Category: Sunday

  • On the trail of aborted modernity ( The life of James Pinson Labulo Davies: A colossus of Victorian Lagos)

    On the trail of aborted modernity ( The life of James Pinson Labulo Davies: A colossus of Victorian Lagos)

    Something happened to Nigeria on the road to modernity. The evidence is there in the stultified institutions. They are so estranged and alienated from the principal goal of civilizing humanity that they have assumed a punitive life of their own. You have a political system that breed tyrants, men without economic conscience and moral imagination; an imported religious order that bristles with spiritual predators and afflicted redeemers; financial institutions that cripple initiatives and genuine enterprise; an intelligentsia so historically disoriented that it is incapable of reflecting on its own real condition.

    It is a miracle that Nigerians have managed to survive such a debilitating order. But the human toll has been quite prohibitive. Lacking in the most rudimentary formation of modernist rationality, many African societies are stuck in a time- warp; a whirlpool of irrationality and savage superstitions.

    Yet some architecture remains in the ancient and modern ruins. But if Pre-colonial Africa had some semblance of traditional order, it was because ancient African philosophers and statesmen, like their counterparts elsewhere, used the power of human imagination to resolve or deflect pressing existential contradictions.  That was before modernity and its scientific rationality took over from imaginative resolution and rationalization of concrete contradictions.

    Now, huge forests have grown around the ancient mud huts all over again, and they are resistant to primitive cutlasses. In a startling regression to animal barbarity, a cannibal ethos prevails. People still eat other people. At least four post-colonial rulers of Africa are documented cannibals. In the twenty first century, this is a metaphor for political savagery. The most urgent task at hand is how to plot our way out of the historic cul de sac.

    It is not going to be an easy task. But we must thank God for small mercies. Help sometimes comes from unexpected quarters. It has been noted that although humanity first civilized in Africa, they have not continued to do so there. But Africa has not always been completely hopeless and helpless.

    Despite the ravages of colonization and Arab pillage, despite imperialist occupation, there have been African avatars, particularly from the much storied coast of Lagos, who have heroically attempted to bridge the gap between Africa and western modernity by striving to impose their own vision of modernity powered by an African essence.

    The subject matter of this beautifully written and excellently packaged book is one of these unsung and unheralded titans. It is a moveable feast of colonial derring-do and a moving tribute to one of the greatest men ever thrown up by the Lagos Protectorate. Urbane, self-effacing and impeccably well-mannered, Professor Adeyemo Elebute, a retired surgeon and one of Nigeria’s most distinguished medical practitioners, wields his pen like a scalpel and with the thoroughness and finesse of a master surgeon performing a routine operation.

    The result is a tour de force of historical exposition which often reads like the magical Simon Schama, the famed historian, at the most sublime summit of his expository art. It is indeed a happy and uncanny coincidence of events that has brought a notable surgeon to focus on the life and times of this colossus of Victorian Lagos. Well-researched and impressively annotated, the beauty of this book lies in the fact that Professor Elebute is too well-bred to make any garrulous intellectual claim. But without doing so, he has contributed to modern Nigeria’s search for self-retrieval and continental self-validation.

    The book is also a labour of filial love and affection. According to the foreword written by J.D.Y Peel, the distinguished Africanist and Emeritus Professor of Anthropology and Sociology at the School of Oriental and African Studies, Elebute had contacted him in connection with what he had written about his grandfather, J.B Sadare, a famed goldsmith of his time, who had provided the house in which Ijebu Ode Grammar School held its first classes in 1913.

    Unlike contemporary self-commemorating Nigerian billionaires who steal from government coffers without giving anything back to the society, these giants of colonial history provided the seed money, the accommodation, the selfless devotion and the tireless nurturing that gave birth to most of the iconic higher institutions in Lagos and the Yoruba hinterland which pushed that part of Nigeria sharply forward in the race to modernity. It was this fertile soil that Awolowo would find so conducive to his breathless modernization project.

    There are giants even among giants. Among these worthy exemplars, Labulo Davies stood out like a supreme exemplar for his superb courage, his indomitable spirit, his intimidating brilliance, stupendous energy, entrepreneurial wizardry and the immutable hand of destiny which accounts for his miraculous ability to survive and even prosper in adversity. He was one hell of a man.

    His life reads like a magical adventure or some African version of Robinson Crusoe. Born on August 13, 1828 to liberated African slaves of Yoruba extraction (Egba and Ogbomosho) who eventually settled in the Sierra Leonean village of Bathurst just outside Freetown, the young boy displayed early promise and exceptional brilliance which did not escape the attention of the visionary colonial abolitionists who wanted to train indigenous Africans who would man essential services for the emancipated continent.

    In 1849, the British Admiralty having agreed to this proposal took on a set of African boys for training on ships belonging to the British Preventive Squadron with a view to turning them into captains of merchant ships. After a rigorous selection exercise at Freetown Grammar School, the young Davies and another boy were selected and placed on the HMA Volcano, a formidable war sloop, as cadets under Commander Robert Coote.

    Displaying exceptional courage and brilliance, Davies, within three years, had risen from cadet to midshipman and eventually to lieutenant. Echoes of Equaino, the fabled African sea-warrior of Igbo extraction, who together with other liberated slaves such as Cuguano and Sancho were to seize the literary saloons of London by the scruff of the neck towards the end of the eighteenth century?

    In December 1851, the young Lieutenant Davies was on board HMS Bloodhound in the Lagos lagoon and participated fully in the historic bombardment of Lagos. He was wounded in action. James Labulo Davies retired from the British Navy in 1852 and became a fully fledged master of merchant vessels plying the West African coast. Despite a naval disaster which saw to the ruin of his vessel at the Igbosere beach, Davies rose swiftly and was soon established as arguably the leading businessman in Lagos with choice property and land all over the future capital of Nigeria.

    Renowned for the scruples and the humane integrity of his business transactions and blending visionary entrepreneurship with missionary advocacy, Davies was to become one of the movers and shakers of Victorian Lagos. By this time, the entire maritime world had become the oyster of this enterprising African business mogul and son of former slaves  constantly shuttling between the coast of West Africa and London and being feted as he went along. It has been a long walk to real freedom.

    On Thursday, 14, August, 1862, after some initial hiccups, James Davies took his belle, the delectable former Sarah Forbes, to the altar in St Nicholas’ Church, Brighton, Sussex in England. It was a marriage that had to be sanctioned and personally approved by Queen Victoria. According to the author: “For several days before the wedding, the whole of Brighton was agog with the news of the grand marriage of an African couple rumoured to be of royal pedigree”.

    If the life of Captain Davies reads like pure fiction, the story of his wife is straight out of magical fantasia of outlandish dimensions.

    Originally a slave girl captured by the Dahomeans’ army after her Oke Oda/ Ilobi homestead was sacked and her parents slaughtered in 1848 when she was about five years old, she was handed over as a gift to the visiting Commander Forbes by King Gezo of Dahomey on July 5, 1850.

    Ina as she was then known—probably a corruption of the Yoruba name Aina—eventually made it to England with her adoptive father where Queen Victoria instantly took a great shine to the bright and precocious. Famously contrarian and eccentric about royal etiquettes where it came to African and oriental former captives, the great British sovereign showered love affection on the young girl and took her to live in the palace. Queen Victoria would eventually adopt a daughter of the union and send her study at Cheltenham, a famous private boarding school for girls.

    This work throws rich and fascinating light on a nascent African middle class and the stirring of some form of modernity which now stands tragically aborted. It was no doubt a society that looked towards the west for guidance and enlightenment. But it paid its dues by imbibing the finer aspects of higher bourgeois culture. It eschewed conspicuous consumption, was scrupulous in its business dealing, adopted a Calvinist restraint and rectitude in its outlook, was aggressively modernist in the pursuit of education and massively philanthropic in its vision of an integrated society.

    And it had massive restraints and severe deterrents in place for erring members. When he became bankrupt, Davies found himself excluded from consideration for political office until he retired his bankruptcy through massive plantation of cocoa at a place called Ijon. Known felons were shunned and deprived of the oxygen of permissive and primitive adulation. The social services worked smoothly and without the humongous lubrication of greasy corruption. It was a prim and proper society with frugal discipline as its watchword.

    To be sure, there was a hint of cultural disorientation such as when one of the grandees of the society was later tell the Reverend Henry Townsend that they considered themselves as middlemen between the white and the Egba.  Yet these self-assured men were no lackeys of the imperialist do-gooders as Sir Lugard and his brother would find out. In any case, better cultural alienation than the comprehensive epistemic deracination that has overtaken contemporary Nigeria.

    You cannot completely control what you didn’t invent. Let it be with western modernity. Despite centuries of imperialist subjugation, the culturally assured and intellectually confident Chinese, Japanese, Indians and lately the Singaporeans and the desert Arabs of Dubai have shown us how it can be done. But in most of Africa, particularly in a richly endowed country like Nigeria, we have completely surrendered the initiative. The result is the institutional chaos and social anomie that stare us in the face.

    From the weighty evidence of this important book, there was going to be another country. But it went under like an overburdened cargo ship. We can go on from here to eternity sharing the blame about what went wrong. It will not change anything. What is now important is to find our way out of the debris of aborted modernity.

  • Change is here: The National Assembly must never again be allowed to get away with stealing public funds

    Change is here: The National Assembly must never again be allowed to get away with stealing public funds

    According to Abayomi who has been fighting this oddity since 2002 and has a
    case in court about it,  there is nothing like constituency project since the National
    Assembly has NO power, whatever, to insert any project in a budget.

    Whoever hasn’t seen the CHANGE in town will not recognise a cyclone if he sees one. Isn’t it the saying that there is honour even amongst thieves? When was it Nigerians ever saw anything like this hurricane convulsing the House of Representatives?  Apparently, even with all the emphasis on CHANGE during the Buhari campaign, our legislators never believed that a new Sheriff had hit town. How would they, with Saraki riding roughshod, not only over the APC but significantly insulting the president in the process?  Nor had Dogara a whiff of it either, but he was smarter, and a lot more respectful. So he soft-pedaled and aligned with the party. But collectively, they believed that what Ndume called their internal mechanism – read chop and clean mouth – would still be the order of the day.

    So  off they went,  padding  and padding, believing they could make the Buhari budget in their own image and,  like in President  Jonathan’s  days, every machete was out, cutting slices of a budget that  they knew was going to be funded through massive external  borrowing. But who cares?  If you believe the Dogara side of this roforofo fight, you will have the following: “For reasons that were not noble and not in the Public Interest, Hon Abdulmumin had initially inflated the Budget by adding about N250b more to the total figure as submitted by Mr President. This, the NASS leadership out rightly rejected as a form of financial recklessness and inability to appreciate the dwindling resources available to government necessitating that we act prudently” I can hear Nigerians asking  these con artists  when exactly they started being, not only  so  people -friendly, but  caring and  responsible. If they were half as considerate in an economy where so many are hurting, they would long have stopped being amongst the highest paid legislators in the world as I would show below. Confident that  they would successfully pad  the Buhari  budget,  change or no change, since this has been a  long running practice in the National Assembly,  dating back to the  Obasanjo era  when  that President hauled some  of them  before the  courts,  Abdulmumin alleged that the House leadership “fraudulently shortchanged  the House by taking away N40 billion out of the N100 billion allocated for constituency projects and distributing same to  themselves even   without  the approval of the House”. It did not stop there as, according to Jibrin, “10 standing committees of the House inserted over 2000 projects worth N284 Billion”, into a budget President Buhari was agonising over its funding. Rationalising this public odium, however, hear how the Chairman, House Information Committee, Abdulrazak Namdas insulted Nigerians. According to him “given the workings of the budget process, the House cannot be accused of padding because there is nothing like that.’ In his puerile explanation, this same man, who Tunji Abayomi, a doctorate degree holder in Law. recently  took through a learning process on budget making on Channels TV, said  the following: “Section 4 empowers the National Assembly to make laws for the good governance of the federation while Section 59 confers on the Legislature final say on the budget. “Section 80 (4) on the other hand, which confers on the legislature absolute power of control over public funds, states: “No money shall be withdrawn from the Consolidated Revenue Fund or any other public fund of the Federation, except in the manner prescribed by the National Assembly”. And the cheek of it: “The word manner confers absolute legislative discretion. “When, therefore, the National Assembly appropriates funds in the budget, it can never under any circumstances or guise be deemed or regarded as tinkering or padding’. What impudence, what banality, both anchored on a stultifying ignorance!

    If this fellow was not such a poor student, he should not have forgotten the most elementary of what Dr Abayomi taught him: simply, that Budget making is an EXECUTIVE function and that it is the ONLY subject about which the Nigerian constitution specifically specifies the modus. According to Abayomi who has been fighting this oddity since 2002 and has a case in court about it,  there is nothing like constituency project since the National Assembly has NO power, whatever, to insert any project in a budget. Therefore, the only way legislators can help their constituencies is by lobbying the Executive branch to have projects inserted in the budget. To do otherwise, I hope they now know, is to sleep walk to jail.

    A stitch in time…

  • Trump and racist, xenophobic rejection of neoliberal globalization in the West – a hopeful portent? (2)

    Trump and racist, xenophobic rejection of neoliberal globalization in the West – a hopeful portent? (2)

    This was the note on which we ended the column last week: Donald Trump linked his economic nationalism and anti-globalization – America first! – with xenophobia, racism and Islamophobia and this is why his message, his demagoguery has created a mass movement numbered in the tens of millions, especially among the white working class. Is this a portent, a frightening portent for the future? No, I don’t think so, I wrote last week and write again this week. Let me now address this issue in this closing piece in the series.

    First of all, and as a slight qualification of what might appear as an over-confident assertion that Trump and his movement do not represent deeply troubling auguries for the future of our global community, let me admit that there is great cause for alarm in the successes of Trump, first through the Republican Party’s primaries and now in the unfolding see-saw movement of the polls between him and Hillary Clinton. Ordinarily and on any measure of decency, maturity and responsibility, Trump should be in the gutter, in the sinkhole of public and electoral popularity. His vulgarity, his bombastic egomania, his mendacity and his reckless disregard for accountability for his past and present misdeeds are unmatched in American electoral politics in the last hundred years. Indeed, in January this year, Trump went so far as to declare that if he went down the streets of New York City and shot dead the first person he met, the masses would still stick with him! That such an odious person and a politician with the mind and the morality of a teenager with a severe case of arrested emotional and ethical development is riding so high in electoral popularity in the richest and most powerful country in the world should be worrisome for all of us, especially as the fundamental basis of his appeal is a total rejection of neoliberal globalization and its discontents.

    Trump and his mass movement are troubling also because they present us all with an all too familiar reminder of how all human beings typically behave when confronted with severe economic hardship, this being the tendency to displace our anger, resentment and bitterness on the strangers, the collective “other” among us. Remember the “Ghana Must Go” debacle to African unity and solidarity in 1983 when an order was given by the government of Shehu Shagari for the expulsion of about two millions “aliens” from Nigeria within a period of two weeks? After the economic boom of the 197s, oil prices had slumped and the economy had sharply contracted. Moreover, elections were approaching and Shagari and the NPN found it expedient to displace the anger and resentment of the masses on”foreigners”, especially the Ghanaians who numbered a solid one million among the two million ordered expelled. I remember it distinctly now with a rueful anger that has never gone away: Shagari’s expulsion of the Ghanaians and other West African nationals was very popular in our country, especially in Lagos. And this is not in any way mitigated by the fact that about two decades before “Ghana Must Go”, the government of Ghana had in 1969 itself expelled hundreds of thousands of “foreigners”, most of them Nigerians, from Ghana.  And then of course, there is post-apartheid South Africa in which we have seen wave after wave of murderous, xenophobic violence against “foreigners” in the wake of the rising tide of economic and social insecurity attendant on the failure of the government and the ruling party, the ANC, to effect deep and meaningful redistribution of wealth after the end of apartheid. Thus, the millions trooping to the xenophobic trumpet of Trump indeed have justificatory examples and similarities to point to in our continent and other parts of the world.

    All these caveats notwithstanding, I still insist that Trump and his mass movement, though deeply troubling in the ways in which they connect with our human tendency to scapegoat “others” in periods of deep insecurity, do not present us with a portent for both the immediate and long-range future ahead of us. Trump may have won the Republican primaries, but he has not captured the American presidency. And I for one will go out on a limb now to declare that he is unlikely to win in November. In making this seemingly unguarded “prediction”, I hasten to declare that it is not so much the issue of winning or losing in the contest for the American presidency that concerns me as what this would mean for the forces of anti-neoliberalism and anti-globalization in our country, our continent and the world. Let me express what I have in mind here very clearly and unambiguously: even if he were to win in November, Trump will not in any sincere and meaningful way carry out the most important of his anti-globalization campaign promises. This is partly because of his fundamental insincerity and    inconsistency. But there is also the far more important fact that Trump – and for that matter any American president – would need the legislative approval of the U.S. Congress to push through the sort of deep and wide departure from free-trade capitalist globalization that he is promising his supporters. Congress, as it is presently constituted, will not give legislative support to such a project. In other words, and to bring the particular speculations I am making here to their logical conclusion, in office as president, neither Trump nor Clinton would embark on a serious project of doing away with free-trade, neoliberal capitalism. And on this point, we need to briefly consider Bernie Sanders who, as a matter of fact, has given deep thought to how to take on the U.S. Congress in dealing with neoliberal globalization and its discontents in America in particular and more generally, in the world. What do I have in mind in making this observation?

    It is one of the great regrets of the present cycle of American presidential elections that both the electoral platform and the message of Sanders have been grossly underreported at home in the U.S. itself and around the world. Other than the significant fact that he attracted millions of young people and previously unregistered Independents who had never participated in elections, little has been reported or discussed on his absolute insistence on the limits to electoral politics in America and what to do to circumvent and get beyond those limits. Specifically, Sanders has addressed the issue of the certainty of Congressional opposition to his project of dismantling neoliberalism in favor of an economic nationalism that mostly favors working people and the shrinking middle class. With a courage and a frankness that are rare in American electoral politics – indeed in electoral politics all over the world – Sanders again and again told his supporters that many of the things he was promising would not get Congressional approval, and that the only way they could be overcome resistance and blockage from the present political order was through a permanent political revolution in which a permanent siege on Congress in particular and all political appointees would put an end to business as usual. In other words, Sanders has repeatedly told his supporters, “don’t expect that after you elect me into office you can go home and leave everything to me and my cabinet; no, you will not go home, you will remain permanently mobilized to make sure that things will not go back to business as usual”.

    I started this series with the idea of portents in the current American presidential electoral campaigns and return to that topic in my concluding observations and reflections. As we now know, thanks to the hacking of the emails of the Democratic National Committee, Sanders was defeated by Clinton in part because she is the candidate preferred by the Establishment. In fairness though, diehard Sanders partisans must admit that Clinton did win a resounding majority and plurality over Sanders and that, in the words of Chinua Achebe, it is not morning yet on creation day for the sort of left-wing anti-neoliberalism of their hero, Bernie Sanders. If Sanders had defeated Clinton in the primaries, and if he had then gone to trounce Trump in the general elections, that would have been a portent of great significance to all of us across the world for it would have indicated that it is not necessary to link anti-globalization with xenophobia and racismin order to win elections and change the course of global affairs away from a seemingly entrenched and immoveable neoliberalism. As things stand now, Clinton has taken on board some of the items on the Sanders electoral platform. This too has a portent specific to it: depending on how sincere she proves to be if she wins the elections in November, we may see and get some reforms to neoliberalism that we have not seen so far in any Western country, least of all in America itself, the heartland, the center of gravity of neoliberal globalization and its enforcement in our world through both arms and diplomacy, aggression and enticement, the stick and the carrot.

    Our last words, our concluding thoughts must go Trump and the great threat that his coupling of economic nationalism with xenophobia and racism poses to all of us around the globe. In insisting that the future does not belong to Trump and the mass movement that he has inspired and set in motion, I am, I admit, expressing the wish, the hope that he loses and loses mightily in November. These are very chaotic, very perilous times in our world and the last thing we need now is a demagogue, a charlatan, a conman and a rabid misogynist at the helm of affairs in the most powerful nation in the world. But I am also fairly convinced that Trump will not win, that the Western world is not about to descent into a new dark age into to which it will, undoubtedly, pull all of us in our planetary home. If the best we can hope for and get now is Clinton-Sanders, so be it. Let it not be Trump, alone, his supporters fooled and in their disappointment digging deeper into the morass of the worst fears and anxieties that plague us when turn on the “enemies” among and within us.

     

    Biodun Jeyifo                                                                                                                         bjeyifo@fas.harvard.edu

  • Ten years of exciting journalism experience

    Ten years of exciting journalism experience

    How time flies! Today marks the tenth anniversary of the publication of our soar-away newspaper which hit the newsstands with a bang on July 31,2006 and has remained a major force to reckon with in the media industry in the country.

    I count myself privileged to be among the pioneer staff who midwifed the launch of the newspaper at a time not many gave it a chance to survive. Understandably, the newspaper market back then (and even now) appeared saturated and it was risky and ambitious taking the plunge when we did.

    Before then, some national newspapers had shut down, while some others were struggling to sustain publication. Not many gave us a chance to make it past a few years notwithstanding the formidable team, made up of experienced journalists led by our Managing Director and Editor-in-Chief, Victor Ifijeh.

    Even when we survived earlier projections of not lasting beyond two to three years, only few were convinced that The Nation was here to stay and become a major media player.

    There were justifiable concerns about the political leaning of the paper, but we are grateful and return all the glory to Almighty God for the grace to have made it this far.

    Our vision of being a quality paper of first choice among discerning readers has remained our guiding principle and it should not surprise anyone that our paper and staff have won virtually every available award in the industry.

    Working in The Nation in the last ten years has been a personally and professionally exciting experience for me in many ways. When I left The Punch in 1999, I thought I was through with working full-time in a newspaper house. Between 2000 and 2005, I was in and out of three newspapers; National Interest, Financial Standard and New Age. I later went for an overdue Masters degree in Mass Communication,  preparatory to seeking a teaching appointment in the university but took up the offer of being Sunday Editor of the defunct Comet. Comet was soon over and I joined The Nation for what has become a major chapter in my new book, Journalism of My life.

    We published many great stories during my tenure as Sunday Editor, but a particular one I can never forget was about a Nigerian studying in the United Kingdom whose family, back in Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria, lost contact with. He had died without their knowledge.

    I read about this incident in a report on a new television series by an intern published in a London paper. The Yoruba name among the list of people who had died and buried by the council without any trace of their families got me curious and we published the story from the Nigerian angle.

    Following the publication, his family members, for the first time, got information about his death and sent me a text message to thank us for helping to unravel the mystery of their son’s disappearance in the UK after completing his studies.

    My Assistant Editor then, Eni Akinsola, travelled to Ibadan to get the full details of the journey of the deceased to the UK, and correspondences and pictures he sent before he became incommunicado, and efforts by the family to trace his whereabouts for years were futile until the publication.

    For the successes of the last ten years and the glorious years ahead, I join the management and staff to appreciate our readers, advertisers and other well wishers.

    Thanks for the patronage and support. You can always rely on The Nation to remain faithful to our motto: Truth in Defence of Freedom.

  • Scrap the Senate: Our economy can no longer  take care of these senators

    Scrap the Senate: Our economy can no longer take care of these senators

    Not for the first, or even the second, I am constrained to write about the Nigerian Senate again. This is not just because the Senate has become so  hugely distracted – indeed, Femi Falana SAN, in a lecture  at the recent  investiture of Barrister Dele Ojogbede as the President of the Rotary Club of Ikoyi, brilliantly proved that they did not complete the constitutionally prescribed number of days of attendance at plenary to have qualified to be paid salaries. He therefore called on the Accountant-General of the Federation to set in motion the process of surcharging them. That is just as well but I write for a far greater moment.  Senators may have gone rampant celebrating themselves at the end of their last legislative year. Such peccadilloes can be permitted. What is beyond the pale, in an extremely troubled Nigeria,  is the  sheer  vacuity and the aimlessness of the 8th Senate. Senator Bukola Saraki managed to foul it up from scratch. It will interest me, personally, to read from  the most  supportive  of this senate  amongst  my readers  to please controvert me on this so we can  open a new chapter on the subject. What follows is a WhatsAPP message that is widely trending presently here in Nigeria. If the claims in it are wrong, I shall urge the appropriate organ of the senate to painstakingly educate Nigerians so that the lies, if that is what they are, can be summarily interred with their bones. Otherwise, I will urge Nigerians to put it on the ballot come 2019. ”Senator’s Pay World Wide:* Sri Lanka – $5,100.00* India – $11,200.00* Malaysia – $25,300.00* Thailand – $43,800.00* Spain – $43,900.00* Ghana – $46,500.00* Saudi Arabia – $64,000.00* Indonesia – $65,800.00* Kenya – $74,500.00* France – $85,900.00* Sweden – $99 300.00* South Africa – $104,000.00* Britain – $105,400.00* New Zealand – $112,500.00* Israel – $114,800.00* Germany – $119,500.00* Ireland – $120,400.00* Hong Kong – $130,700.00* Japan – $149,700.00* Canada – $154 000.00* Singapore – $154,000.00* Brazil – $157,600.00* United States – $174,000.00* Italy – $182,000.00*Nigeria – $2,183,685.00The details of the remuneration of anaverage Nigerian Senator is detailed below;* Basic Salary (B.S) – N2,484,245.50* Hardship Allowance (50% of B.S) –N1,242,122.70* Constituency Allowance (200% of B.S) – N4,968,509.00* Newspapers Allowance (50% of B.S) –N1,242,122.70* Wardrobe Allowance (25% of B.S) – N621,061.37 *Recess Allowance (10% of B.S) – N248,424.55* Accommodation (200% of B.S) – N4,968,509.00* Utilities (30% of B.S) – N828,081.83* Domestic Staff (70% of B.S) – N1,863,184.12* Entertainment (30% of B.S) – N828,081.83* Personal Assistants (25% of B.S) – N621,061.12* Vehicle Maintenance Allowance (75% of B.S) – N1,863,184.12* Leave Allowance (10% of B.S) – N248,424.55* Severance Gratuity (300% of B.S) –N7,452,736.50* Car Allowance (400% of B.S) – N9,936,982.00* TOTAL MONTHLY SALARY = N29,479,749.00 ($181,974.00)* TOTAL YEARLY SALARY = N29,479,749.00 x 12 = N353,756,988.00The average salary of Nigerian worker based on the national minimum wage is N18,000.00. So, the yearly salary is N18,000.00 x 12 = N216,000.00Remember, yearly Salary of Nigerian Senator = N353,756,988.00Proportion: N353,756,988.00/N216,000.00 = 1,638It will take an average Nigerian worker 1,638 years to earn the yearly salary of a Nigerian Senator.”

     

  • In need of national heroes…

    There is no single hero’s cape that can fight the mess. We all need
    to put on our capes.

    Nigeria has not been blessed with too many heroes. Awolowo for instance, looked at the willful and stubborn children of the western part of the country and sent them to schools under the free education programme. Perhaps, it was to rid them of their stubbornness, but I suspect it was more for the mental peace of the parents while the children cried. But by some strange pull, the malaise spread to the rest of the country and the government adopted it as a national habit. And now, the parents are crying because they have to pay so much for their freedom, and the children have found their own peace by forming secret cults.

    Balewa is another example. He told his people in the north to stay still and he would bring Nigeria to them. While they waited, they did a bit of farming and by another strange power pull, that act also spread. Now the rest of the country is still, nothing is moving and no one is farming.

    Zik, our last example, asked his people in the east what they wanted. They replied that they wanted to trade, so he told them that the entire country – nay the world – was a market for their capture. Again, the trading culture spread all over the country and everyone has broken out in a rash of shop-keeping ever since.

    Obasanjo, starring in ‘The Return of Uncle Sege,’ galloped up, looked at the situation of things, and exclaimed ‘Whara mess!’ Twice, he said it! And he promptly began the task of trying to put things right, throwing trade, education, farming and stillness into the air like a circus juggler in a practice session. But he either did not know how to throw or the things themselves defied the law of gravity, nothing went up or came down, except maybe his blood pressure.

    Then Buhari came, cape flying behind him, and landing with a thud. The whole country reverberated as he strode in with his heavy boots. Quickly, he sized up the situation, and decided that the country was too full of sores for his liking. Deftly, he traced the putrefying sores to some strange concept called corruption caused by Nigerians’ greed for material gains where they had not sown. Promptly, he brought out his sword from his back pocket and began waving it around madly at the guilty. Many of them are still trying to look for their decapitated heads.

    I really wish JFK’s statement – ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country — could be credited to a Nigerian because no country needs it more than ours. Many of us in this country do not know the words of our anthems; it is all we can do to even recognise its tune! I understand there was a quite a stir in the assembly recently because an ambassadorial nominee did not know verse two of the national anthem. I don’t know it either but that has not prevented my amala from going down the red lane in peace, meat or no meat!

    The flag is definitely not our hero. No one seems to have realised that it is anything beyond a piece of cloth. If we did, no policeman or navy man or soldier would willfully kill another Nigerian citizen while the flag stands hoisted on a tall pole in front of his police station or other public buildings, waving its love and benevolence and cover for all its citizens in the air. We would also refuse to soil its whiteness with the blood of our fellow human beings in the name of religion or politics or greed or anger. We would, in addition, keep its greenness lush with cultivated fields where amala and brothers would sprout in obedience to the invitation from our fingers, to feed the nation.

    We need national heroes who can see better and understand better and instruct us better. We are looking for heroes who will look at all of our infantile kleptomaniac tendencies and turn down the corners of their mouths at us and tell us to ‘grow up’. We need heroes to rescue us from what presently goes as our national ethos defined in broken down structures, dilapidated infrastructures and constantly changing policies. We need people to teach us to dream in matters of national planning, education, what can or cannot be imported, industrialisation, and even eating! This last has been known to be the cause of a great deal of instability. Let me explain.

    From three square meals, the average Nigerian who does not patrol the corridors of Aso Rock previously learnt to keep his soul within his body with the contents of two meals, garri and groundnuts making a very satisfying second. Then Nigeria went down officially to a one-meal policy, when cassava came into its own and found its primary purpose on earth: as an industrial resource. To think that all these years, we thought cassava was food. Now, from that one-meal policy, the country has since descended into a one-meal-in-two-days-or-more policy.

    This country definitely needs heroes, to redefine many things for it not least of which are the domestic and foreign policies. Among the domestic problems to tackle is the question of population control. In view of the food situation, I need to know whom I can call ‘Brother’, one who is allowed to fight with his siblings and can therefore share the family’s amala and oil dinner; and one whom I can call ‘Oh Brother!,’ and from whom I should, in one single, swift and supple movement, deftly hide that amala pot under the bed.

    The domestic policy should also naturally compel all husbands to declare all their assets and their salaries to their wives. The wives should also be given the right to pick what they need and want from such declared assets and emoluments, or go on strike. And where two or three women are gathered together in deep discussion, it should not be thought that they are gossiping but are only discussing union affairs, mainly children and husbands. They may also be discussing whether or not to declare a strike, which may be worse than the NLC total strike, over the price of garri. The alternative is that all the housewives, to a woman, may pull on Buhari’s agbada.

    The foreign policy should spell out for us whom we can declare war against, such as noisy neighbours, intemperate market women who hike prices indiscriminately, and government officials who delight in changing the country’s policies without a thought to anyone else. Our heroes would also help us decide which aligned or non-aligned movement or league to join, such as the comity of homes sharing the same ideals: refusing to have anything to do with new-fangled things like iPods.

    Seriously though, this country could do with all of its one hundred and fifty million national heroes, who would fashion out some ideals that would pave the way to a more purposeful future for us as a people. We are looking at things like inventing the mouth organ (roasted corn), weekend burial ceremonies (happiness), but would, on no account yield any more money to the first world countries for the privilege of living in the same universe with them (keeping foreign accounts).

    Sadly, that hero lies deeply asleep in each one of us. You and I are the heroes that this country needs to pull out of this gargantuan mess that past decades of national carefree jamboree has plunged us. There is no single hero’s cape that can fight the mess. Buhari’s alone cannot do it. We all need to put on our capes. Come now; let’s be the heroes Nigeria needs today.

    • This is a revision of an article published in New Age in 2005.

     

  • Buhari exhumes ghosts and indicates a mysterious future

    Buhari exhumes ghosts and indicates a mysterious future

    NEWSPAPERS squirmed last Monday with the startling story of President Muhammadu Buhari’s post mortem on the 1985 coup that toppled his military regime. He took office himself through a coup d’etat in December 1983, whether the motives were pure or not, and was toppled by another coup led by Ibrahim Babangida, an army major-general at the time. There were reports that Gen. Babangida moved against the then Gen. Buhari because of the latter’s inflexibility, autocratic bearing and refusal to carry his colleagues along. There were indeed many accounts of the coup.
    To lay the ghost to rest, President Buhari, in an interview conducted some months ago but only now published by The Interview magazine, gave his own reading of the coup. His explanation attempted to rebut Gen. Babangida’s insistence that President Buhari misread the motive(s) of the coup. Said the president: “I learnt that Gen. Ali Gusau, who was in charge of intelligence, took an import licence from the Ministry of Commerce, which was supplies, and gave it to Alhaji Mai Deribe. It was worth N100, 000, a lot of money then. When I discovered this, I confronted them and took the case to the army council. Gen. Malu was the Chief of Defence Staff; Gen. Babangida was the Chief of Army Staff; Tunde Idiagbon was the Chief of Staff, Defence Headquarters and I was the Head of State. I said if I didn’t punish Gusau, it would create a problem for us. It is North versus South; majority versus minority; Muslim versus Christian. That was what it showed. So, I said Gen. Ali Gusau had to go. He was the Chief of Intelligence. That was why Babangida got some officers to remove me. Let him repeat his own story. Ali Gusau is still alive.”
    It is not only Gen Gusau who is alive; Gen Babangida is also alive, thankfully. Whether they will react to the president’s account or not is uncertain. And whether the victim of the coup is expected to know more than the planners of the coup is also not clear. What is clear, however, is that the president should have included the rebuttal in his memoirs, assuming he plans one. By joining issues now with his former colleagues over a 1985 ghost probably indicates what many fear about him: that the president keeps grudges and exacts a terrible price from those who offend him. Apart from inadvertently portraying Gen Babangida as chivalrously fighting for Gen Gusau, the president’s version also attempts ingeniously to respond to critics who today accuse him of nepotism, ethnocentrism and bigotry. It is not certain whether that attempt will successfully dispel the feelings many Nigerians hold about his government’s biases.
    Overall, the president should have ignored the interview granted by Gen Babangida to explain the motives of the 1985 coup. Asked what he thought of the explanations of those who deposed him, he should have parried the question, especially because he obviously cannot trust himself not to be emotional about the matter, not to talk of the impression of pained grief he appears to be forcing himself to endure over the circumstances surrounding the coup. The fear now is whether he still harbours other grudges in his past, particularly during his military dictatorship. But as for the impression he tried to create of his sense of fairness and justice, the present realities enveloping his presidency instill only partial confidence.

  • Okon and Baba Lekki in phone-in drama

    AS the House of Representatives finally unravels in a smouldering inferno of truly outlandish scams, snooper has been assembling a team of crack editorialists to pen the political obituary of the leading figures of the upper and lower chambers. But you must trust Okon and his ancient collaborator to take a dimmer view of developments in the country. After being invited to take part in a phone-in programme by a popular radio station, the rebel duo have been running subversive commentaries about the state of the nation until the D-day.
    Hostilities began as soon as they walked in and Okon accosted the beautiful lady moderator with a lewd stare.
    “Bia nwannem maranma. No be you I been dey see for Okota before before?”, the mad boy crowed. But the gamely lady had a full measure of her man and gave it back to the rogue.
    “Mr Okon, we know you are a boastful efulefu. Just get on with it!!” the lady shot back with a prim smile.
    “Ha my sister, no vex. You know say man no be wood. Even Tiger Wood sef no be wood”, a half-contrite Okon whimpered to the raucous delight of the audience. An irate caller opened proceedings.
    “Okon, where are we going gan gan in this country? I want to know?” the angry man hollered. With a self-important swagger, Okon adjusted his resource control cap and began to ventilate.
    “You see my brother dem country be like when towing vehicle dey tow towing vehicle and him come tumble and catch fire for Third Mainland and katakata come burst. Override come override Overdrive. Fire come kill driver. Conductor come jump inside lagoon”, the mad boy sniggered as his lips parted in a sadistic grin.
    “What is your take on Baba’s statement that most members of the house are thieves?” a caller from Mushin demanded in an imperious tone.
    “As for dat one, na baba’s goat dey chop baba’s corn ooo”, Okon sneered. It was at this point that Baba Lekki, in a deranged burst of energy, began a savage parody of a famous Yoruba ditty about the immutable law of self-cloning.
    Omo o le jo baba kama binu omo, aiyee le
    Moni eniarebu yi jo baba e ju
    Omo o le jo baba kama binu omo.
    As the old crook cantered and capered to his own music sending the audience into rapture, it was another angry caller who stopped him in his track.
    “You this yeye old man. You are dancing like a fool when some stupid so called militants are still holding on to that Yoruba Oba from Iba.” The man growled like an angry bear. Baba Lekki sat down like a punctured balloon.
    “You see my brother. Dat one na case of juju get accident. Na dem female traitor inside palace who come phone dem militants say make dem dey come as baba don remove him ibante. (Yoruba underwear made of charms) Na the reason why dem capture baba like fowl be dat,” Baba Lekki grunted.
    “Baba I been dey surprise say small boy yab you like dat and you come dey shiver like dem Obudu monkey. Abi juju don get accident again?”, Okon sneered.
    “Okon, leave the fool. No be the same day small pikin abuse Iroko dat dem thunder go strike him and him mama”, the old man noted as he began rubbing his palms together with satanic relish. It was at this point that crackling gun fire from approaching militants sent everybody scampering for safety.

  • Restructuring: pontifications, excuses, and a way forward

    But pro- and anti-restructuring regional spokespersons need to mobilise and consult those they claim to represent before presenting positions on their behalf

    Rhetoric in support and against restructuring or return to true federalism has become rife in the country’s political space. The stridency of the rhetoric is almost as strong as it was between the annulment of MKO Abiola’s presidential mandate and the death of General Sani Abacha. There is virtually no day that newspapers don’t carry news on this topic, an illustration of the growing importance of federalism to various interest groups and of opposition to federalism to others. Restructuring has become a new formula for dividing the country ideologically, just one year after a national election that majority expected to unite the country in preparation for a change-making president.

    Restructuring is not new to Nigeria. The Midwest region resulted from restructuring just as the 12 states created under General Gowon. Chief Obafemi Awolowo made federalism an abiding part of the country’s political conversation for decades between the 1950s and the 1980s. Sovereign national conference for the purpose of restructuring came into public conversation at the instance of late human and civil rights lawyer, Alao Aka-Bashorun in the late 1980s. The concept got popularised by the Movement for National Reformation at the instance of such figures as Anthony Enahoro, Cornelius Adebayo, Baba Omojola, etc. And Afenifere as the nucleus of NADECO became a major populariser of demand for restructuring during the struggle against Sani Abacha’s usurpation of the mandate given by majority of Nigerians to MKO Abiola. The concept became part of the national and international campaign of NADECO against the rule of terror that Abacha adopted to sustain himself in power and to coerce the country to accept his self-transformation from military dictator to civilian president.

    Recent calls by Afenifere for restructuring is therefore in character even though details of the organisation’s demand may be debatable. The recent characterisation by Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) of Afenifere as agent of diversion from more pressing national problems on account of renewing calls for restructuring smacks of a deliberate attempt to underminethe constitutional rights of citizens to express themselves in a democracy and pooh-pooh expression of political desires of citizens. The highlight of Arewa’s communique: “ Nigeria now faces more serious security challenges, social and economic problems, such as the destruction of oil pipelines by the Niger Delta militants, Boko Haram insurgency, youth restiveness, drop in oil revenue, unnecessary killing and kidnapping etc that require everyone’s input, rather than diverting the attention and resources of government on an issue that could be tackled by our democratic structure” illustrates an attempt to call a dog a bad name in order to hang it.

    All the problems catalogued by Arewa in the quotation above must have adverse effect on the country. But it is surprising that Arewa has not given these problems the critical thinking they deserve. Is it not conceivable that all the problems graphically described by Arewa, apart from the fall in oil revenue, can also be perceived by others as being caused by the existence of a flawed structure of governance in the country, especiallydestruction of conducive relations between national and subnational governments and communities?How illogical is it to see as diversionary efforts to critique a system of funding 36 states and 774 local governments from revenue from one single commodity whose price is determined beyond our shores?   Is there any evidence that devolving more power and functions including fiscal federalism or autonomy to subnational governments cannot solve many of the problems currently facing the country?

    Nigerians have been distracted for too long from coming to terms with what they perceive as negative outcomes of gradual de-federalisation of the country, via creation of fears about the Nigerian by State by one section or their supporters in power from time to time.  For example, Unity as a mantra was deployed to induce political crisis in Western Nigeria immediately after independence. Awolowo’s decision to remain in opposition in the belief that a strong opposition is crucial to survival and consolidation of democracy became a problem for those who thought the best way for the country to be properly united was to create a one-party state. Later, threat to national unity by General Aguiyi-Ironsi’s decree to turn the country into a unitary system from the federal system that defined the country at independencebecame another mantra that became irrelevant shortly after the second coup. Fighting corruption provided a basis for the third coup, and many others that happened on and off between 1975 and 1998. All this time, very little time or energy was left for planning for sustainable national development, as efforts to critique the structure of governance was overshadowed by problems identified by rulers as urgent national problems.

    Furthermore, after the exit of military rule in 1999, words like unity and burnishing of the country’s image internationally came back to silence calls for re-federalisation.  Non-negotiability of the nation’s unity and diversification of the economy nationwide are the latest mantras being pushed by ACF and kindred groups to crowd out calls for consideration of the nation’s political structure. Arewa’s directive on how to solve Nigeria’s problems and its call on Afenifere and other groups to remain silent until Arewa perceives the country ready to hear other voices exudes political intolerance that is not acceptable in a multicultural society and polity. It is too late in the evolution of the country for any group to blackmail others and pose or act as landlord by viewing others as tenants. Arewa’s recent bullying of Afenifere seems like an excuse for stopping others from addressing issues that can ameliorate what they perceive as diminishing their chances to make life and living better for themselves and their children. Directing Afenifere to pass its demands to the legislature is also failing to recognise the fact that a constitution that did not originate from citizens and without their consent may be an aspect of the project of restructuring.

    Nothing in today’s piece should be construed as supporting Afenifere’s call for restructuring entirely. The organisation’s fixation on Jonathan and recommendations of the conference he convened on the eve of the last presidential election raises doubt about the goal of the organisation and others like it in other parts of the country. Assuming that Afenifere is speaking for the Yoruba rather than for its members, is it accurate to insist that the federal system that the Yoruba want is synonymous with recommendations from the 2014 national dialogue arrived at by delegates handpicked by Jonathan? Essentially, Afenifere and Arewa are groups of self-appointed leaders or spokesmen for their own sections of the country, and their views pro and con of restructuring should not be seen to go beyond claims and demands that have not been presented to citizens for whom they claim to speak.

    While calling for restructuring of the Nigerian polity can be presented in the vocabulary of overt or covert partisanship, strategies and activities that can gain traction among citizens, especially in the Yoruba region will have to be at best bi-partisan or supra-partisan, in the fashion of a movement in which members see re-federalisation as an ideological goal that must be achieved before proper political and economic development can be achieved in the country. Some template for turning restructuring into a people’s demand in the Yoruba region was created three years ago under the aegis of the Yoruba Assembly convened in Ibadan by retired Lt-General Alani Akinrinade. The project of establishing a supra-partisan Yoruba Constitutional Convention that ensued from the Assembly is still waiting today for endorsement of Afenifere and kindred organisations. There may be no genuine restructuring without a negotiated constitution. At present, Nigeria has a constitution imposed on it by military dictators and designed to make far-reaching amendments of such constitution impossible to accomplish. Consequently, proponents and opponents of re-federalisation should note that creating a de-militarised constitution that enjoys the consent of citizens is part of the campaign for restructuring.

    Arewa should note that, apart from Afenifere’s fixation on Jonathan’s conference recommendations, Afenifere and other groups calling for restructuring have not done anything to derogate from President Buhari’s promise to: Initiate action to amend our Constitution with a view to devolving powers, duties and responsibilities to states and local governments in order to entrench true Federalism and the Federal spirit. But pro- and anti-restructuring regional spokespersons need to mobilise and consult those they claim to represent before presenting positions on their behalf.

  • Trump and racist, xenophobic rejection of neoliberal globalization in the West – a hopeful portent? (2)

    Trump and racist, xenophobic rejection of neoliberal globalization in the West – a hopeful portent? (2)

    This was the note on which we ended the column last week: Donald Trump linked his economic nationalism and anti-globalization – America first! – with xenophobia, racism and Islamophobia and this is why his message, his demagoguery has created a mass movement numbered in the tens of millions, especially among the white working class. Is this a portent, a frightening portent for the future? No, I don’t think so, I wrote last week and write again this week. Let me now address this issue in this closing piece in the series.

    First of all, and as a slight qualification of what might appear as an over-confident assertion that Trump and his movement do not represent deeply troubling auguries for the future of our global community, let me admit that there is great cause for alarm in the successes of Trump, first through the Republican Party’s primaries and now in the unfolding see-saw movement of the polls between him and Hillary Clinton. Ordinarily and on any measure of decency, maturity and responsibility, Trump should be in the gutter, in the sinkhole of public and electoral popularity. His vulgarity, his bombastic egomania, his mendacity and his reckless disregard for accountability for his past and present misdeeds are unmatched in American electoral politics in the last hundred years. Indeed, in January this year, Trump went so far as to declare that if he went down the streets of New York City and shot dead the first person he met, the masses would still stick with him! That such an odious person and a politician with the mind and the morality of a teenager with a severe case of arrested emotional and ethical development is riding so high in electoral popularity in the richest and most powerful country in the world should be worrisome for all of us, especially as the fundamental basis of his appeal is a total rejection of neoliberal globalization and its discontents.

    Trump and his mass movement are troubling also because they present us all with an all too familiar reminder of how all human beings typically behave when confronted with severe economic hardship, this being the tendency to displace our anger, resentment and bitterness on the strangers, the collective “other” among us. Remember the “Ghana Must Go” debacle to African unity and solidarity in 1983 when an order was given by the government of Shehu Shagari for the expulsion of about two millions “aliens” from Nigeria within a period of two weeks? After the economic boom of the 197s, oil prices had slumped and the economy had sharply contracted. Moreover, elections were approaching and Shagari and the NPN found it expedient to displace the anger and resentment of the masses on”foreigners”, especially the Ghanaians who numbered a solid one million among the two million ordered expelled. I remember it distinctly now with a rueful anger that has never gone away: Shagari’s expulsion of the Ghanaians and other West African nationals was very popular in our country, especially in Lagos. And this is not in any way mitigated by the fact that about two decades before “Ghana Must Go”, the government of Ghana had in 1969 itself expelled hundreds of thousands of “foreigners”, most of them Nigerians, from Ghana.  And then of course, there is post-apartheid South Africa in which we have seen wave after wave of murderous, xenophobic violence against “foreigners” in the wake of the rising tide of economic and social insecurity attendant on the failure of the government and the ruling party, the ANC, to effect deep and meaningful redistribution of wealth after the end of apartheid. Thus, the millions trooping to the xenophobic trumpet of Trump indeed have justificatory examples and similarities to point to in our continent and other parts of the world.

    All these caveats notwithstanding, I still insist that Trump and his mass movement, though deeply troubling in the ways in which they connect with our human tendency to scapegoat “others” in periods of deep insecurity, do not present us with a portent for both the immediate and long-range future ahead of us. Trump may have won the Republican primaries, but he has not captured the American presidency. And I for one will go out on a limb now to declare that he is unlikely to win in November. In making this seemingly unguarded “prediction”, I hasten to declare that it is not so much the issue of winning or losing in the contest for the American presidency that concerns me as what this would mean for the forces of anti-neoliberalism and anti-globalization in our country, our continent and the world. Let me express what I have in mind here very clearly and unambiguously: even if he were to win in November, Trump will not in any sincere and meaningful way carry out the most important of his anti-globalization campaign promises. This is partly because of his fundamental insincerity and    inconsistency. But there is also the far more important fact that Trump – and for that matter any American president – would need the legislative approval of the U.S. Congress to push through the sort of deep and wide departure from free-trade capitalist globalization that he is promising his supporters. Congress, as it is presently constituted, will not give legislative support to such a project. In other words, and to bring the particular speculations I am making here to their logical conclusion, in office as president, neither Trump nor Clinton would embark on a serious project of doing away with free-trade, neoliberal capitalism. And on this point, we need to briefly consider Bernie Sanders who, as a matter of fact, has given deep thought to how to take on the U.S. Congress in dealing with neoliberal globalization and its discontents in America in particular and more generally, in the world. What do I have in mind in making this observation?

    It is one of the great regrets of the present cycle of American presidential elections that both the electoral platform and the message of Sanders have been grossly underreported at home in the U.S. itself and around the world. Other than the significant fact that he attracted millions of young people and previously unregistered Independents who had never participated in elections, little has been reported or discussed on his absolute insistence on the limits to electoral politics in America and what to do to circumvent and get beyond those limits. Specifically, Sanders has addressed the issue of the certainty of Congressional opposition to his project of dismantling neoliberalism in favor of an economic nationalism that mostly favors working people and the shrinking middle class. With a courage and a frankness that are rare in American electoral politics – indeed in electoral politics all over the world – Sanders again and again told his supporters that many of the things he was promising would not get Congressional approval, and that the only way they could be overcome resistance and blockage from the present political order was through a permanent political revolution in which a permanent siege on Congress in particular and all political appointees would put an end to business as usual. In other words, Sanders has repeatedly told his supporters, “don’t expect that after you elect me into office you can go home and leave everything to me and my cabinet; no, you will not go home, you will remain permanently mobilized to make sure that things will not go back to business as usual”.

    I started this series with the idea of portents in the current American presidential electoral campaigns and return to that topic in my concluding observations and reflections. As we now know, thanks to the hacking of the emails of the Democratic National Committee, Sanders was defeated by Clinton in part because she is the candidate preferred by the Establishment. In fairness though, diehard Sanders partisans must admit that Clinton did win a resounding majority and plurality over Sanders and that, in the words of Chinua Achebe, it is not morning yet on creation day for the sort of left-wing anti-neoliberalism of their hero, Bernie Sanders. If Sanders had defeated Clinton in the primaries, and if he had then gone to trounce Trump in the general elections, that would have been a portent of great significance to all of us across the world for it would have indicated that it is not necessary to link anti-globalization with xenophobia and racismin order to win elections and change the course of global affairs away from a seemingly entrenched and immoveable neoliberalism. As things stand now, Clinton has taken on board some of the items on the Sanders electoral platform. This too has a portent specific to it: depending on how sincere she proves to be if she wins the elections in November, we may see and get some reforms to neoliberalism that we have not seen so far in any Western country, least of all in America itself, the heartland, the center of gravity of neoliberal globalization and its enforcement in our world through both arms and diplomacy, aggression and enticement, the stick and the carrot.

    Our last words, our concluding thoughts must go Trump and the great threat that his coupling of economic nationalism with xenophobia and racism poses to all of us around the globe. In insisting that the future does not belong to Trump and the mass movement that he has inspired and set in motion, I am, I admit, expressing the wish, the hope that he loses and loses mightily in November. These are very chaotic, very perilous times in our world and the last thing we need now is a demagogue, a charlatan, a conman and a rabid misogynist at the helm of affairs in the most powerful nation in the world. But I am also fairly convinced that Trump will not win, that the Western world is not about to descent into a new dark age into to which it will, undoubtedly, pull all of us in our planetary home. If the best we can hope for and get now is Clinton-Sanders, so be it. Let it not be Trump, alone, his supporters fooled and in their disappointment digging deeper into the morass of the worst fears and anxieties that plague us when turn on the “enemies” among and within us.

    Biodun Jeyifo                                                                                                                         bjeyifo@fas.harvard.edu