Category: Segun Gbadegesin

By Segun Gbadegesin

Rationality is a human endowment that we deploy as needed. It fights our battle of self-interest and other-regarding interest on the intellectual plane. We could deploy it instrumentally to serve our desired end no matter how odious it is. Alternatively, we could deploy rationality objectively in the interest of a morally sound end.

Portuguese, British, and American slave traders deployed rationality instrumentally in pursuit of their economic interests. They found it rational to hunt, capture, and enslave Africans as a means to attaining economic greatness. The thought of the evil of using other human beings as mere means to their own selfish ends didn’t cross their minds.

When enslavement became too much of a burden and its economic value waned, the West deployed instrumental rationality in a different direction. It was now more to their interest to establish colonies for the supply of raw materials and the marketing of products from their factories. The scramble for African resources led to the Balkanization of the continent into European territories. The thought of the evil of grabbing other people’s land without their permission didn’t cross their minds.

Of course, instrumental rationality in pursuit of selfish interest against others might be unsettling to a morally conscious person or group of persons. While the majority of those who deployed this rationality in the case of enslavement and colonialism didn’t give a damn about morality, a few did. But they had a way of getting around it from religious and economic perspectives. On the latter, Fredrick Lugard famously argued that colonialism was in the common economic interests of Great Britain and Nigeria. On the former, they convinced themselves that the West had a burden to evangelize and civilize the “pagan world”. It all ended, however, when the “pagan world” insisted on their natural right to self-determination.

Value, or objective, as opposed to subjective rationality, is morally conscious. It considers the humanity of the Other. It treats the Other as a rational being with ends that deserve respect. Value rationality doesn’t place self above others. It doesn’t place the national interest of one nation above that of the others. In considering the right conduct, it takes into account how it affects others. In the Kantian tradition, it asks the question: what if others decide to act in the same way? It is the logic of the Golden Rule.

Not a whole lot of rational beings voluntarily adopt the dictates of value rationality or pursue the morally sanctioned path if they can get away with considerations of self or group interest only. Why would they, if there is no penalty to pay? It’s the way many think of political power: you have it and you can do whatever you want with it for your interest or the interest of your group. The problem with this mindset is that it fails to take account of the strength or potential strength that those that they underestimate might bring to the arena. Hobbes, the foremost philosopher of egoism, warned against this mindset in his Social Contract.

Setting aside our complaints about the 1999 Constitution, let us grant that Nigeria is a federal republic. My argument here is that two rationalities are emerging in the discourse on Nigeria. One is the instrumental rationality that prioritizes sectional interest and it takes its cue from the rationality of colonialism. The other is the value rationality of morally conscious citizens and it prioritizes the good of the nation and seeks to secure her future. Whichever we choose to embrace will determine the future of the nation.

Since security is the foremost duty of any government, the ongoing national discourse over the effectiveness of our domestic security architecture in the context of its breach appears to be a good measure of the rationality at play.  And it is noteworthy that the recent articulation of both kinds of rationalities has come to us from one ethnic nationality. This is a good sign because it shows that we are not divided beyond redemption.

Two weeks ago, I focused attention on Governor Abdullahi Ganduje’s smart solution to the herdsmen-farmer conflicts across the nation. Today, my focus is on the rationality behind the solution. In various forums and media discussions, the governor, a Fulani himself, presumably with a herding background and with herders in his extended family, has deployed a value rationality that prioritizes the unity of the nation. He has argued that cattle movement is not good for the cattle or the herders; that avoiding farmer-herder conflicts or cattle rustling is impossible without banning cattle movement; and that boosting the economic power of herders requires settling them in Ruga settlements which he has pioneered in Kano state.

Importantly, this reasoning doesn’t demean herding. It also doesn’t engage in the reification of a way of life. It draws its strength from balancing the good of the herder with the good of the farmers on the one hand, and the common good of the nation on the other. Incessant conflicts deter from the unity of the nation and no one has monopoly of violence as it should be clear by now.

At the opposite end of the Ganduje rationality is Governor Bala Mohammed’s. It is the embodiment of instrumental or subjective rationality which has zero tolerance for the consideration of other groups in the discourse. Mohammed’s reasoning, like the enslaver’s and the colonizer’s, could care less about the humanity or right of other rational beings. But whether in a nation-state or a multinational state, it is obvious how this could create avoidable crisis.

Mohammed told his audience that herdsmen have a right to settle anywhere because “land is in the hands of the state and federal government in trust but Nigerians don’t need the permission of governors or the federal government to settle anywhere.” It reminds one of the reasoning adopted a few years ago by some in the United States Congress that the world oil deposits belong to the world and should not be monopolized by any country. Curious how Mohammed would have responded to that argument!

People who use rationality in service of self or group interest, sometimes forget taking different positions at a different time. But for the institutional memory of Femi Falana (SAN) we wouldn’t know that Mohammed had a different view of residency rights when he served as FCT Minister and he attempted to demolish buildings because they encroached on government land.

Governor Mohammed also argued for the right of herdsmen to carry AK-47 on their grazing route because they are “exposed, dehumanized and demonized.” He, typically, omitted reference to the allegations of killings, maiming, and raping by AK-47 wielding herdsmen. If herdsmen must protect themselves against dehumanization, shouldn’t there be the same provision for farmers and other victims along grazing routes? Shouldn’t there be a universal right of every Nigerian to carry AK-47? And what can we expect if that were the case? Subjective rationality only cares about the self or the group, not the Other whose humanity doesn’t come into calculation.

I observe above that it is gratifying that the examples of both rationalities displayed in the matter of farmer-herder conflicts have come to us from one section of the country. However, it is even more pleasing that Governor Ganduje’s example of value rationality is shared across zonal boundaries. Thus, the Nigerian Governors’ Forum, the Southwest Governors’ Forum, Governor Ortom of Benue State and civil societies across the nation, have expressed support for one version or the other of this rationality and the policy action that it requires.

The future of Nigeria as a multinational state will be determined by how committed every individual, group, or nationality is to the requirement of value rationality with its emphasis on having considerations for other individuals as we have for ourselves. It’s a give and take philosophy. It’s the philosophy of the frog as Ola Rotimi amply illustrates in Kurumi’s declaration to Reverend Mann. It must be the philosophy of Nigerians if the country is to have a peaceful and prosperous future. As leaders of the nation, Mr. President, Governors, and Lawmakers have good legacy reasons to embrace value rationality.

By Segun Gbadegesin

Brigadier-General Oluwole Rotimi (retd.) may not now be a household name. He is neither a politician nor a money bag. But over many years of active military and public service, he has demonstrated his possession of a special asset that no one has been able to take from him, even at a time when compromise was the rule of thumb in high places. Rotimi is a man of principle, who stands for principle, who lives by principle. On this 86th anniversary of his birth, it is an honor to celebrate a man of honor.

Once upon a time, the Nigerian Army was an institution of honor which attracted men and women of principle whose only reason for enlistment was service to country. Young Oluwole Rotimi was attracted to the military as a student at King’s College, Lagos. And after a university degree that guaranteed him a rewarding future career in the civil service or private sector, compared with an uncertain future in the military, he chose that uncertain future of service to country. That motive force of patriotism, strengthened by an unwavering principle, was to characterize his conduct as a soldier, Quartermaster, military governor, and diplomat.

What was it about the military on the eve of independence that attracted young Nigerians to it? Certainly not what became of it as a cauldron of ethnic jingoism and filthy corruption between 1966 and 1998! General Rotimi and his colleagues from the early era of the military would volunteer stories of a Garden of Eden in which the many were truly united as one in their determination to defend the country, if necessary with their lives. And differences of tongue or tribe was not going to prevent them from achieving that goal.

That was how General Rotimi and many of his colleagues saw their mission: as a united force, defend the nation and promote her unity. That was their understanding of the oath they took. Unfortunately, however, it wasn’t all up to them, as other players had different ideas.

Shortly after independence, politicians engaged in a divisive and destructive ethnic politics against their best interests and the interest of the nation. And at a time when military coup was the norm across the Third World, some officers took the bait. The proverbial apple was tasted and the garden polluted. It was never the same again.

Thankfully, we have stories like that of General Rotimi to remind us of the good old days of the Nigerian Army. As Quartermaster General during the civil war, he had responsibility for supplies not just to the war front but to all army formations. A different actor would come out as a filthy rich guy and take an early retirement. It is however on record that this man of principle conducted himself so creditably that he earned the trust of the Commander-in-Chief and after the war, he was deployed to serve as the third Military Governor of the old Western State.

Western Region had just being through some tough times. Recall that the immediate cause of the military takeover in January 1966 was the “wet e” crisis following the rigged 1965 Western Region election. That crisis didn’t quite abate even after the military takeover and Col. Adekunle Fajuyi, the first Military Governor, had his hands full until the counter coup took his life in July 1966. General Adeyinka Adebayo took over and was saddled with the Agbekoya tax riots. The Western Region, aka Wild Wild West, was a hard nut to crack even for army officers.

When General Rotimi took over, he went to work. He enlisted the support of the civil society. He rallied traditional rulers. With a distinct approach to governance which emphasized leadership by example, he won the heart and minds of a cross section of the population who agreed with him that without peace there can be no development. He restored peace to the state.

Knowing that government cannot satisfy the developmental desires of every community, the administration introduced the idea of self-help. Communities were to contribute a percentage of the project that they identified as their need with government contributing the balance. This was attractive to many communities, and the administration delivered on its promise.

Chief Simeon Adebo’s pioneering efforts ensured that Western Region would be a trail blazer in civil service administration in the entire country. But when General Rotimi took over the helm of governance in 1971, there was a manifest crisis of indiscipline arising from perceptions of favoritism and unequal treatment of equals. A man of principle and stern discipline would not condone acts of injustice and he made it clear. He was on top of every case of indiscipline, especially among the top echelon of the service, and he restored order and discipline.

General Murtala Mohammed’s coup of 1975 terminated the Gowon administration. This ended not only the tenure of General Rotimi as military governor of Western State, it also ended his military career. At only forty years old, the man of principle soon faced reality. A man who resisted vast opportunities to corruptly enrich himself soon found himself without any means of livelihood while his whole life was still ahead of him.

General Mohammed was also a man of principle. But he initially painted every officer who worked with Gowon with a common brush of corruption. He set up a Commission to investigate each of them to prove himself right. While he was right with many, however, his estimation of two was wrong as his Commission concluded. It exonerated General Rotimi and General Mobolaji Johnson. This confirmed that General Rotimi was not just a talker but a man who walked his talk, a man who practiced what he preached. With more like him in positions of power, the Nigerian story would be a lot different.

“It’s all good to be principled and honesty. But these assets won’t put food on the table or provide a warm shelter for the body.” So do many think! But the mighty hands of the Almighty is upon those who do his will. And he will never leave them alone. The Psalmist testifies powerfully that having been young, and then being old, he has never seen the righteous abandoned or his children begging bread. Why does this not assure the many who allow the devil to direct their hearts and minds to the evil of corruption?

General Rotimi avoids greed. He contents himself with what the Lord provides. And He enjoys the respect of those who are godly. In retirement, he was called upon to serve the country as Ambassador to the United States of America in 2009. As a man of principle, always tethered to his principles, he took his principles of honesty and self-discipline to his mission abroad.

Approaching his new assignment as he did as Military Governor, Rotimi was determined to root out indiscipline and corruption in high places. He decided to investigate what became of the proceeds of sold government properties. And that didn’t go down well with those who called the shots. He was unceremoniously recalled. But those who followed the story would confirm that Rotimi had the last laugh—again. He was vindicated and his traducers shamed.

Let me now come back to where I started from above. A great life is not necessarily one that boasts of billions in the bank. Neither is a great life one that every page of newspapers or magazines mentions on a daily basis. Nor is it one that boasts of controlling millions of followers. One can be all of these and still fail the test of greatness.

To be great is to live in righteousness and for righteousness, to be a model of integrity and honor, and to be self-disciplined. As Prophet Micah revealed, God has been clear about what he requires of his creatures: “only to act justly, to love faithfulness, and to walk humbly with your God.” Conducting ourselves with this requirement is what defines greatness. General Rotimi has chosen this path, and at 86, it will not be taken away from him.

Happy Birthday, General. Igba odun, odun kan.

By Segun Gbadegesin

Now our knowledge is partial and incomplete, and even the gift of prophesy reveals only part of the whole picture”—1 Corinthians 13: 9 (New Living Translation)

How true! Divine knowledge is complete; human knowledge is partial. It is the reality of our human condition, and every now and then, to our dismay and utter helplessness, we come face to face with this ultimate reality.

A little over a year ago, towards the end of 2019, I penned a tribute for one of the humblest, smartest, and God-fearing persons I have had the fortune of knowing on planet earth, Dr. (Prince) John Oyediran Olabisi, as he marked his 70th birthday in January 2020. A few years earlier, I had dedicated a column piece (“When an ear doctor retires”) to his retirement from the service of Oyo State. Now, he is gone home to be with his Master, and no one saw it coming!

The reality of our helpless human condition is truly unflattering. But we are not left without hope, or with guidance towards its realization. In the same epistle, Paul goes on to predict that while we now “see only a reflection as in a mirror”, there is coming a time when “we shall see face to face.” While we “now know in part (only)”, there is coming a time when we “shall know fully, even as we are fully known.”

In my 2019 tribute, which is the reference point for this piece, I referred to Moses’s meditation in Psalm 90:12 when the servant of God prayed to God to “teach us to number our days carefully so that we may develop wisdom in our hearts.” I observed that since God’s wonderful work of creation, wisdom and folly have exercised dominion over human beings.

Through the Holy Spirit, the wise are acutely aware of the fleeting nature of time and of human life. This awareness helps them put their hearts in the path of wisdom. They “remember how short (human) life is” (Psalm 89:47) and are determined to make the most of the time that they have left to fulfill God’s purpose for them.

We know those with the endowment of wisdom because the preeminence of God is reflected in their lives. They make daily effort to follow his direction and do his will. Their motivation is to achieve God’s purpose for his creation, which is to promote their good. Pushed by faith in God, they build a character that imitates God and his servants. They internalize the counsel of Paul to “imitate me as I imitate Christ.” (1 Corinthians 11:1).

However, even the wise have no claim to perfection. What they have that the foolish lack is the inclination, the urge, to constantly seek perfection. Mindful of the shortness of time and the frailty of existence, the wise follow the injunction to make the proverbial hay why the sun shines. They work hard to make provision for their family and loved ones. They invest their time and talent in promoting the good of humanity. They elevate the spiritual over the material. No matter the circumstances of their birth, they do not rest on their oars.

Over his short but memorable 71 years sojourn on earth, Dr. Diran Olabisi exemplified the features of the Godly wisdom that Moses had in mind. The smart young prince of Old Iganna kingdom moved swiftly from Secondary Modern School, Olivet High School, to University of Ibadan College of Medicine and postgraduate training as Ear, Nose, and Throat (ENT) Specialist in the United Kingdom, leaving records of scholarly achievement at every point.

With his specialist training, Diran moved the boundaries of scholarship and the art of healing in the upward direction, surprising his trainers and peers in the land of the Queen. Surely, something great had come out of our Nazareth. Upon his return to the country of his birth, Diran had a great plan. He served in the Oyo State Ministry of Health until his retirement as Permanent Secretary. He established the Highland Hospital, catering for the generality of our people, rich and poor, old and young, men and women. And soon enough, the prince of smarts demonstrated his godly character.

The medical profession requires compassion and empathy. But the profession doesn’t automatically confer these qualities on its practitioners. Indeed, as we know, many in this compassion-demanding profession are anything but compassionate or empathetic. Of course, the ailment that afflicts dear country doesn’t discriminate, and many professionals are victims of greed and ostentation. But Diran proved time and again how different a breed he was from the pack. He stood out for his compassionate caring. I am a credible witness and beneficiary.

He was always there for the needy. He always made himself available for the helpless and hopeless. It was for this purpose that he established Highland Hospital, and it soon became a haven for the many that seek healing. Away from the homeland, it would only take me a phone call to get my relatives to receive treatment at Highland Hospital. For cases that needed referral, Diran did everything in his power for my people.

Our common friends have also expressed to me their appreciation of Diran’s wonderful support in their times of need. Most recently, a friend who had a near death experience in the deep of the night told me how Diran, called up in the middle of the night, personally led his ambulance to his house and saved his life. He was a prince who understood his calling and knew that the one who called him to the caring profession and supported his training, had himself led by example which he expected him to follow. As a prince of faith would.

Job of old expressed faith in the living Redeemer. I know that my Redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand upon the earth (Job 19:25). This knowledge is enabling. It is as elevating as it is strengthening. True wisdom requires this knowledge and understanding. And those who are so endowed are the anointed.

Diran took seriously his anointing as a child of God and a deacon of his church. His trust was in His God from the beginning to the end. Even as he confronted his own ill-health, Diran placed others ahead of himself or his ordeal. In my last conversation with him, he downplayed his health challenges, and was more concerned about one of his cousins whose professional career was his concern.

Being close to Diran was tantamount to recognizing this quality of his life as a child of God. Thankfully, he had a Kingdom partner in his loving wife, Pastor Bolanle. From the beginning, they were a pair of role models for the Christian life. They exemplified Paul’s testimony: “But everything that was a gain to me, I have considered to be a loss because of Christ. More than that, I also consider everything to be a loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord.” (Philippians 3:7-8) Diran subscribed to this creed to the end of his journey.

It is not how long, but how well. And to objective and God-fearing observers, though Diran left us too soon, he also left us a vital example of a life well-lived, putting God first, others second, and himself last. While we cannot query the giver of life for taking it back when He wills, we have the assurance of a great reunion when the trumpet sounds and the dead are “raised imperishable, and we will be changed.” (1 Corinthians 15:52). Diran is only gone before us; we will catch up with him sooner or later.

To his loving wife, Pastor Bolanle, children, grandchildren, and the entire family, I pray that in this moment of sorrow, your faith in God does not waver, and your hope in His mercy does not dim. For you can certainly do all things through Christ who strengthens you. (Philippians 4:13)

Diran Olabisi lived well and he died the death of the righteous. As he lives on in our hearts, his memory will be a blessing to us.

By Segun Gbadegesin

The farmer-herder crisis has hitherto presented itself as a crisis of trust not just between herders and farmers, but also between ethnic groups in general and between the north and south in particular. It has seemed as if it is a continuation of the same old north-south political division. Which, by reasonable inference, it is not.

Here’s why. The 50s and 60s witnessed the most serious north-south political division in the country. The 1953 motion for independence nearly resulted in a permanent disintegration of the country even as it looked ahead to independence. The 1959 election was one of the most divisive in the country. The 1963 census crisis led to a realignment of political coalitions that resulted in a federal election contest between predominantly southern versus northern alliances of UPGA and NNA respectively. The final nail on the coffin of the First Republic was the 1965 Western Region election.

Through all of the turmoil of ethno-national politics back then, however, farmers and herders across the country coexisted and interacted peacefully and productively. Before RUGA recently sneaked into our national vocabulary, there were Igaas on the outskirts of almost every Yoruba village. Herders grazed their cattle on grasslands across the region while their women sold cheese and cow dung to indigenes. It was a conflict-free relationship. Therefore, presenting the present crisis as an absence of trust between ethnic nationalities is a mischaracterization of the reality of a serious social and economic crisis created by the influx of criminal foreign herders who feel entitled to any and all land across the nation, including farmlands.

The economic crisis is simple to understand. When herders graze their cattle indiscriminately on farmlands, it is economic disaster for farmers. Should farmers remain silent, they are alright and will not be attacked by herders. But should they raise their voice and complain to herders, they are subjected to bodily harm and death. Herders don’t carry AK-47s for nothing. This is the root of the social crisis. And this is all a new development since the early 1990s.

Some have cast this simple economic crisis as a cultural conflict. They claim that herders are culturally wired to nomadic life and they must have access to grazing lands all over the country. They acknowledge that farmers are also culturally entitled to agricultural land. To avoid conflict, therefore, their solution is to allocate grazing land across the country for herders.

This proposed solution, as we know, runs into a couple of problems. First, the Federal government cannot by fiat allocate land to herders or farmers across the country for the simple reason that, by the 1999 constitution, state governors are the custodians of land in their states. Therefore, they have to buy in to the idea. Thus far, for various reasons, many governors especially across the south, have not demonstrated a readiness to go along.

Second, grazing routes or grazing reserves cannot effectively prevent the conflict because they cannot prevent herders from grazing on farmlands near or adjacent to grazing routes, especially during the dry season. Evidence? There are viral videos of young herders uprooting cassava tubers along their route to feed their cattle.

What is to be done? In March 2018, the governors of Borno, Sokoto, Kano and Kaduna states met with the leadership of Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association (MACBAN) in Sokoto “to find lasting solutions to the continued clashes between herders and farmers across the federation” as the media reported at the time. Worried about the conflicts, they expressed optimism for a “lasting solution” with the adoption of a “local-conflict resolution mechanism to bring back trust and understanding among all the people of the region.” This made their prospective effort a regional one. Even with this limited focus, MACBAN didn’t seem to share the governors’ optimism, only wondering aloud why the conflict was getting out of hand.

Now, however, we are witnessing the singular effort of Governor Ganduje of Kano State and his advocacy pointing to a lasting solution to the crisis. While Governor Ganduje has always been part of the Northern Governors’ meetings on this matter, either his proposals for a solution have not been favored by the group or we are yet to see the success of its collective effort. But this hasn’t deterred him from proceeding with his preferred strategy in his state.

Thus, in August 2019, seventeen months after the Sokoto meeting, Governor Ganduje announced the plan of the Kano State Government to convert five forests to grazing reserves for herdsmen in the state. Among other good outcomes of the policy, he noted that it would boost socio-economic ventures in the state and discourage the movement of herdsmen from the north to the south thereby addressing the herders-farmers conflict. He promised that the reserves would provide health and education and security for herdsmen, insisting that the settlement of herders, like farmers, was a state issue and should be treated as such.

In June 2020, nine months after the initial announcement of his intention, Governor Ganduje launched the first Ruga settlement in Kano at the Yanshoshi forest. Planned as a settlement of 200 housing units with hospital, schools, police station and earth dam, he commissioned the first batch of 25 housing units at the ceremony. Placing his fingers on the root of the crisis, the governor advised the federal government to ban the movement of foreign herdsmen into the country. Without mincing words, he noted that those foreign herdsmen come into Nigeria with guns and weapons, bringing crimes with them.

Among the reasons for Ganduje’s intervention are the need to avoid farmer-herder clashes across the nation, avoid cattle movement, avoid cattle rustling, and improve and modernize cattle breeding for economic boost. He extended invitation to Fulani herders across the country to take advantage of the provision of Ruga settlement in Kano with a promise to provide more.

Just this week, eight months after the launch of the Yanshoshi Forest Ruga settlement, Governor Ganduje announced the commencement of another settlement in Samsosua forest along Katsina border. In making this announcement, however, he also called on the federal government to ban the North-South movement of herders and cattle. According to media reports, the governor addressed journalists in Katsina and advocated thus: “There should be a law that will ban cattle movement, otherwise, we cannot control the conflicts between herdsmen and farmers and the cattle rustling which is affecting us greatly.”

Governor Ganduje’s approach to this matter deserves commendation for two reasons. First, he appears to me to be one of the very few elected officials who has walked the talk. He has a good grasp of the challenge and he has determined to meet it head on. Second, beside his active commitment to providing Ruga settlements for herders for the social and economic reasons that he has espoused, the governor has also zeroed in on what the federal government must do to make state efforts effective.

In this regard, Ganduje noted the influx of foreign herders and the disruption they cause to the peaceful coexistence of indigenous herders and farmers. This is beyond the paygrade of a governor to resolve. He therefore called on the Federal Government to ban foreign herders. Second, inter-state movement of herders without Ruga settlements in every state is bound to continue to cause violent conflicts. Therefore, he has again called on the Federal Government to place a ban on such movements. Coming from a Northern Governor with a mindset for pragmatic solution to social and economic crisis, these proposals are spot on.

More significantly, however, the proposals put the herders in the driver’s seat of their economic activities and should place the Northern states at the giving end. If other Northern governors would follow Governor Ganduje’s pragmatic leadership, the North stands to benefit greatly from the implementation of the proposals. A whole new industry of livestock farming can be built with the North calling the shot as its rallying point. A new generation of herders will have their children’s future taken care of. And the entire country can bid goodbye to the incessant conflict between farmers and herders.

Hopefully, someone is listening to Governor Ganduje.

By Segun Gbadegesin

Four years of nightmarish experience have come to an end. To the relief of millions of citizens and residents, the light at the end of the dark tunnel has finally appeared. As a boil is most painful when it’s about to burst, so has the last couple of months felt for America in particular, and the world in general.

The breach of the Capitol was the final act of the Big Lie. In the end, some, certainly not a significant number, of the enablers have had it and won’t take it anymore. Top leaders of the Republican battle snubbed Trump’s invitation to an early morning sendoff party which would have caused them to miss Biden’s inaugural morning mass.

The Capitol riot by White Supremacist terrorists, fearful of their imminent loss of power in the highest office of the citadel of democracy, was itself, however, a monumental breach of democracy. This obviously meant little or nothing to the mob, many of who claimed to have answered the call of dear leader. They couldn’t bear to witness the loss of privilege that they felt entitled to and which they seemed to have enjoyed in the last four years.

Truly, they had all the fun till the end. They acted with impunity. They carried their guns and ammunition to sacred places. They attacked peaceful protesters. They vandalized Black Lives Matter (BLM) banners. And when they terrorized the Capitol, violently attacked police officers, and ransacked offices for souvenirs, they were treated with utmost respect to the amazement of everyone who witnessed police response to peaceful BLM rallies last summer. Surely, all animals are not equal.

America is a divided nation. She has always been since the beginning of the republic. Early colonizers wiped out all but a few remnants of Native Americans. White settler terrorists invaded Africa, captured Africans as slaves, treated them as cargoes on the way back, tossed the weak and sick ones into the sea, and dealt harshly with survivals on various plantations. For at least 250 years. Even after the official proclamation of emancipation in 1863, White resistance ensured that Blacks continued to be oppressed and tyrannized. Physical violence, including hanging and lynching, was the norm in the era of Jim Crow. No matter what patriotic efforts Blacks made to enjoy civil liberties, they were rebuffed.

With White economic interests in jeopardy, they had to fight a revolutionary war of independence against Britain and this united them against a common enemy. But the irony of fighting a war of independence for themselves while keeping other human beings in shackles didn’t prick their warped conscience until it became clear that the cost of enslaving Africans was becoming too expensive compared with the benefits.

This economic reality, combined with the moral voices of abolitionists, succeeded in getting the attention of the better angel of Abraham Lincoln and his Republican Party with their campaign to end slavery. This pitted them against southern states which prioritized White supremacy over moral niceties or Christian platitude. Incidentally, these were the states that sent Christian missionaries to Africa while they engaged in the most brutal treatment of Africans they held in captivity. It took a civil war to end slavery.

The Lincoln-led Republican administration ended slavery and appealed to the better angels of our common humanity for unity in pursuit of freedom and democracy, the government of people by the people and for the people which Lincoln prayed will never depart from the face of the earth. Shortly after, he was killed, and while democracy has outlasted many of its foes, it has gone through hiccups of various levels of seriousness, usually imperceptible, sometimes clearly obvious, over the centuries since Lincoln, often with Blacks and other minorities as victims in the hands of mighty White supremacists.

In the era of Trump, however, subtlety gave way to crudity and since 2017, White Supremacists reveled in their new limelight. With unquantifiable support from the highest office in the land, conspiracy theorists flourished, targeting liberals and civil right activists, culminating in the final onslaught against democracy itself.

Knowing that the polls were not particularly kind to him, Trump fed his White nationalist supporters with lies about mail-in ballots, about dead people voting, about machine malfunctions, and about the conspiracy of democrats and the deep state to take steal the election from him. The result was the breach of the Capitol which even one of his staunchest supporters, Mitch McConnell, has concluded was “provoked by the president.”

Enters Joe Biden as the 46th President. His work is cut out for him. How would he return civility and empathy to American politics? How would he unite a country in which a third of the population have no respect for the truth? How would he reconcile a vast majority of would-be autocrats who are averse to the ideal of one person one vote? And how would he go about the business of governance when, despite his securing 7 million more popular votes than Trump, and 74 more electoral votes than his opponent, 74 million Trump voters still won’t recognize him as president, and his defeated predecessor just skipped his inauguration?

Characteristically, Joe Biden appears unperturbed. With more than 44 year experience in Washington DC as Senator and Vice President, he is poised to demonstrate, not only the value of experience, but also the reservoir of moral fiber that has been his forte over the decades.

Ordinarily we should expect that with the unraveling of Trump’s presidency at the 11th hour, and the smart escape to the hills by his former enablers, Biden’s task should be less onerous. But we are in an era of alternate reality. And Biden will need tremendous goodwill and support from the more than 81 million who voted for him and many more who wish that they did.

Thus far, he has started well. On the eve of his inauguration, after paying tribute to his native Delaware and the memory of Beau his loving son, he departed for Washington, and his first act there was to honor the memory of more than 400,000 Americans lost to Covid-19 and to empathize with their loved ones. It was a moving ceremony celebrating life and showing the nation the kind of president he planned to be.

With a string of substantive and symbolic Executive Actions on Day 1, Biden has shown that he is determined to restore American presence and leadership of the struggles of the 21st century world: Covid-19 pandemic, climate change, economic depression, racial equality, and environmental issues. His Inaugural Address revealed his determination to restore decency in governance and appeal for unity as an essential requirement to confront the nation’s challenges.

The theme of unity and peace, justice and truth, decency and accountability, runs through the Biden Address. “Without unity”, he says, “there is no peace.” He also knows, of course, that a complementary requirement is justice, without which there also cannot be peace. And, as important as peace and unity are, accountability for wrong done to the image of the republic and its constitution and the crimes committed in the wake of the insurrectionists’ attack on the Capitol, cannot be discountenanced.

In light of the national experience over the last four years, Biden’s promise to “defend the truth and defeat the lies” is a recognition of the sanctity of the mandate that he has received and the oath he swore. For the mark of leadership depravity is to engage in lies big and small. The message of a lying president to citizens is that they are either too weak to manage the truth or too unintelligent to detect the lie.

Toasting the triumph of democracy at its most fragile hour, Biden welcomed “America’s day.. in history and hope, of renewal and resolve” and resolved to tackle the most serious of the nation’s problems, including the pandemic which has killed more than 400,000, economic downturn, and growing disunity and racial intolerance. These are not easy challenges. But if anyone can do it, Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. who has faced enormous personal challenges in life and met them standing, can.

Godspeed, Joe, America’s 46th President!