Category: Friday

The spirit of Kiriji summons us to re-membering on this 23rd of September.

As we remember the civil wars that tore apart the Yorubaland of the 19th century, we must also remember the torn pieces and strive to make them whole again for the realisation of the goal of unity that has been so sadly elusive.

I concede that this is a tall order in view of the obvious political and ideological challenges. The silver lining on an otherwise cloudy sky of the land of Oduduwa is that religious and spiritual differences have not been allowed to aggravate and complicate political divisions. Therefore, unity for the sake of cultural advancement is not impossible.

Scholars have sought to understand the causes and consequences of the civil wars that ravaged towns and villages in Yorubaland, sending entire populations into refugee camps and forcing the relocation of a lot more to other places sometimes in unfriendly territories. Whether it was the economic and material greed of the military class or the insatiable appetite for territorial control by the political class, or yet, the external push by forces outside the control of both, seeking the enslavement of able-bodied men and women for the New World plantations, the consequences were far-reaching.

Oduduwa’s immediate offspring had pushed not only the frontier of the kingdom but also the civilisation that it spawned beyond the confines of the original territories such that we could talk about the establishment of an Oyo empire to the north and west. Sadly, however, the wars not only led to the fall of the empire but also to the balkanization of the original kingdom. Yet more than this material consequences, the psychological and sociological consequences, which many have attributed to the symbolic breaking of the pot of charms by Awole, have been far more devastating.

The significance of Kiriji is two-fold. On the one hand, it was the spirit of freedom-loving, independence-craving resistance against internal colonialism. It was the spirit of cultural democracy and economic liberty. It was the spirit that took over control when a people have had it and can take it no more. That spirit resides in every human group and in every human being.

On the other hand, Kiriji and other conflicts before it tragically strained the ties that bound the people to a common progenitor. And if consciousness can be projected on to the abode of the ancestors, there is no doubt that the fratricidal wars violently disturbed the peace of its illustrious occupants.

There is every good reason then for people to heave a sigh of relief at the signing of the peace treaty on September 23, 1886, even if it was facilitated by an outside power, whose active participation in the trade in humans had been responsible for much of the devastation in the first place. It was also true that the interest of Britain in colonial expansion into the hinterland had been an additional impetus for its intervention. Whatever it’s motivation, the initiative prevented the total collapse of the entire Yoruba civilisation.

Where are we one hundred and thirty (130) years since that historic treaty? In 2004, Yoruba Foundation under the leadership of Ambassador Olu Otunla proclaimed September 23 as Yoruba Day, no doubt in commemoration of the peace treaty signed on that day but also as a conscious expression of hope and a commitment to work for the unity of the Yoruba nation.

We deceive ourselves and there is no truth in us if we remotely believed that there is unity among the Yoruba. Perhaps, it couldn’t have been otherwise. The external facilitators of peace took over political power and forced their brand of governance on a diverse population that included the Yoruba. Their brand first dealt a death blow to traditional rule, brought those rulers under its control and pitted them against their subjects. It was the first step in what was to become an effective divide and rule policy. The next step was to drive a wedge between one part of the new nation and the others.

As far as the Yoruba situation is concerned, the fault lines established by the civil wars had tragically endured and new political relationships followed those lines as evidenced by the party affiliations of major towns during the First Republic. That period saw further entrenchment of the divisions and the emergence of new ones, consequent upon the outbreak of the Action Group crisis.

Words have the power of life and death, with the ability to fetch soothing kolanut from the pocket or deadly arrow from the quiver. The average Yoruba tongue, like its capable surrogate, the talking drum, is extremely effective in producing an arrow.

Through demonising, stereotyping, or casting aspersions on other groups, we have managed to keep alive the memories of the 19th century civil wars and the 20th century political divisions and conflicts. In so doing, the cause of unity has been inadvertently hampered. More tragically, we have allowed the proverbial lizard from externalsources to enter through the gaping cracks on the walls of the Yoruba nation.

The evidence of this anomaly is the innumerable associations that have been established for the promotion of Yoruba culture and civilisation. Naturally, we gladly celebrate our fierce independence and freedom of conscience with the wisdom of the elders: “We cannot all sleep and face one direction”. But if the purpose of sleeping is to get a good night rest, that purpose is defeated if you point your feet in the direction of my nose. In other words, if we share the common purpose of Yoruba unity, it must not be jeopardised by the insistence on the freedom of individuals to hold opinions that are averse to that unity. That “if” is obviously significant and it is also important to agree that unity does not mean uniformity.

What then are the burning purposes that unite or must unite us? One indispensable link in the chain of Yoruba being and consciousness is culture, including customs, ethos, aesthetics, language and spirituality. Of this, I think it is commonly agreed that language is what makes for Yoruba identity. For this reason, there must be a common interest in the preservation and promotion of Yoruba language.

In the current dispensation, however, Yoruba language is in danger of extinction. Go to the home of any middle class Yoruba family and you will be shocked. When parents insist on their children speaking English or French and they censure the speaking of Yoruba even inside the family home, then we have a serious problem on our hands.

There is a need for our political leaders, whatever their party affiliations, to see the threat for what it is and engage their fertile minds in the search for appropriate response to this challenge. The need for a purposive unity based on the threat to our linguistic and cultural identity thus recommends a political unity of purpose that does not infringe on the freedom of conscience of each person. By the same token, what recommends the unity of purpose for our political leaders also recommends a unity of purpose across the various organisations and groups.

Finally, since it is the biggest masquerade that is accorded the honour of being the last to exit Igbale, our royal fathers must understand that the reason of their being is the culture of which they are the custodians. The erosion of that culture from whatever source should be of utmost concern to them. If they agree on this principle, there is good reason for them to jettison all personal animosities and work together for the survival and prospering of the culture.

From the Yoruba experience discussed above, it should not come as a surprise to other nationalities why the Yoruba have been in the vanguard of the struggle for political restructuring in Nigeria. If they fought against internal colonialism and tyranny within their primordial group with a common identity, they will struggle with all in their control for cultural democracy and true federalism within the larger Nigerian society. The lesson to learn from the Yoruba antecedents is that freedom ultimately prevails.

Sixteen months after the change train left the aversion station, there is little doubt that there is palpable disenchantment pervading the socio-political and economic atmosphere. There are complaints of hunger and starvation. Inflation is sky high. Jobs are being lost daily but new ones are as scarce as the proverbial coins on the masked face of masquerades. In the circumstance, it is difficult to fault the despairing spirit of citizens who voted for change.

President Buhari seems to understand the challenge that his administration faces: focusing on the task of economic revival, placating innocent victims of economic malaise, and encouraging them to bear the pain a little longer. At every opportunity since he took over the reins of power last year, he has assured Nigerians that he too feels their pain. The gesture is needed and appreciated but even he knows that it is not sufficient for the desperation that afflicts the people.

The new campaign recently launched by the President may have been inspired by the obvious need to carry the people along. If “Change begins with me” catches on and it succeeds in having citizens internalize the idea that everyone is a change agent, it might as well be the prescription that has always been missing in our national therapy.

But we have been there before, haven’t we? From ethical revolution of the late 70s, to the War Against Indiscipline (WAI) of the early 80s, to the Mass Mobilization for Social and Economic Reform (MAMSER) of the late 80s, and the War Against Indiscipline and Corruption (WAI-C) of the mid to the late 90s, Nigerians have been preached to ad nauseam. That we still remain the same or indeed, have become worse, appears to be a strong sign of either the incorrigibility of Nigerians or the ineffectiveness of the sermons. There are good reasons to believe that it could be a combination of both.

Nigerians behave as if they are generally immune to correction. Whether it is in the matter of reckless driving or in jumping queue for lack of patience, or in the indiscipline of lateness to work and its attendant low productivity, there has been no discernible changes in our social and economic attitudes in the last 56 years. Indeed, there appears to be a deterioration instead of improvement.

A state governor recently saw first-hand the incurability of our lackadaisical attitude to work when he confronted civil servants whose first order of early morning business in office was to pay obeisance to the stomach god with a bowl of amala and gbegiri. Recall that this attitude was one of the targets of the disciplinary efforts of military governors between 1974 and 1979. Three decades later, we are still learning. And tragically, we’ve evolved into more sinister pastimes including kidnapping, armed robbery, cultism, and political assassination.

That the various campaigns have not been effective is undeniable. But beside the apparent incorrigibility of many Nigerians, it is also true that the leadership at the helm of those campaigns have led less by example than by precept. By leadership, I mean, not just the military president or governors or the civilian president and the cabinet, but all those in positions of authority who are seen by citizens as role models.

It was not unusual for those in such positions during the military era to see themselves as above board and to exempt themselves from the rules that they laid down for citizens to follow. But Nigerians are not dummies. They quickly found ways of adjusting and acting without being caught. Whereas if they knew that leaders followed their own rules, they too were willing, even if reluctantly, to toe the line.

For this new campaign to succeed, then, its architects have to learn from the failures of past efforts. The new campaign is for change, in line with the change agenda of the administration. But the change agenda is comprehensive, with emphasis, for citizens and leaders, on attitudinal changes; for leaders on commitment, positively, to efficient delivery of services, and, negatively, the avoidance of corruption and injustice.

The campaign enjoins that the positive change in attitude must begin with every individual citizen.

In fairness to the president and his team, I think that the idea of a campaign of this nature is excellent. It is anchored on the challenge of getting individuals to have a good attitude towards the common good of all without needlessly jeopardizing the good of the self. It is of course true that leaders must lead for followers to follow. But the role that a citizen has to play cannot be delegated to the leader and vice versa.

It is also true that an important piece in the big puzzle is the overarching national goal that both leaders and followers subscribe to as worthy of their sacrifice. There is no need for the Buhari administration to reinvent this wheel because it is clearly identified in the constitutional statement of the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy in Chapter 2 of the constitution. The entire chapter with its twelve clauses encapsulates the Nigeria of the founders’ and constitutional framers’ dreams.

Unfortunately, in the 37 years since the words were first accepted as our national ethos in 1979, we have not moved an inch closer to the implementation of even its most achievable objectives. The unity that is predicated on everyone sharing a sense of belonging anywhere is still very much out of reach of sections of the country. While the southwest has become a common home to many citizens from different parts of the country, the same cannot be said of some other parts. It is the responsibility of leaders to lead in the effort of national integration. But it cannot be accomplished by mere exhortation. Determined effort by way of example is essential.

Political violence is condemnable and must never be condoned under any circumstance. As a democracy that has come to stay, we know that the maximum an administration has is four years at the end of which it is returned or rejected. Therefore, a non-performing government can and should be tolerated or impeached. Violence is not part of the equation and cannot be a good substitute for valid elections. This needs emphasis because if violent pays at one time, it can equally pay at another time. What goes around comes around. No one has the monopoly of violent uprising against a government that is legitimately elected.

Exemplary leadership and committed followership are the key to the success of the new campaign. But it must start with leadership example. And every level of governance, across every zone, must buy into the change mantra and become its most eloquent exemplar. While it is a most difficult scenario to imagine—that leaders in Nigeria can, in deed, commit to disciplined practice of virtue, it is not impossible. How I wish for a pleasant surprise. For simply put, hypocrisy defines its absence. But if exemplary leadership is effectively realized, I am most certain that followers will have no choice but to gladly fall in line.

Finally, then, let leaders lead and followers will follow. From the President to the  Ministers, from the members of National Assembly to State Legislators, from Governors to Local Government Chairmen, from First Class Obas, Sultans, and Emirs to Chiefs of all ranks and classes, from Permanent Secretaries to Administrative Officers, from the Security Chiefs to Military Commanders, from the Inspector General of Police, to Commissioners of Police and officers, from the Chief Justice to Magistrates, from Vice Chancellors and Provosts to Lecturers and Graduate Assistants, from Chief Imams, General Overseers, Prelates, and Archbishops to Pastors and Evangelists, there is a clarion call to leadership initiative and action.

President Buhari has called on everyone with an urgent invitation to get on board the change train. If the campaign for discipline and respect for national values enshrined in our constitution is to be successful, it must start with everyone. And when we assume its leadership, we can expect those looking up to us to follow suit. Change is as simple as having disciplined leaders lead from the front.