Up until very recently, some of the myths Nigerians wallowed in included the idea that Nigerians had nothing to do with international terrorism. Abdul Mutallab’s 2009 christmas day stunt jettisoned such myth, putting Nigeria on the terror list with full flare. Nigerians, especially the ones abroad, had the habit of reminding their international counterparts that, yes most Nigerians may be womanizers and even polygamist, but never pedophiles. Sani Yerima’s Egyptian acquisition pulled out Nigerians from such era of innocence. After the last world cup debacle, it is now clear to Nigerians how puerile is the idea of relying on just luck without adequate athletic and managerial organisation to do well in a tournament. These three events are clear reminders that at fifty, Nigerians need to deal with some of their received understanding of the country in a mature way.
At 50, one of the greatest myths and misconceptions Nigerians have to deal with in an adult way is the origin and mode of the country’s independence. Over the years, Nigerians have been made to believe in the myth of freedom fighters that fought the colonials for power, liberated Nigeria and forged a proud independent country. This is not true! Nigeria (like most African countries then) got independence because the Brits were on their way out, because after the second world war the empire did not make sense anymore, because the new world economic power, the USA, itself a former colony, had more than a few problems justifying colonialism. Yes, the motion was moved by the then young man after whom even I was named, yes movements were formed and groups realigned, but the real story of Nigeria’s independence is that a part of the country was ready for self government but another part was not and that there was a debate about the need to postpone the formal request for independence. The understandable need for a unifying narrative and an aggregative ethos for a dishomogenous collective made it necessary to invent national heroes and events to celebrate, rally round and on which to build a future. As much as we need them, these myths do not however stand any rigorous test and cannot sustain any vigorous clash. At 50, it is time to wake up to reality and draw the rational consequences.
One other prevailing myth is that of ethnicism or tribalism in the Nigerian parlance. For those readers uninitiated to third world politics, the popular reasoning is thus: because in Nigeria, the roles of national leaders and public managers are attained thanks to ones ethnic origin rather than merit, the country’s affairs are generally managed by the most mediocre elements available. This popular myth goes on to show that because most Nigerian leaders and managers tend to identify with and care only about their ethnic part of Nigeria, anything wholly Nigerian is left to nobody’s care and those with the responsibility of tendering to the needs of Nigeria only loot it for their own private or regional interest. The most pessimistic ethnocentric observers of Nigeria add that it is no point trying to make Nigeria work because the people are too different and there is no common ground. The idea of Nigeria as a country so diverse and marred by the ethic factor is very rooted in the Nigerian collective imaginary and has led to the creation of concepts and principles such as Federal Character, Rotation and the new political mantra called Zoning.
At this point, it is worth noting that Nigerians, as citizens, have never truly shaped the course of their country, the nearest they ever got to that was in June 12 and the best they ever did was to successfully strike and stay at home. Everything Nigerian can be traced to less than fifteen thousand people and whilst the whole country is being fed with the baloney of the difficulty of effective management due to ethnic factor this very little group that have shaped and continue to shape Nigeria continue to work together to enhance their own personal interests. A quick look at the names of shareholders and board members of Nigerian top companies will show you how Nigerian elites can work together regardless of their ethnic divide when it comes to their own pocket.
It is also time to break the myth about leaders not working for the whole of Nigeria because they work for only their part of Nigeria. Whilst it is true that the north of the country has produced most national public holders than all of the rest of the country put together, it is also true that rarely can you think of any part of Nigeria that has not produced a national public office holder of some sort. The question now is what has each one of these national public holders done for his or her own community? The answer is very little. It is clear that if everyone that has held a national public office had done something for just his or her own community of origin by now the whole country will have at least one national project that works and is worthy of admiration.
When pondering about the problems beleaguering the country, Nigerians and indeed some international observers are quick to conclude that the single biggest problem of Nigeria is corruption. Yes, Nigeria is infested by corruption but that is not the biggest problem facing the country. No country or system is entirely free of corruption, the difference between Nigeria and those countries where Nigerian elites desperately go for medical treatment or they profligately troop to for holidays and where they treacherously invest money they made in Nigeria is that in those countries, the roads are good, electricity is reliable and the banks are stable. It is not that the their contractors don’t inflate prices or that their politicians don’t do favors, it is just that there are people and more importantly, institutions that work to ensure an accepted standard of living is maintained and things don’t degenerate below such standards.
More than corruption the biggest bane in Nigeria is incompetence; people cannot give what they don’t have and it is incompetence that breeds and fosters corruption.
