The Sun News

The crisis of Nigerian development?

The crisis of Nigerian development is not a crisis of leadership. It is a crisis of civilisation. And the critical procurers of civilisation are not leaders. The critical procurers of civilisation are scholars – especially axial scholars. The Nigerian conundrum is that, in lacking scholars, axial scholars, not professionals, not concerned professionals, the Nigerian intellectual elite shift and outsource their failures to others, to leadership.
And since the problem with Nigeria, by their fanciful account, is leadership, there are thus too many leaders on offer. And, in a poetic irony, no leader knows what to do. That is why they have failed since Abraham. The question is, why? The answer is that no Nigerian axial scholars have mapped out what it is to be Nigerian either in whole or in its subunits.
So, Nigerian leaders are actually leading in and with ignorance. And this includes the most educated of them. The point is simple: knowledge of a profession, say, soldiering, journalism or armed robbery, is not knowledge of whole reality. A profession is a narrow cut of the human experience. Reality is tracked or mapped by the primary sciences. These sciences and their scientists are not usually thought of as professionals and are not often glamourised or thought of as stars. But without them nothing can be done in the realms of the pursuit of civilisation. These are the men who write the new scriptures in history, in mathematics, in physics, etc.
It is in the pursuit of civilisation that we have decided to add our own little stride to the race. And that comes in the form of a book. Titled Nigeria: The Unreported Genocide Against the Igbo; The Murtala Mohammed-Olusegun Obasanjo Diktats, it is by yours truly, Ahiazuwa.
Let us summarise the main proofs of the book. 1. That the Generals Murtala Mohammed-Olusegun Obasanjo, 2GMO, junta-regime plotted, executed and enacted a peace time delayed-action genocide on the Igbo. That this fact has been largely unseen is due to its AIDS-like nature. Like AIDS, the genocide the 2GMO exacted on the Igbo had a window of false innocence or even goodness. That as in AIDS, the invasion tactics was to deceive and compromise the immune/sociological system and destroy the man/society from the inside.
Consequently, the book calls for the abolishment throughout Igboland of all eze-ships, igwe-ships, and monarchies. These monarchical alienisms constitute the vehicle through which the 2GMO invaded Igboland, AIDS-like. That is, to continue to be a traditional ruler in Igboland is to want to advance the AIDS-like socio-pathogen that the 2GMO implanted in the Igbo bloodstream. That is, to destroy Ndi-Igbo so that you may be monarch? Igboland must be made safe for 21st century development as the best of the world.
The eye-level visible consequence of this is the notorious fact that Igboland has a million autonomous communities and counting and with monarchs to match. The fact of this atomistic, divisive destruction and or metastasis of Igbo autonomous communities, is the purpose of the 2GMO. Now is the hour to stop it, to stop them or all Igboland is ruined beyond damage. More is that we now have a programme by which these now voided monarchs will be trained/retrained to be mathematicians, physicists, philologists etc, which is what the Igbo, a proud, free and republican people, need now and here.
And we have painstakingly researched and put together the data and the logic. In fact, the work is now, even in its inaugural days, considered as an advancement on Genocide Studies.
Also in the course of our research something magnificent happened. What is that? Now, the Yoruba have Oduduwa for their father and paterfamilias. The Jews have Abraham. And the Igbo? We are happy and humbled to say that with this book the father of the Igbo has now been named. And he is? Because of the socio-historical importance of the book we have made them available in the major cities of the East and Lagos already. Lagos, Patabah Bookshop, Shoprite, Surulere; Enugu, Knowledge Hammer Bookshop, Dolphin Restaurant, GRA Enugu/08065764065; Aba, Jibo Bookshops, 135, Market Road/08074762452; Onitsha, Chris Ajugwe & Associates, 43, Old Market Road/08036680177; Owerri, Nwakanma & Co/08063022520; Nsukka, University Bookshop, UNN. And the argument continues online. Let’s meet on Facebook and other social media platforms. Ahiazuwa.

 


Evidence is not truth?

On the matter of retired General Muhammadu Buhari’s post-London presidential speech. According to Buhari, he once hosted General Chukwuemeka Odimegwu-Ojukwu in his country home at Daura. Apparently both of them were then private citizens. That is the evidence he adduces. And he goes on to state that he and Ojukwu decided that the country must remain one and united.
Those are his claims. It may be true and authentic. It may be false, forged or farcified. However, the most important point is that there is no evidence, okay, really, no proof, that Ojukwu and Buhari came to such agreements. They may have, we repeat, but there is no proof to such assertions. And if there is no proof there cannot be assertions. Otherwise, I can assert that Buhari is the president of Britain where he once holed up. Ahiazuwa.
And Buhari cannot speak on behalf of Ojukwu in matters of a joint parley. He may only do so if he is directed by all parties in issue, that is, Ojukwu and himself. And the fact of a Buhari being so directed must be in the public eye or proofs adduced to the rights of representations of another thereof.
This is especially important because there has been several instances of disputes as to what and what not were agreed to in private and sometimes even public conversations. An example is the alleged one-term-only working agreement that ex-President Goodluck Jonathan apparently had with his sponsors. According to a faction, there was no such agreement. Yet, according to another faction, there was. And a third faction argued it was merely a non-binding suggestion.
So Buhari’s claims or conjecture on what he agreed with Ojukwu remains poetic at best. There are no facts or proofs to it. It is well to remark, as mathematicians say, evidence is not proof. Your data and figures and facts must be able to carry your conclusions. If not, you are in poetry-writing not historical or mathematical work.
Moreover, it is not the duty of your audience to have faith in you or in your ability to tell the truth. History-writing and recalling is formal business, not a mystical thing. There is no room for trust of raconteurs. The trust is reposed solely upon facts and logic. And if you missed on these you have missed it all.
So if Buhari has clips or communiques to the effect of signed and/or agreed to positions on Nigerian unity with Ojukwu, let him, for the sake of history, forward it. Otherwise, it may be taken that his assertions are, well, very well, urban, if presidential, myth-making.
Now, there are two persons to the acclaimed parley. Now, again, one of the parties is dead. And only one, who it is well to remark is on the other side, is alive and in contention. And he has been elected president. And he is relying solely on his verbal memoirs. Yet memories have not served history as best as they could.
That is why history, like mathematics, is not written on the integrity of promoters. History, to stand, must be asserted independent of their authors, verifiable by third parties.
Even more, there is the issue of what the two warlords were up to. Were they acting on behalf of who? Yes, Ojukwu was once a leader of the Igbo, but the Igbo do not entertain the dubious concept of eternal leader. So, Ojukwu, out of power and office, is not representing the Igbo. His are the visions and views of only one man, who, in an earlier incarnation, was as powerful as a god. But that era is gone and the Igbo have moved on. So, invoking Ojukwu is sentimental, not objective in Igbo or indeed rational historiography.
And, finally, we must not discount this. Ojukwu, a guest to Buhari in his country home? Was Ojukwu not humouring his host just to let the moments go on and flee back to whence he came? And that reminds me of the Chinese guy Zhuang Zhou. He says: I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly dreaming I am a man.
Well, his take is quasi-mystical. But another guy, now French, Albert Camus, puts the matter in more contemporary idiom: “Marrie, the girlfriend, had asked if I’d marry her. I said I didn’t mind; if she was keen on it, we’d get married. Then she asked again if I loved her. I replied, that her question meant nothing or next to nothing – but I suppose I didn’t. And she probed further: if that is how you feel why marry me? And the truth: I pointed out that anyhow the suggestion came from her; as for me, I’d merely said ‘Yes.’”
The question: Did General Ojukwu merely say ‘’Yes.’’ How safe or impolitic is it to say “No” in Daura? Could an Ojukwu have negotiated for the Igbo in Daura – homeland to one of the protagonists? Did the protagonist also visit Nnewi to affirm what was allegedly negotiated? And there are more questions. Meanwhile it is cool to have the president back, even if like the rest of us he is working things out from home. We end with this quote by Dollar Brand a South African jazz musician. So many theories of east and west abound. One thing alone is sure. The world is round. Ahiazuwa.

Share

About author

2 Comments

  1. Nwagu K V 24th August 2017 at 7:25 am

    Ojukwu, like you pointed out, was on his own, a private individual chewing the curd with another private individual, a retired army colleague representing no one. And now Ojukwu is long dead. Does Buhari want the Igbo to cling to the leadership of a dead man? Does he want the Igbo to accept Ojukwu as God Almighty whose words are immutable? The Igbo are very dynamic and hasten to abandon you when you fumble. The invocation of the Ojukwu name smacks of desperation to calm the Igbo. Very simple: give Ndigbo their rightful due in a society based on equity, justice and fair play. Let no person or group arrogate supremacy to himself and continuously deny and cheat others.

  2. Peter Okeke 24th August 2017 at 9:16 pm

    Buhari’s comments in that regards was to remind the Igbos, nay the IPOB members that the man they held in highest esteem believed in the indivisbility of the country. That of course was the reason that the spirit of Aburi accord ought to have represented which, unfortunately, was sadly not honoured which led to the civil war. Ojukwu believed in Nigeria as one but not in an unjust discriminatory conditions against a particular tribe. If agitation is coming from any segment of the country or many segments amidst elected representatives for the people in a democratic setting then it is obvious that such representations have ceased to be true representations and are existing without root from their constituent parts but for themselves. This is the situation as we have now in the country where the peoples needs are being taking to the public domain in disregard of their so called representatives that work in contradiction to their aspirations. Should that be the right trust of democracy or the so called unity that is not negotiable.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Archive

September 2017
M T W T F S S
« Aug    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Enquiries

Take advantage of our impressive statistics, advertise your brands and products on this site. Call Uche on +234-805-633-4351
Editor, Online: Ikenna Emewu
Share