I have come by several jibes on idealism but the most provocative to date was Mecken’s slur that an idealist is one who concludes that a rose makes a better soup than a cabbage simply because it smells better.
In essence, fragrant idealism thrives as Utopia. It wholly diminishes if unaccompanied by the preconditions essential to its actualisation.
Without grit, the most radiant ideal dims to smut; flaming and curling, it sears with promise until it scalds the heart of the idealist, leaving him with a charred psyche.
The best idealism is mined inside out, deep down in the trenches. It surpasses the splendour of pontification or a snobbish purge of the mind. Thus to attain actual relevance under the incoming dispensation, the Nigerian idealist must descend from his arrogant perch and hop into primaeval mud.
Torrid idealism, alone, could never demolish the castle gates of malfeasance ingrained in the Nigerian psyche. Our multiplex of corruption is celebrated and worshipped by several raptorial divides.
The Nigerian public office is not for the faint-hearted; treasury looters, paedophiles, rapists, advance-fee fraudsters, ex-convicts, and thugs vie for public office – often against the patriot.
All is fair in pursuit of power thus politicians sponsor carnage and hate speech in pursuit of public office. At their victory or defeat, they recruit all shades of characters – intellectuals inclusive – to condemn their defeat or celebrate their victory.
To such end, a few privileged idealists assume the role of courtiers; to validate power in unworthy hands, they create a pseudo-reality plausible enough to redefine truth and distort facts. It is instructive, for instance, that a good many of them are still egging on Labour Party’s ‘obidients’ that Peter Obi is set to grab power through the trapdoor of the electoral court, even though he came a distant third to the winner of the February 25 election, President-elect Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
Outside the corridors of power, they plot pseudo-events and pretend to speak for the people. They claim to work for the country’s good but they are performers whose chief intent is to make money. Conflict is their treasure trove. Call them political profiteers or merchants of misery.
In the corridors of power, they shamelessly parrot official propaganda, polluting public discourse with sycophancy, and doublespeak, among other behavioural toxins.
Government and corporations allow courtiers into their inner circles imbuing them with instant celebrity but as Saul points out, no class of courtiers, from the eunuchs behind Manchus in the 19th century to the Baghdad caliphs of the Abbasid caliphate, has ever transformed into a responsible and socially productive class.
Courtiers are, ultimately, political degenerates. They are intellectual hooligans committing the violence of pretence against Nigeria and her people. When they claim to be pro-citizenry, they carry on like “political hobbyists,” often lending their ‘voices’ to front-burner issues, and sponsoring hashtags to attain clout.
There is little difference between them and the proverbial fawning page, who plays smooth flatterer and thug to both the government and citizenry-herd, twisting and turning with changing circumstances.
They are deucedly reactive, a spectacle of submission and ideological sodomy, their words and deeds boom as a cloying mime of irate mobs, corrupt politicians, and corporations’ reprobate wiles.
Eitan Hersh, Associate professor of political science at Tufts University identifies courtiers as “political hobbyists,” and highlights their perfect contrast in the person and politics of Querys Martias. The Dominican immigrant, resident in Haverhill, United States, presents a rare exemplar to supposedly educated eggheads.
For Matias, politics isn’t just a hobby. In her day job, she is a bus monitor for a special-needs school. In her evenings, she amasses power. By leading a group called the Latino Coalition (LC) in Haverhill, she unites the Dominicans, Puerto Ricans, and Central Americans who together make up about 20 per cent of Haverhill. The coalition gets out the vote during elections, but it does much more than that, notes Hersh.
The coalition once met with the Haverhill representative in Congress and asked for regular, Spanish-speaking office hours for its community. It advocates for immigration reform and federal assistance in affordable housing. The coalition has also met with the mayor, the school superintendent, and the police department requesting more Latinos in city jobs and on city boards.
Matias’ political participation is strategic; the 65-year-old influences governance to the benefit of her community. Under her leadership, the coalition operates with discipline, combining electoral strategies with policy advocacy under her leadership.
Unlike Matias, Nigeria’s college-educated intellectuals personify Hersh’s political hobbyist stereotype. They are disproportionately educated, flaunting several awards, titles, and postgraduate degrees.
They espouse politics of the soapbox; a wanton game in which they debate Nigeria’s big issues on abstract merits – often mouthing off their “superior” logic or sounding off for clout in social space, at events sponsored by meddlesome foreign consulates or on government-sponsored think tanks.
Their assemblage thrives on pseudo-realism, their ability to propound and market spurious experience. In reality, they are toxic to politics and harmful to the country.
Nigeria would do better if her eggheads redirected political energy to serve the people. For instance, they could start at the grassroots, where government presence is non-existent.
To re-establish relevance and repair integrity, Nigeria’s idealists, revolutionary heroes, youth leaders, or whatever other labels they answer to, must detach from ideological voyeurism and fault-finding – a tactic of assault and defence that eventually becomes their nemesis and tomb.
They must seek to empower people. For so long, they have united to market cunning and rhetoric, for and against selfish segments of the political class; it’s about time they united in the interest of the electorate.
Grassroots politics thrives on empowerment; helping imperilled peasant farming communities defeat desert encroachment, insecurity, and flooding; improving fringe communities’ access to health care, electricity, and good roads, and provision of soft loans to unemployed youths, SMEs, and agricultural start-ups – all these can be championed and facilitated by the social critic and idealist. The latter would foster societal progress in no small measure by championing such initiatives and drawing attention to the plight of society’s underprivileged.
These could be achieved by influencing real political power. Nigeria’s eggheads could seek collaboration in modest and large organisations to meet the immediate and long-term needs of the people. Then, when an election dawns, the community would show up. Call it dividends of their investment in the people’s emotional bank account.
Some would call it strategic citizenship. It’s pragmatic, humane, and real politics. It’s the kind of engagement that public intellectuals must perform to give substance to their professed clout.
And it’s precisely the kind of politicking that helps the electorate shun the tokens and humiliating food packs, often handed out by the political class in exchange for their votes, at election time.
If we humanely engage with the people, we might attain noble repute with the grassroots and the grudging respect of the political class. We might assume a prideful place in the pantheon of Nigeria’s finest patriots and statesmen.
True, fancy repute and ghostly online clout may earn us money in the short run but we shall lose it all in the long run to the same system that taught us to be soulless hobbyists.
We have used fiery intellect and the soapbox as mirrors to reflect society’s hypocrisy, moral corruption, and injustice.
It’s about time we walked our talk in the interest of Nigeria and the populace
