Who are the examples in Obasanjo’s generation that represent the norms subverted by the generation that succeeds Obasanjo’s?
General Olusegun Obasanjo stood sociology on its head a few days ago when he posited that the younger generation (younger than his own) failed Nigeria and Africa. As reported in The Nation, Obasanjo theorised “that his generation led the way with purposeful, progressive, visionary leadership marked by accountability and probity while the younger generation of leaders failed to continue with the good legacy that his (Obasanjo’s) generation left.” It is what Obasanjo has refused to acknowledge that raises questions about his own sociological knowledge or imagination, more specifically, about what is expected in all societies to be the responsibility of the older generation in the development of the younger generation.
Now that Obasanjo has identified the generation that has damaged the chances of Africa to grow and compete with the rest of the world, it is pertinent to ask some questions. How were the members of the generation after Obasanjo socialised? What is the role of Obasanjo’s generation in the socialisation of the generation that has, in the words of Obasanjo, become a generation of deviance from the norms embodied by Obasanjo’s generation? Who are the examples in Obasanjo’s generation that represent the norms subverted by the generation that succeeds Obasanjo’s?
Historically, Obasanjo’s generation came to power on account of fighting corruption perpetrated by members of the generation before his own or of members of his own generation who happened to have had access to political power. Is this an indication that the generation before Obasanjo was also bad or did Obasanjo’s generation lie to citizens when they accused their predecessors of corruption? The regime that succeeded Obasanjo in 1979 was led by people in a generation older than Obasanjo. Again, this group was removed from power by members of Obasanjo’s generation on account of what they called corruption under the presidency of Alhaji Shehu Shagari. Shortly after, another group from Obasanjo’s generation booted out the regime that was manufactured by members of Obasanjo’s generation to replace ShehuShagari, and the rest is history.
Sociologists and anthropologists all over the world believe that it should not be easy for a generation to castigate the generation after it for not acting normatively. It is generally believed that no generation emerges on its own into a cultural space. Each generation is groomed directly or indirectly by the generation before it. Each citizen is believed to be a product of socialisation or enculturation. This process includes the transfer of values from one generation to the one coming after it. This is done through schooling, through transfer from the older generation of what is considered acceptable and unacceptable behaviour in society. In addition, members of the younger generation learn by imitating the actions of those before them. In effect, apart from whatever is induced by genes, enculturation accounts significantly for what a citizen does or fails to do in his adulthood. While some section of a citizen’s behaviour or misbehaviour can be blamed on genetic inheritance, so much of it is blamed on the values in circulation when a citizen is growing up.
Going by elements of sociology and anthropology with respect to the role of an older generation in the moulding of the generation after it, members of Obasanjo’s generation cannot be absolved from dereliction of duty with respect to the values or lack of values passed to the generation after them, even if we have to accept without incontrovertible evidence the claim that Obasanjo’s generation was saintly and stellar as rulers of their countries.To beef up Obasanjo’s claim that the generation after his own prevented Africa in general and Nigeria in particular from growing up, it is important to examine the kind of legacy that the generation of the saints left behind.
Under General Obasanjo’s supervision, the constitution of Nigeria was changed from a federal constitution to a quasi-unitary one. This meant that powers and responsibilities including moral supervision of politicians by citizens, possible under the regime of devolution of powers in the years preceding the coming of Obasanjo to power, were withdrawn from regions and concentrated at the centre. The centre with no direct relationship with citizens became at the instance of Obasanjo the locus of power and resources, and the site of corruption and impunity. Institutions of learning, a major agency in the business of socialisation, were summarily transferred from the supervision of regional authorities to a federal one that had no known values to protect and promote. Moreover, members of Obasanjo’s own generation also introduced a policy that prevented older politicians from seeking power, on account of their understanding that older politicians were attached to the cultures of the nationalities that constituted Nigeria before the coming of military autocracy and the imposition of a unitary constitution. The new breed political class was a creation of the type of military oligarchy presided over by General Obasanjo.
Apart from General Obasanjo’s proclivity to praise himself, and by extension, his generation in politics, the matter of why Nigeria or Africa is in a mess today cannot be explained via generation bashing. It has to be viewed as a systemic failure. Mugabe belongs more to Obasanjo’s generation than Dariye does, just as Mandela belongs more to Obasanjo’s generation than Tinubu does. Generation bashing is an over simplification of the problems besetting governance in Africa. It is like profiling or stereotyping. Nigeria and most of Africa have had their own share of good and bad old and young politicians.
If age is everything, Obasanjo would not have picked Dr. Goodluck Jonathan as vice president to UmaruYar’Adua in 2007, as there were many much older politicians with interest in becoming the vice president at that time. Not including President Jonathan in his list of young people who have failed Africa is an indication that, though Jonathan is one of the youngest presidents in the world, he is still considered a good choice bequeathed to Nigeria by Obasanjo.
Sociology or Anthropology 101 links older and younger generations in the preparation of citizens for socially adjusted citizenship at all levels; for nurturing by the older generate of the younger generation to sustain the values that keep societies going and predispose them to improvement; for members of an older generation to accept their duties and obligations in the failure of members of the younger generation after them for any moral decline, caused by failure to transfer right values to the new generation. Social continuity in all societies does not derive from a saintly father having a satanic son to succeed him or from an angelic mother raising a devilish daughter.Social continuity thrives on a sociological understanding that comes to terms with the existence of an umbilical cord between generations. To praise a good father under whose nose a bad son has grown is to promote Sociology zero zero zero.
