Social indiscipline starts with leadership indiscipline. If a minister or commissioner does not have to queue in line or wait in traffic like everyone else, why would anyone else? Nigerian leaders are not indisciplined because society is indisciplined, it is the other way round.
The next question then is: why are Nigerian leaders indisciplined? Because the political system allows them to be. It confers so much powers, privileges, and discretions on our leadership that, by law, they can act anyhow without accountability or consequences. And they do.
Well, the next question is: why does our political system confer such powers?
Because that was the only way the British could exploit Nigeria from the 1860s until 1960. The laws made by the British gave Governor Generals, Governors, and District Officers wide executive powers.
And since 1960, when Nigerians started self-governance, we have not examined these laws and the administrative systems to reduce these reckless powers and put our leadership under control. Instead, the military expanded these powers even more.
The next question is: But why are the British not a dysfunctional society too since they had these powers?
No, the British home govt didn't have such powers at home. They only used such powers in the colonies and they left them intact for the independence govts without reform.
Next question: But why is it that social indiscipline is now worse than ever if leadership indiscipline was always there?
Because British home political culture influenced our leaders at first. But as years passed, our govt became more and more absorbed with their own powers.
Next question: what are we going to do about it?
1. Stop preaching at ordinary Nigerians: we mostly follow where the jungle leads.
2. It's not just about changing our leaders: a born again pastor president with the same powers and no accountability will also be indisciplined.
3. We need to re-examine our political system and its accountability structures. This means a renewed constitutional framework that transforms the structure of existing society and a new legal system that prioritises the civil, political, social, and economic rights of citizens.
Next question: with the current state of the national assembly, the presidency, the judiciary and the political party system, how are we going to achieve this?
Through a sustained and organised mass agitation that demands for this until the existing systems give in.
Next question: Is a mass agitation a revolution? Won't that lead to violence?
No. A revolution as typically used is just about changing the people in power. A mass agitation is a a movement to make changes to the system used by the people in power.
Movements arise through organised actions. Organised actions result from social consciousness. Social consciousness develops from increased awareness of a systemic issue. Awareness increases with education. This thread is education.
Next question: Will the current political elite just sit and watch while we educate people and raise awareness?
Of course not. They will ignore it at first. Then they will dismiss its potential for change; they will suggest other short-term fixes that serve their own interests.
If the movement keeps growing, the elite will next try to manipulate the agenda and suggest ideas for restructuring that works for them. However, as more people become aware and conscious, the political elite become less able to ignore, dismiss, or manipulate the true movement.
Question: But, isn't all these a lot of work?
YES. True social change that works for the people takes work. It takes education, engagement, and organising. It won't happen just by getting a voters card and voting every 4 years for the 'choices' the system throws on the ballot.
For more, read the following threads.
1. What is the Nigerian political system and why is it a problem?
@henroy7 Once our elite led the way in this style, the rest of us have followed since. Read historical novels like The Beautyful Ones Are Not Yet Born, Chief the Honourable Minister, Man of the People, etc that document how the first generation of educated Africans triggered indiscipline.
@henroy7 So any society that is looking for individuals to all come together and do the work is accepting that it is incapable of organising itself functionally to have a govt and institutions that takes care of these on behalf of all. Is that what we are now resigned to in Nigeria?
For those who are still sceptics about how leadership and the political system can radically alter social attitudes over time: here's a thread on how, with the state of their leadership today, the US/Europe may end up on the path of social indiscipline:
@fachonlerum When Awolowo was running western Nigeria, social attitudes were very different from what they are now. If the people are rottten, you have to ask yourself: how did they become rotten? And the answer will always go back to: someone in power created that rot.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We Yoruba people are now basically led by smugglers, drug lords, low-level politicians, and patronage entertainers.
Gone are the intellectual and industrial giants, the scientific innovators, and the ideological politicians who crafted critical essays to articulate their vision.
Our best are gone elsewhere, leading innovation abroad. Our worst are here winning elections with the support of our people just because they are Yoruba - people who, back in the day, would have been chased away with stones as thieves and brigands.
If we are not careful, this is going to be our defining identity for years to come. The reputation Yorubas had for decades as being the most educated etc was not just because we sent kids to schools but because our leadership reflected this.
Reminder that the the antidote to a civilian dictatorship/weak democracy is not a military coup.
The antidote is civil society pushing for strong institutions through critical opinion, protests, litigation, and electing candidates who are anti-elite interests.
Never soldiers.
When the military runs the govt, every soldier - from the private to the General - becomes an extension of government. The entire military becomes a political institution. While the Generals are fighting the West, the soldiers on the streets are dealing with everyday citizens.
The military owes no one accountability. It is accountable only to itself - not to the courts, not to the legislature, and not to the people.
The individual soldiers are accountable only to their superiors, who are in turn accountable only to their superiors. Power is top-down.
What @cchukudebelu said about politicians repeating the mistakes of the 1st and 2nd Republics is critical.
History is replaying not just at home but all around. Coups are on the rise again and are being welcomed by the masses. This is very alarming and our leaders are to blame.
When military interventions started deposing democracies of the 1960s, nobody was surprised except the politicians.
They were still jostling for appointments and sharing contracts while everyday people were fuming.
When the house came down, they did not see it coming.
And yet the signs of trouble were everywhere: growing agitations over social issues: declining confidence in the legitimacy of elections; the increasing use of the military to suppress civilian protests; and increasing wealth gap between the political elite and everyday people.
I had come to Abuja to facilitate a human rights meeting with several NGOs and my accommodation was also booked at the hotel where the meeting would be taking place. 🧵
Soon as I landed, I sent messages to my friends in Abuja confirming that I was around.
As always, whenever I am in Nigeria, my friends would come welcome me at my accommodation, share a drink or two and generally gist. This time was no different.
For now.
One of them promised to stop by on her way home from work, also in the area.
Of the people I texted, she was the first to get to my place. I had checked into the hotel around 6.20pm and she got there around 6.40pm. Barely 15 minutes later, three police officers came to my door.
This piece of history is often overlooked: Abeokuta had a separate treaty with Britain in 1893 and was not under the Southern protectorate but existed as a sovereign kingdom. In 1914, Lugard broke the treaty, sent troops into Abeokuta and forcibly annexed the kingdom to Nigeria.
The colonisation and amalgamation of Nigeria is often told as a linear narrative where the main actor is the British. But the different societies had their own stories of resistance and surrender. Some very compelling. Nigerian school curricula should focus more on these.
The battle for Lagos is one of those stories that should be common knowledge. In November 1851, there was fighting for three days between the Eko Kingdom and the British navy. The British shelled the city until they eventually surrendered.