innocent principalities. 

A ki je meji po, l’aba Alade is a Yoruba philosophical thought on scarcity and resource allocation that echoes the indispensability of these human and social (economic) principles. It tells you to choose one, you may not have both!

“It is up to you”: My First Lesson on Plurality in Malaysia, By Semiu A. Akanmu

From certain distant observers, Malaysia is an Islamic country, most likely, the nationals speak Arabic, and Sharee’a (Islamic) law is the national legal mechanism. No matter how ludicrous this assertion might sound to those in the knowledge of the actual identity of Malaysia, it should not be surprising.  It cannot be unusual when there are Nigerians naming Australia as a member country of West Africa. It can be that appalling! 

Even though I was fairly informed of the national identity of Malaysia, and its socio-political characterization, I was extremely surprised to learn that, despite being of Muslims majority (70%, arguably), with handy portion of their legal instrumentality reflecting Islamic laws, Malaysians at their individual levels are pluralistic, tolerant of individual freedom of choice, even when they disagree. “It is up to you” is very close to an average Malaysian’s cheek; he or she throws it at you to simultaneously express respect to your choice, and disagreement or disinterest with/in that choice. “It is up to you to make your choice.” “It is up to you, since it is your life.”

This trait of an individualistic society is in steep contradiction with the Malaysian national collectivist culture which is perpetuated by the political class and generally obtainable in modern Asian countries. However, Malaysians, at their interpersonal relationship level, proudly exercise this tolerance to plural society and endorse libertarianism. As a citizen of a country of God-appointed litigators and moral policemen, Malaysians’ tolerant disposition to ideals they equally find strange and obnoxious was my first lesson. 

I encountered “it is up to you” in many of my interactions with Malaysians –from classrooms, to group discussion, to shopping malls, to groceries’ stores. In all, Malaysians’ disposition to homosexuals, or people that are publicly exhibiting effeminate features (for supposed males), and masculine features (for supposed females), is the most reinforcing of Malaysians’ unmistakable maturity to deal with plurality. 

To be very clear, and for the purpose of emphasis, Malaysians’ majority are Muslims, Malaysia is a close-open society, depending on your angle of appraisal, and homosexuality is a crime. Yet, Malaysians will not act with brazen impunity of dispensing justice on behalf of the state; Malaysians will not assault and harass people that are inclined to homosexuality. In fact, my close knowledge of homosexuals, their dressing style, outward appearances, and concrete understanding of their existential livelihood came from Malaysia.

I have had few encounters with this people, though distant, but till now, I could not still wrap myself around the actual fact and truth supporting their wish for anatomical shift. I have been subtly wooed by one of them, I have been served food in a restaurant by one of them, I have taken ferry with one of them sitting nearby, and most unbelievable, I have prayed in mosque with one of them. One of this people a typical Nigeria religionist so much abhor and ready to kill on behalf of his God is a mosque administrative assistant for people praying to their own God in Malaysia. I have since been wondering if Nigerians’ Allah/Jehovah is different from Malaysians’. If this is not, certainly Nigerians’ Islam/Christianity is different from Malaysians’, and/or Nigerian Muslims and Christians are different from their Malaysian counterparts. You cannot claim to read the same scripture, worship the same God and have different disposition to the same phenomenon, especially when such is argued to be scriptural or theological. A particular intervening variable must be missing out. 

And I know. I know that Nigeria citizenry is one with battered psychology –evident in cheerleading of its treasury looters but reprimand its petty thieves. I know that as Nigerians provide alternatives to public amenities like electricity and water, they are also tempted to provide justice. But there is a need to specifically engage certain section of the Nigerian populace who dispense jungle justice or rationalises such national madness based on religious leaning and theological precepts. 

It should dawn on us why we should quickly fix the Nigerians’ religionists’ demon; we should infuse “it is up to you” into their mental being for us to be safe from their theist terrorism.