PDA

View Full Version : Nigeria : The folly or wisdom of Disintegration [Main Debate Thread]



Ishola Taiwo
Jun 21, 2008, 11:25 AM
I would like to debate with one (or several) of the loudest advocates on NVS for the splitting up of Nigeria along ethnic lines.

My main argument will involve showing how the single-minded pursuit of this aim would be the greatest strategic mistake our people could make at this time.

While I do agree that the present arrangement is far from ideal, I also believe that an uncompromising urge to divide Nigeria up into contiguous sovereign countries makes no sense within current global realities.

I am also prepared to defend the prediction that should this aim be pursued in all seriousness by the most influential stakeholders in our communities, at the end of it (most probably several generations from when it is embarked upon), the geo-political morsels that will result from the disintegration of Nigeria will be economic basket-cases and playthings/feeding grounds for non-Nigerian entities.

I am also prepared to argue that by proposing the disintegration of the union of the African peoples currently known as Nigerians as being the only solution to the presently faulty union, the advocates for this disintegration are working consciously (or unconsciously) for the same interests that have being preying on African miseries for several centuries now.

There are other much more efficacious solutions and they do not necessitate the transformation of current Nigerian geographical space into several sovereign countries.

Ishola Taiwo
Jun 26, 2008, 01:13 AM
1.00: I will try to be as concise as I can be with this two part submission. Therefore, where I use examples, please be assured that for every one that I use, there are several other things that I could have mentioned.

1.01: I am hoping with this debate to get certain things out in the open. I believe, as stated earlier, that those who are calling for the disintegration of Nigeria are ones working (consciously or unconsciously) for the same forces that originally set the peoples within that geographical space on their current aimless course.

1.02: In other words, just as once upon a time, the welding together of our various ethnicities into one State was the best option for the ones that midwifed the birth of Nigeria, the dissolution (at this time) of Nigeria into smaller (more manageable) chunks is now seen by those same predatory forces as being the best possible outcome.

I will be more elaborate regarding this assertion in the second part of this submission.

2.00: I believe that the ones calling for disintegration are disingenuous in the way they ignore certain immovable facts that stand in the way of a peaceful dissolution. I have also seen dishonesty in the way some have made assured assumptions that are based on nothing like the reality existing on the ground and, in the way certain euphemisms have being used to conceal what is actually being spoken about.

2.01: A common tactic when trying to illuminate a topic under discussion is to seek correspondence with situations that seem similar. I myself have used the example of long-term dissatisfaction in other multi-ethnic States while speaking of the obstacles that stand in the way of the birth of a true Nigerian nation. However, to go from using examples of the dissatisfactions that existed in a multi-ethnic empire like the USSR to describing its alleged peaceful dissolution as a predictor of something that looms inevitably in Nigeria's future is, as already stated, disingenuous.

2.02: Ongoing events in Chechnya, Ossetia, Ukraine, Georgia and the Asian Muslim republics that were the southern vanguard of the old USSR stand as proof that dissolution, even when accomplished without bloodshed does not always guarantee that a collective tragedy will not occur in the future.

3.00: It may be good to look at the various scenarios that have been placed before us by those who speak on the forms dissolution can take.

3.010: There is the scenario where the so-called Southern Nigeria breaks away from what is called Northern Nigeria. The first question that springs to mind for me as a Yoruba person as I look upon this definitely anti-Emirate 'Southern Nigeria Republic' is : Where are my family from Kwara and Kogi?

3.011: Are these, ones with whom I have more in common with than with my so-called fellow 'Southern Nigerians', to be sacrificed on the altar of the repugnance that drives me away from those who share that part of Nigeria with the Yoruba? Or, am I to insist that they come with their fellow Omo Oodua?

There are more questions along this line, but like I said earlier, for the sake of brevity, I will only mention a few out of several that exists.

3.020: Another scenario that is placed before us is the one where each ethnic group gets a country of its own.

3.021: Unfortunately again, here, the examples we have from similar occurrences around the world are either to dissimilar to what exists on the ground in Nigeria, or, only half of the picture is revealed and, this is the half that serves the purpose of those using these occurrences as predictors of what can happen in Nigeria.

3.022: We are told about Czechoslovakia, a country that successfully broke up into the Czech Republic and Slovakia. What we are not told is that the ease with which this happened was due to the fact that the two contiguous countries that evolved from the old Socialist Republic were peopled by the two majority ethnic groups that later made up the citizens of the devolved republics. In other words, unlike in a prospective Oodua Republic, especially in one where all areas that have a majority Yoruba population are included, there were no corresponding minorities like Awori, Urhrobo, Fulani, Ijaw, Ebira...etc.

3.023: Therefore, Slovakia has not experienced what the Oodua Republic will surely experience when the 'minorities' start asking either to be allowed to take their piece of land and join it to their brethren in the Ijaw Republic (for example) or, to the Arewa Sultanate (in the case of the Fulani). Neither has the Czech Republic experienced what the Oodua republic will experience when those Ebira and Urhrobo settlements caught up in its final borders disagree with the Yoruba consensus that sees the story of self-determination as one that has reached a conclusion and, commence instead a struggle for their own autonomy....

3.024: In short, to use Czechoslovakia as an example is as bad as using the alleged peaceful break-up of the USSR as an example. The best predictors may actually be what is transpiring as we speak in the Caucasus [Refs] and in the lands that used to be the Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia.

Since as we speak, Bosnia is still occupied by 'peace-keeping' forces from NATO and, the matter between Serbia and the Albanians of Kosovo is not yet settled, one is left to marvel at the superhuman optimistic ability of those from our country-men who, armed with blood-soaked examples like this, still proclaim the rightness of this crusade to lead us towards the bright future that beckons right after a clean separation from the masses of people who are at fault for the current Nigerian nightmare.

4.00: I assert that if there is no rational reason for the continued existence of Nigeria, then there is no reason to presume that there will be harmony in a Southern Nigeria Republic.

4.01: For the sake of summarising the argument, we can disregard some reality for now. We can omit from our projections the matter of how the other so-called minorities will be accommodated within this Southern Nigeria republic.

4.02: Since the problems that accompany ethnic differences in the Nigeria we have at present have largely revolved around the dynamics between the so-called Big 3, we can project into the future and ask if the Big 2 of Southern Nigeria will experience greater amity once the Hausa are out of the picture.

The only truly useful answer to this question is the one that allows for uncomfortable truths.

5.00: We have not looked at religion yet but, since this plays a large part in the lives of our people, since in fact, a large part of the character is formed by the religion one adheres to, we should look at how religious differences will play a part in the prospective adventure that has been named the Republic of Southern Nigeria (apologies if I have got the name wrong).

5.01: For a start, Yoruba Muslims, of which there are tens of millions, have more in common with Hausa Muslims than they do with an Igbo Christians...an inconvenient truth that those whose true purpose may actually be the gradual dissolution of Nigeria into little chunks presently ignore when they start playing the false tunes that sing the beauty of our alleged Southern commonality.

In short, this idea of a harmonious Southern Nigeria whose progress is being retarded by the alien North should be put under the classification of wishful thinking and/or fraudulent description of goods - where it belongs.

Refs:
Trouble in the Caucasus :
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/fline/fl2118/stories/20040910000605700.htm
http://www.memo.ru/eng/memhrc/hotpoint.shtml
http://peacelikeariverblog.com/2007/07/bit-of-trouble-in-south-ossetia.html
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/1999/07/990700-trouble.htm

Alata
Jun 26, 2008, 10:03 AM
Dear ALL,
I have only just visited the Crucible for the first time yesterday and made my first and much belated post (http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/board/parallel-threads/45666-afrocentric-i-e-africa-centred-perspective-22.html#post4295060828) to the discussion on Afrocentric (the African centred perspective).

I saw this challenge for the first time today and have raced through the posts so far. I am pleased no one has pre-empted me in accepting Eja's challenge.

I know this debate will be followed widely by those whose interests are served by Nigeria, including those who set it up and those who keep it going. Many of these 'strategic interests' are not identified as Nigerians and most never post directly on this forum. Nonetheless, they are here. For your and their information, whatever I say here should not be read as secessionist intent to break up Nigeria or otherwise imping on Nigeria's constitutional or territorial integrity. Even as I endanger my identity and possibly my life in this debate, I feel strongly that it must be held and so I will enjoin the debate with Eja.

This is an intellectual exercise. I am arguing, not agitating, for the dissolution of the colonial-era business geography known as 'The Federal Republic of Nigeria' because it is not federal; not republic, and not of, for, or by Nigerians or any other set of heritage Africans.

My point of debate goes beyond the overdue dissolution of Nigeria and other European colonial legacy countries. I will try to make the case for the Constitutional Confederacy of African Tribes.

Alata
Jun 26, 2008, 10:45 AM
Eja,
please post the second part of your two-part assertion so that the debate can commence.

1. As Khalil has pointed out, you will need to make a logical case not only against dissolution but for continuation of Nigeria. I will make the case for dissolution not only of Nigeria but also of other colonial-remnant countries across Africa.

2. You will need also to identify for us just what Nigeria was/is for and how it has succeeded or may succeed if left as it is. I will identify the purpose(s) I observe and outline the extent of its dubious success(es), now and into the future if Nigeria is left as it is.

3. You will need also to tell us why and how the multiple sectarian interests currently contained in the Nigeria plantation will benefit from continued integration. I will indicate an alternative arrangement which I propose allows sectarian interests to cooperate and compete to the advancement of the African people worldwide.

4. You will need also to tell us why and how and for whom exactly is it a folly to disintegrate Nigeria. I will state my reasoning that Africa's solutions are problems for the international community, and that their 'strategic interests' are invested strongly in the social-economic web of which Nigeria is a malignant thread.

Your post #52 (http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/board/crucible/73771-nigeria-folly-disintegratrion-6.html#post4295060845) above does not answer any of these four pressing questions that are core to your assertion that "disintegration is a folly". I hope your apakeji (part 2) will put some substance behind your rhetoric.

Ishola Taiwo
Jun 26, 2008, 11:22 AM
Eja,
please post the second part of your two-part assertion so that the debate can commence.

1. As Khalil has pointed out, you will need to make a logical case not only against dissolution.
2. You will need also to identify for us just what Nigeria was/is for and how it has succeeded or may succeed if left as it is.
3. You will need also to tell us why and how the multiple sectarian interests currently contained the Nigeria plantation benefit from continued integration.
4. You will need also to tell us why and how and for whom exactly is it a folly to disintegrate Nigeria.

Your post #52 (http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/board/crucible/73771-nigeria-folly-disintegratrion-6.html#post4295060845) above does not answer any of these four pressing questions that are core to your assertion that "disintegration is a folly". I hope your apakeji (part 2) will put some substance behind your rhetoric.

Iyaalata, I look forward to debating this topic with you.

Ishola Taiwo
Jun 26, 2008, 04:08 PM
6.00: Before I go on, I would like to invite the reader to go back to the first part of this submission and look again at Paragraphs [3.010] and [3.011].

6.01: Adapt the questions to your own indigenous region and as you do so, imagine that these are the inner thoughts of the most incorrigible ethnic chauvinist you know of. Imagine this because when the time is right, these are the types of questions that will be used to set up as wide a conflagration as we have never seen.

6.02: We should always keep in mind that the easiest mass-emotion to stir up is that which speaks to the inner chauvinist in us all. The easiest thing to do, when times get rough, is to get people to agree that it is all somebody else's fault and that they must pay (the lousy foreigners!).

6.03: Yes; when we are all sovereign nations, we shall then be at liberty to sign military alliance treaties with 'helpful' nations like France, Britain, the USA (and maybe even China). We shall then all be free to invite 'advisers' who will tell us how best to use whatever 'mineral wealth' we possess to ensure our safety from rapacious neighbours and the possibly treacherous minorities that we have within our sovereign borders.

6.04: France already has military 'advisers' stationed in Chad and Gabon. The UK is in Sierra Leone and the USA has its own Sao Tome to play with [Refs].

How quick will these countries be to offer their 'assistance' to the paranoid (yet endowed) Sovereign Republics of Lagos, Oyo, Bayelsa, Ikwerre, Biafra, Arewa, and all the others that will be formed from what is currently called the middle-belt?

And we should not forget later Republics like that of the Ijebu and Ekiti...

7.00: Humans have moved along. There are things we know now about ourselves and about our neighbours that our ancestors did not know. Yet, the sad hard truth is that for more than a few of us, interfacing with the reality that confronts us is still governed by the same thought patterns that led our ancestors into making their most grievous mistakes.

7.01: It was the inability to see beyond their identities as citizens of Ijebu, Ibadan, Ekiti, Ijaye, Ilorin etc. that led to the Yoruba losing not only territory but also many lives and eventually, their sovereignty.

7.02: It was the inability of those they confronted to see beyond their identities as citizens of Eko, Benin, Aro, Bonny, Lokoja, Kano etc. that enabled the British, with a few hundred 'white' soldiers, to become the overlords of the millions for whom, right up until (and even after) they lost title to their own lands, still perceived the ones who lived next door as being the greatest threat to their freedom.

8.01: The British played us off one against the other, used us as soldiers against each other, and at the end of it all, had us locked into the prison plantation that was given the name Nigeria by a whore.

8.02: We have rightly identified selfishness as being the motive that led the British into manufacturing Nigeria. We have had cause many times to regret the fate that led us to this current state. This is no different from one who having endured much suffering, regrets being born. However, since it is not possible to return to the womb (talk less of returning to the state of lone spermatozoa and lone egg), one is then faced with two options : to end ones life or, to seek a way to overcome the difficulties, and then to thrive.

Nigeria has been described as the marriage no one wants but no one wants to dissolve. I would say that Nigeria is the marriage whose dissolution will bring about the certain ruination of all parties - the type of divorce where the biggest winners are the divorce lawyers.

9.00: We have assumed that the existence of what is called 'militancy' in the Niger Delta, the levels of insecurity in parts of the country and the seeming incompatibility of 'liberal' south with "Sharia North" gives truth to the prediction first made by the all-knowing American State Department that Nigeria is doomed to become a 'failed State' in the near future.

9.01: It is a testament to the power of propaganda that this prediction, made without much fanfare several years ago but, repeated often enough in the right places, has now become (in the minds of some Nigerians) something that has the prophetic force of an utterance made by an infallible oracle. It has in fact become a part of the language we use when we talk of our homeland amongst ourselves.

9.02: One more example of how easily we allow others to create definitions (and the realities that follow) for us.

9.03: Some who parrot this prediction have probably forgotten who first issued it, while others have not asked why India, like Nigeria, once a technologically backward country with the same cultural, religious and ethnic fissures, did not become a failed state.

9.04: Why India, in spite of full-blown insurgencies that have lasted for decades in several of its regions, did not descend into full chaos but instead managed (while seeking resolutions to its several fissures) to lift several millions of its citizens up from relative deprivation into a better standard of living.

In other words, the same ingredients that exist in melting pot Nigeria also exist in melting pot India. Why then is it agreed by some of us that unlike the Indians, we are not capable of growing into nationhood?

10.00: Perhaps we speak of ending the Nigeria project because we have decided that our 'leaders' have tried and failed for 48 years to build a truly united country....but is this true? Did they really try to build a united country...and more to the point, have we actually ever had Nigerian leaders?

10.01: I would answer this last question by saying "no". The label "Nigerian leader" has been a mask that has been worn by various compradors and 'tribal' leaders/warlords with low mentalities who planted themselves in various high places.

10.021: Again: we have never had Nigerian leaders; we have never had ones in power who sought to build a united and autonomously prosperous Nigeria, therefore, we have not failed at building a united and autonomously prosperous Nigeria.

10.022: The option of success or failure is only available to those who attempt.

10.023: Our so-called leaders have failed to attempt.

10.024: The failure to attempt on their part is a sectional failure and, a sectional failure, especially in an organism that was never integrated is not necessarily a precursor to wholesale systemic failure.

10.03: The Nigerian nation is not a doomed nation because the Nigerian nation is yet to be created.

11.00: The best metaphor that describes what has been going on is as follows :

A man gets a piece of land to build on.

He gets the blocks and all other materials required for the erection of his house. He has the workmen skilled at putting all this material together at hand and, he has the funds to pay them. However, because it would be more immediately pleasurable for him to fritter away the money at a nearby bar/whore-house, that is what he does - every day at sunset, he goes into the bar and whiles away time and money while the materials and workmen remain on stand-by.

In the morning, just as the sun rises, he stumbles out, beholds his pile of bricks, roofing material...etc. and cries to heaven that he is still without a house to call his own.

He blames the witch who cursed his lineage and he blames the 'greedy' workmen who have refused to labour until they are payed. Then he collapses beside a pile of bricks and falls asleep until evening when he returns to the bar....and so the cycle repeats.

This is what Nigeria has been so far

12.00: It is true that the British imperialists left us without a usable structure, however, we had all that was necessary - we still have all that is required - but so far, we have done little but take our immediate pleasure with what we should be building with. So now, we do not have a house built on faulty foundations, we do not have a house wired wrongly and, we do not have a house with a terrible paint-job.

12.01: What we call Nigeria can be likened to a pile of bricks sitting and waiting to be put to good use.

13.00: Nigeria needs restructuring - yes! But the conversation on how best to do this has too often seen reasonable postulates on the efficacy of options like confederation being blended in with arguments that speak of the necessity to dissolve Nigeria and, this blending is often done with a level of skill commensurate with what can be observed when an experienced painter goes from dark grey to black on the same canvas.

13.01: It should be noted that the type of restructuring that brings forth a confederation does not automatically equate to the creation of sovereign countries. Confederations have a common centre - only that this centre is not as domineering as what holds in a unitary state.

13.02: Sovereign countries on the other hand may be allies with common interests but, such common interests do not provide the same binding force as what exists when there is a common centre.

14.00: It is customary, as said before, that ones who wish to speed up the disintegration of Nigeria will point at what transpired in Yugoslavia or the USSR. In my opinion, such non-contextual reliance on the history of others as a predictor of our future is not only a guaranteed misleader, it is also an indicator of limited expectations.

14.01: It would be more fitting to what we know of our people's innate talents, to expect that Nigeria can do something the likes of which the world has never seen before...in other words, rather than us pointing at convenient portions of Soviet history and saying "Look at what happened there...", we should be working at the creation of something that will make future generations say "Why can't we do something that resembles what the Nigerians did?"

For us to create this unique thing, we have to set at the task before us with a clear picture in mind of where we are and, of the assumptions that are shaping our ideas regarding where we ought to be heading (and how).

Refs: Some Euro/American armed forces currently active in West Africa

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/oct/25/westafrica.sierraleone
http://allafrica.com/stories/200709170011.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2210571.stm
http://www.afrol.com/articles/14269
http://www.modernghana.com/news/134927/1/the-rumour-of-the-us-military-base-in-ghana.html
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C00E0DB1039F931A15756C0A9609582 60

Ishola Taiwo
Jun 26, 2008, 04:10 PM
We need a moderator. Any volunteers please?

NextLevel
Jun 26, 2008, 06:10 PM
We need a moderator. Any volunteers please?

I can moderate, unless my voiced positions already exclude me - does the moderator need to have delete privileges?

Alata
Jun 26, 2008, 08:39 PM
This is my first debate on the Crucible so please let me what special rules apply.

NextLevel can moderate, thank you.

I have opened a parallel thread (http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/board/parallel-threads/73945-nigeria-wisdom-disintegration.html#post4295061309) here to be the debating arena.

Alata
Jun 26, 2008, 09:11 PM
Let us begin. Moderator can catch up later.
My originals in black. Your posts in quotes. Your numbering system in gray. My responses in navy blue.

I must wonder if your post #70 is the part 2 you promised us. If so, please do not dodge the questions you need to address in order to convince us that the knackered and crippled vehicle called Nigeria is even fit to be in the competitions we must engage. In this post, I address the morsels in your part 1. I have moved your posts round in order to align them with the questions you need to answer.

1. Please make a logical case not only against dissolution but for continuation of Nigeria.

3.020: A(nother) scenario that is placed before us is the one where each ethnic group gets a country of its own.
This is not possible. To my knowledge no one has ever advocated it on NVS for every ethnic group in Nigeria. Invariably, ethnic nationalists are from one or other of the larger tribes: Yoruba, Ibo, Hausa, Edo, or Ijaw who feel some confidence in self-determination. The unspoken-for tribes are truly the glue that hold Nigeria together by co-opting the larger tribes. l am confident that the African National confederacy will be more protective of smaller tribes than Nigeria currently is. Unlike the implicit caste system that currently pertains in Nigeria as a legacy of indirect colonial rule, the confederacy's constitution will be designed for non-aligned support of tribal differences.

2. Please identify for us just what Nigeria was/is for and how it has succeeded or may succeed if left as it is. I will identify the purpose(s) I observe and outline the extent of its dubious success(es), now and into the future if Nigeria is left as it is.

3. Please tell us why and how the multiple sectarian interests currently contained in the Nigeria plantation will benefit from continued integration. I will indicate an alternative arrangement which I propose allows sectarian interests to cooperate and compete to the advancement of the African people worldwide.



3.010: There is the scenario where the so-called Southern Nigeria breaks away from what is called Northern Nigeria. The first question that springs to mind for me as a Yoruba person as I look upon this definitely anti-Emirate 'Southern Nigeria Republic' is : Where are my family from Kwara and Kogi?

Whether the Yoruba, Edo, Ijaw or Ibo break first, their success will depend on a tacit confederacy with mutual protection (not just defence) in trade and investment, military, and travel. None of these areas will agree to a common language or currency. But then the whole of francophone west Africa used to have one currency, the CFA, allied to the French franc. Nigeria has one official currency, the Naira, and an unofficial basket of foreign currencies. Ondo, Kwara and Kogi are likely to be sources of friction between the Yoruba and other tribes. The confederacy will determine how inter-tribal lands will be administered.


3.011: Are these, ones with whom I have more in common with than with my so-called fellow 'Southern Nigerians', to be sacrificed on the altar of the repugnance that drives me away from those who share that part of Nigeria with the Yoruba? Or, am I to insist that they come with their fellow Omo Oodua?

When the colonial-remnant countries were established (Nigeria in 1960), the borders cut through many incipient tribal nation-states. The Yoruba in republic of Benin (Dahomey) and in Togo are still Yoruba. The Ibo / Arochukwu in Cameroon are still Ibo / Arochukwu. The Hausa in Benin and Niger republics are still Hausa. Many tribes became transnational as a direct result of flag independence. Till today, they hardly pay attention to the country borders as they criss-cross to visit or do business.

4. Please tell us why and how and for whom exactly is it a folly to disintegrate Nigeria.

4.00: I assert that if there is no rational reason for the continued existence of Nigeria, then there is no reason to presume that there will be harmony in a Southern Nigeria Republic.
This seems equivalent to saying that if there are no tenable reasons to continue in a failed marriage, the spouses should still be refused any options of divorce or separation. Someone touched on this marriage issue earlier and wrote (in jest?) to the effect that marriage is for life in Africa. Separation and divorce are common enough in African families for many to know this is plainly not so. Let us not forget that the entity called Nigeria used to include the south Cameroons (and the Bakassi peninsula?) which have since departed without bloodshed to become part of the republic of Cameroon.

Must we fear the possibility of traffic accidents so much that we dare not venture forth in vehicles? No. Must we plan and prepare for the probability of injury in the event of accidents? Yes. In truth, nobody yet knows how much harmony there will be post-Nigeria's disintegration. What we do know is that there is very little harmony or certainty with which to aid planning in the dysfunctional country called Nigeria.


4.01: For the sake of summarising the argument, we can disregard some reality for now. We can omit from our projections the matter of how the other so-called minorities will be accommodated within this Southern Nigeria republic.
For me, failure to accommodate and willingness to disregard 'so-called (ethnic) minorities' is the key reason why Nigeria and the other colonial-remnant countries in Africa have failed, while other colonial-remnant countries elsewhere may have done better. It is a sort of "tragedy of the commons". Ethnicity (TRIBE) is very important for the development of self-regard and national consciousness. Nigeria has always operated on the fallacy that some tribes matter more than others. The country tries hard to suppress the ethnicities of its citizens in its bid to build a unitary 'national' identity.

More sensible countries try to implement policies that recognise and build upon multiple ethnicities, religions, languages and other social differences, Nigeria and other colonial-remnant countries try to destroy these differences and must then go further to try to fabricate artificial identities to represent the rootless country. Of course, the ethnic nations fight back: they must in order to survive. It may be that there was no 'Yoruba' or 'Hausa' people before 'Nigeria' was implanted unto the African landscape. The Anago, Ijebu, Oyo, Egba and ife used to be separate and sometimes-warring 'Yoruba' nations or kingdoms before the colonial invasions. They may be separate again after Nigeria's disintegration. The issue for the African National confederacy is how to support and build upon ethnic efforts at self-improvement and community development. Of critical importance are the issues of land use and ownership, conflict resolution, and governance. I will address these issues when I resume on your part 2

Ishola Taiwo
Jun 26, 2008, 10:09 PM
I can moderate, unless my voiced positions already exclude me - does the moderator need to have delete privileges?

NL, you are welcome to moderate. I think you will need to be able to move posts into the appropriate threads. There is one main thread which will be in this area and that is where Iyaalata and I will conduct our debate and there will be another in the Parallel Threads area where posts made my other Villagers in support of either position can be placed.

Thanks.

Ishola Taiwo
Jun 26, 2008, 10:10 PM
This is my first debate on the Crucible so please let me what special rules apply.

NextLevel can moderate, thank you.

I have opened a parallel thread (http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/board/parallel-threads/73945-nigeria-wisdom-disintegration.html#post4295061309) here to be the debating arena.

Iyaalata, you need to post your response on this thread. The Parallel Threads area is meant for supplementary contributions by other Villagers.

NextLevel
Jun 26, 2008, 10:23 PM
Hmmm - I don't have any moderating privileges so I need to be anointed by the mighty Admins or I will remain unworthy...

Alata
Jun 27, 2008, 09:49 PM
In continuation of why Nigeria should be dissolved sooner rather than later. I would like to touch on some issues that my co-debater has already called on us to omit as of minor importance. In this part 2 of my submission, I hope to build a framework that shows these "disregarded realities" are the under-currents that birthed Nigeria and account for why its failures to its citizens are its successes to its investors. I will then apply this framework to the part 2 of our co-debater's submissions. Please bear in mind that our co-debater does not want Nigeria to disintegrate into small countries only to benefit sundry foreigners. My point of debate is that the various ethnic groups within Nigeria should begin an immediate schedule to dissolve Nigeria, firstly to save themselves from intellectual, cultural and mental extermination, and secondly with the greater aim of founding one more vibrant and protective African National Confederacy.



4.01: For the sake of summarising the argument, we can disregard some reality for now. We can omit from our projections the matter of how the other so-called minorities will be accommodated within this Southern Nigeria republic.


In the course of a long journey, it is often necessary to detour: for water or fuel, and especially to check our roadmap so as to ensure we are still going in the right direction. So too, must we enroute to dissolving the colonial-remnant countries across Africa - and dissolve them we must so that our people can thrive - we need to detour to deal with the issues of minority populations, land tenure, conflict resolution, and community governance. Minorities, land and governance are often talked about in terms of rights. "Minority rights should be respected". "Land (private property) rights should be protected" "A community has sovereign rights to self-rule", and so on.


Of rights and duties.
What we often hear less loudly of are duties and responsibilities. The duties of minorities and majorities of whatever categories to respect their neighbours and the laws of the land. The duty of property owners to care for and not unduly burden the public domain. The duty of the country or other community of the care and security of its people, to pass laws that favour and elevate its citizens above all foreigners, and to enforce its laws fairly and equitably among its citizens. It should be clear to us all that Nigeria has been unwilling and unable to deliver on its primary duties. Nigeria has failed as a country to even show intent to act on behalf of the people it claims as citizens. This failure is reasonable but not sufficient basis for Nigeria to be disintegrated.

Why should it not surprise us that people more loudly proclaim their rights and privileges than their duties and responsibilities. Is it because rights invariably favour the private estate, while duties are invariably contributions to the public wealth? Yes. Must we disintegrate the colonial-era countries we find ourselves in in order to build a community of which our rights and duties are of our making. Yes. Why disband and not restructure? Because the colonial-remnant countries were purposely set up to never favour or elevate us as their citizens. Because they endure us to legal systems and trade agreements made in foreign lands by and for the benefit of foreign, demonstrably hostile and historically predatory powers. Because they enfeeble our ability to educate, arm, defend or protect our families or properties at home or abroad.

How? By making foreign languages, education systems, weapons, religious doctrines into the monopoly of government power that are then used to make our own heritage systems illegal under the law. Because they make it illegal for us to learn of, copy or re-fabricate any and all foreign knowledge that might benefit or harm us. Because they assign us as citizens unto unrepresentative laws on property rights that enable every foreign thief or local Akotileta to loot us blind under the sanction and authority of the law of the land.


Minority Rights In An Illegal Country
The colonial-remnant counties make it illegal for us to manage land resources, grow businesses, resolve conflicts, and govern communities in a manner that is sustainable. These countries conducted land theft on a massive scale all across the African continent by using unfair laws similar to Nigeria's Land Use Act(s). That stolen land is then placed in the care of an investment minority. This is the only minority whose 'minority rights' mean much to the colonial-remnant African country whose duty it is to protect them.

Similar theft of public domain property has been conducted in recent years as arranged market sales into foreign ownership and control of assets and investments left behind after flag independence or acquired since then. A country that can persist only by stealing from its own people has no right to claim sovereignty. The people who must call themselves its citizens have a duty to disintegrate the country and to start other arrangements for a more protective domain. But an even greater and more heinous theft is underway: the theft of memory.


The theft of memory
What is an ethnic minority? Presumably, it is the ethnic groups (tribes) that are the least in number in a given community. Who are the ethnic minorities that our co-debater will have us dismiss with such bare concern? What makes one ethnicity weigh more for another ethnicity to be considered minor: is it population size, economic and purchasing power, military allies and diplomatic strength. media projection? Some of the most vocal ethnic majorities in Nigeria turn out to be of surprisingly minor influence even in western-central Africa.

But the core issue of concern to this debate is that Nigeria is actively trying to erase the cultural and heritage memories of all its constituent ethnicities. The only clues to culture that Nigeria wants to preserve relate to English and Arabic. The clues are in the languages on its currency, its education and its public discourse, in its two semi-official religions: Christianity and Islam, in its legal and judicial systems: one borrowed from the masonic temples of law of Europe and the other from the masonic temples of sharia of Arabia.

A false-flag mis-education
The memory of "everything before independence" is erased from the public space and omitted from the mindspace represented by education, the media, and of course the religious houses that blanket the landscape. Children are not educated of how African societies resisted invasion and domination. Adults are not educated as to how they can resist ongoing campaigns of African genocide by abortion, medical experimentation, internecine warfare, poverty and economic sanctions, and suicide due to mental frustration. Why does Nigeria, the colonial-remnant country, do these damages to us its entrapped citizens? Because it needs us to forget who we are in order for it to continue existing as a false-flag country. Nigeria was implanted onto the numerous ethnic peoples that now make up its citizens. it can survives and persist only by destroying whatever makes those people prefer to belong to different ethnicities so that it can have its own nominal people: the Nigerians.


An Stillborn Independence.



8.01: The British played us off one against the other, used us as soldiers against each other, and at the end of it all, had us locked into the prison plantation that was given the name Nigeria by a whore.

8.02: We have rightly identified selfishness as being the motive that led the British into manufacturing Nigeria. We have had cause many times to regret the fate that led us to this current state. This is no different from one who having endured much suffering, regrets being born. However, since it is not possible to return to the womb (talk less of returning to the state of lone spermatozoa and lone egg), one is then faced with two options : to end ones life or, to seek a way to overcome the difficulties, and then to thrive.

Nigeria has been described as the marriage no one wants but no one wants to dissolve. I would say that Nigeria is the marriage whose dissolution will bring about the certain ruination of all parties - the type of divorce where the biggest winners are the divorce lawyers.


At least our co-debater would not mind Nigeria restructured. There are those who refuse disintegration due to a deceitful claim that Nigeria was created by God or other divine powers. This claim is a lie. Neither was Nigeria born of a war of liberation won by our people under the leadership of nationalist 'founding fathers' from colonial powers. The sad truth is that Nigeria was created to contain the wave of insurgency against ethnic and economic caste structures dominated by Europe - that flowed onwards from the liberation of the USA and of Haiti. Ethnic 'white' Europeans had thrown off the colonial shackles of the European continent to found the USA. Ethnic Africans in Haiti had taken advantage of Europe's distractions to throw off the contamination of European peonage and found African's first independent country.

Two rounds of European World War totally exhausted old Europe and suddenly, the game was up. Asians threw off European and Japnese drug-induced ennui and virtual slavery. India re-emerged. Now, the Africans in the USA and in Africa were getting restive for their own ethnic nation-states. Then as at now, Africans repeated the mistake of all ages: they handed-over their best and brightest for the enemies to educate and groom wholeheartedly without any 'home training'. Then as at now, Europe gladly took to the opportunity to tighten its grip.


The Akotileta Take Custody



10.00: Perhaps we speak of ending the Nigeria project because we have decided that our 'leaders' have tried and failed for 48 years to build a truly united country....but is this true? Did they really try to build a united country...and more to the point, have we actually ever had Nigerian leaders?

10.01: I would answer this last question by saying "no". The label "Nigerian leader" has been a mask that has been worn by various compradors and 'tribal' leaders/warlords with low mentalities who planted themselves in various high places.

10.02: Again: we have never had Nigerian leaders; we have never had ones in power who sought to build a united and autonomously prosperous Nigeria, therefore, we have not failed at building a united and autonomously prosperous Nigeria.



The daughters and sons of Africa's royal and merchant families were literally gifted to Europe in the run up to and after flag independence. They still are. These gifts of Africa were welcomed to the classroom, the bedroom, and the factory but shunned from the members club, the laboratory, and the boardroom; educated to awe of Europe but disdain of Africa prior to European ravages; screened for right-thinking but excluded of African rites of passage; and handed custody of newly-independent colonial-remnant countries across the continent. Then as at now, Nigeria remains a limited liability business venture of our foreign direct investors. It is no coincidence that any European, Asiatic or Arabian is treated as royalty by Nigerian government officials from the President through the civil and military services. To an overwhelming extent, Nigeria and other colonial-remnant countries retain the implicit structures of racism 'white' supremacy as the platform for ethnic-subjugation, religious lobotomy, foreign exploitation, and mass ignorance of Africa's peoples.




10.00 - 10.03



Like a fish on the river bank, our co-debater is gasping in desperate defiance of reality. It is not a coincidence that hardly anything works in Nigeria; that the Nigerian 'nation' is yet to be created; that our co-debater, having made valiant but futile efforts to explain why Nigeria should continue is forced to concede the fate of the rodent still struggling halfway down the python's stomach. We are asked to consider:




9.04: Why India, in spite of full-blown insurgencies that have lasted for decades in several of its regions, did not descend into full chaos but instead managed (while seeking resolutions to its several fissures) to lift several millions of its citizens up from relative deprivation into a better standard of living.

In other words, the same ingredients that exist in melting pot Nigeria also exist in melting pot India. Why then is it agreed by some of us that unlike the Indians, we are not capable of growing into nationhood?



Because unlike many people have done in Nigeria, the citizens of India remain quintessentially Hindu, Sikh, and so on while the Indian country practises religious neutrality as best it can. Indians know their strength is in their ethnicities as defined in spiritual belief systems that confirm that they are daughters and sons of the gods. To the Indians, a god looks like an Indian, not any rainbow-coloured foreigner. Even the Indian who has converted to Christianity and Islam needs not walk far to see himself or herself in the image of the gods that matter.

Nigeria is a plantation country. Its psychological parentage was in the agricultural plantations of the antebellum south of slavery era USA and Brazil. Its system of social and legal governance was furnished from apartheid USA and apartheid South Africa. Nigeria is a country under perpetual economic and social sanctions just like Haiti is and for the same reason: some people in Nigeria dared to hope without planning. Then they backed down without protecting. Then they begged without defending. And all Nigerians caught 'hell' on earth. Nigeria must be disbanded forthwith, but the Akotileta in charge will not do so.


The rise of African fascism
It is when we look at the dynamics of ethnicity that discover the criminality of colonial-remnant countries. It is in this sphere of human society that we find the utter genocides of culture and heritage and people across the African continent and across African communities elsewhere. Here we make the appeal for immediate dissolution of Nigeria and the other misbegotten countries before one and/or other of two things happen.

Nigeria may realise its purpose as an staging post for creating Africa without the Africans. There will be people here who will be known as Africans just as they always were. Except that to all intents and purposes they will be mental and cultural regurgitations of European, Arab or other proselyting world-views. Africans-in-little-but-name already populate Europe and the Caribbean and North Americas. They may make up the bulk of the last three generations on Africa itself.

Alternatively, Nigeria will reach its logical conclusion and African fascism will bloom and will rage.

I had intended to further address my co-debater's submissions. But even Eja concedes that we will have very bad odds on a bet that Nigeria will even attempt anytime soon to raise standards of living for its poor. It is a lost cause to keep Nigeria going as it is in the hope it can one day deliver a nurturing environment. My co-debater has tried to make a case why Nigeria should not be dissolved, but omi po ju oka lo (water pass gari). The very lack of substantial or even persuasive arguments for keeping up the appearance of Nigerian nationhood is a telling damnation that has already wasted three generations. We are left only with the spectre of foreign direct investors as they await, like hyenas and vultures, to feed on the colonial-remnant countries.




14.01: It would be more fitting to what we know of our people's innate talents, to expect that Nigeria can do something the likes of which the world has never seen before... we should be working at the creation of something that will make future generations say "Why can't we do something that resembles what the Nigerians did?"

For us to create this unique thing, we have to set at the task before us with a clear picture in mind of where we are and, of the assumptions that are shaping our ideas regarding where we ought to be heading (and how).



My extension would have been to consider the likely flowering and dimensions of a necessary African fascism when we examine emerging combinations of ethnic and environmental factors with the newly-revealed European new world order of socio-economic castes, and the history of Africa's cultural and militant heritage. It is a consideration that moves beyond the core of this debate.

For now, I rest my case with the observation that the militancy my co-debater notes in the Niger Delta, the wave of anti-social behaviour in all sectors of society, and the cultism recorded in the country's institutions are symptoms of a phenomenon the world does not yet openly acknowledge.

"Out of Africa, always something new" as the dewy-eyed used to say. The new Africa. It will be interesting, for real.

adama50
Jun 28, 2008, 12:51 PM
iyaalata,

I'm one of those people that believe that we are one people. We are the only ones that see the difference and, we are the only ones who care about it, I personally don't see it or , understand it and, I will never see it or understand it , because I want the best for our people and when I say our people, I mean the whole of Africa, I don't give a damn about the rest because , they don't give a damn about us as a people, only when they want something from us do, they pretend to care, so the sooner we can see that ,the better things will be for us. There is no strength in division , we should spend our energy uniting. A lot of us leave our country heading to countries that are united, USA, UK , why are we not trying to create that for ourselves. We need each other if ,we are to survive.

Alata
Jun 28, 2008, 01:56 PM
Eja
You have not yet made your case as to why and how you think "Nigeria Go Better". The people are tired of praying and suffering. They are no longer smiling. Please, hurry up.

You forget to tell us that our Akotileta-in-Power keep asking the Foreign Direct Investors to Come And Exploit 'Our' Resources! Nigeria is dashing oil blocks, farm land, manufacturing plants, foreign reserves, and much more, that rightfully belong to the various African tribes in Nigeria, to any foreigner with a pulse, a passport, and an entourage of oyinbo peppered bushmeat.

Your 2 submissions are the ones expressing the fear that foreigners will quickly swallow the "small sovereign states" that may emerge if Nigeria breaks up. I venture to you that some tribes in Nigeria will re-emerge whatever Nigeria does. My concern is that Nigeria should not overburden them with poisonous debt and culturecide (apologies to Chinweizu) before.

please tell us why and how is Go On With One Nigeria the only option?

Ishola Taiwo
Jun 29, 2008, 06:58 AM
1.00: There is no need to play games with semantics. To call for the restructuring of Nigeria and to call for its dissolution is not the same thing. And, to speak against those working for the unconditional dissolution of Nigeria and being a proponent of "Go On With One Nigeria at all costs" is not the same thing.

Like I made clear at the beginning of this, my purpose is to challenge the folly of the point of view that sees the dissolution of Nigeria as the only/best option we face at this time. And I repeat again: I have no disagreement with a call for the restructuring of Nigeria.

2.00: From my overstanding, my opponent in this debate is of the view that Nigeria cannot be restructured unless its is first dissolved.

2.01: Well, there are certain rules that are universally applicable in warfare, business or politics and they are as follows :

Know your strengths.
Know your weaknesses.
Know the strengths of those in competition (or conflict) with you.
Know their weaknesses.
Know the tools you have.
Know the tools at your opponents disposal.
Know the terrain in which the conflict will unfold.


Most importantly, know your weaknesses.

3.00: Ones who see (as my opponent does) the necessity for Nigeria to be disintegrated before it can be restructured are ones who are discounting the most vital of the rules listed above: They are discounting the greatest weakness that we, the African collective, have at this moment in time.

3.01: This weakness, the effects of which I described in a previous post, is our inability to deal with the world from a perspective that places our interests as a collective first and foremost. This means that individuals will look out first for themselves and for those closest to them by blood, then, and even this is becoming rare, they may look out for the ethnic group that they belong to.

3.02: To expect a manifestation the qualities required for the successful operation of an African Confederacy from ones who have that orientation is unrealistic at this moment in time. Therefore, to carry on saying full speed ahead with the dissolution so we can have our African Confederacy is backward planning of the most detrimental kind.

We need to prepare the soil before we plant the seed, yes; basic agricultural knowledge - but first, we need to be sure that the soil we are preparing is actually suited for the type of seed we intend to plant. Not making certain of this has led many an ignorant farmer into ruin.

4.00: Nigeria, we all agree, was set up for the benefit of predators. Well, Nigeria still exists, it may not be anywhere near perfect but, it is a collection of African peoples. It is a union of victims and perpetrators, yes, but, it is a union and, at this moment in time, this is an advantageous fact - the nature and purpose of the union can be changed for the better.

4.01: We are called the Federal Republic of Nigeria and as you have rightly said, we are neither a republic or federal.

4.02: What this tells us is that the description given has not had any effect on what has been served up so far. In short, a mere arrangement of selected alphabets, without a rearrangement of the consciousness of the ones represented by those alphabets, is a guarantee of more failure.

I have nothing against restructuring. The result may be called African National Confederacy or, it may still be called Nigeria. It may even be called Nkalakolo. The name does not matter. What counts is the finished product and how it operates. And, what will have the greatest effect will be the collective level of consciousness regarding what and how the structure should operate in the world of today.

5.00: What I'm saying is, until a significant/influential segment of the population gets an effective grip on the global purpose of what you call an African National Confederacy, chances are, whatever we come up with after the dissolution of Nigeria will be nothing other than a more chaotic version of what we are currently witnessing.

This is an optimistic estimate. Chances are, it will actually be worse. We will most probably be left with a situation where individualised grains of corn from the poisoned cob Nigeria produce bushels of uneatable corn.

To be continued.

Alata
Jun 30, 2008, 12:47 AM
My co-debater continues to disappoint.
Having sowed the wind (of inviting malcontent ethnic champions to put up and, so far, they have shut up) my co-debater must now reap the whirlwind. The task for our hero is to convince us all as to why and how Nigeria should be left to continue its path of self-destruction.




1.00: Like I made clear at the beginning of this, my purpose is to challenge the folly of the point of view that sees the dissolution of Nigeria as the only/best option we face at this time. And I repeat again: I have no disagreement with a call for the restructuring of Nigeria.

2.01: Well, there are certain rules that are universally applicable in warfare, business or politics and they are as follows :


But what preceded the declaration of war (debate).
My co-debater has repeated the war was declared for a particular set of opponents and doubtless 'knew' all sorts of tanks and bombs to drop on them. He declared war after preparing his Maginot Line (http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/maginot_line.htm) of imagined conflict territory. He cried for the opposition to stand and fire. Allies set forth to flush the bushes. Alas, the state of warfare has evolved beyond this sort of second world war philosophy. The hoped-for opponents refused to show up. What he got is fourth generation warfare (http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2004/05/4gw_fourth_gene.html).


In no conflict can we know all these things.
Therefore, be as water.
Solid. Liquid. Wind.
Adapting to the will of the combat
As water adapts to space, heat and pressure.
Above all, be true to yourself.
Be whole, in victory or in defeat.
For no one can keep you other
Than you have kept your will.




3.00: Ones who see (as my opponent does) the necessity for Nigeria to be disintegrated before it can be restructured are ones who are discounting the most vital of the rules listed above: They are discounting the greatest weakness that we, the African collective, have at this moment in time.

3.01: This weakness, the effects of which I described in a previous post, is our inability to deal with the world from a perspective that places our interests as a collective first and foremost.


Know who (http://www.thetalkingdrum.com/cointelpro.html).
Know why (http://www.directblackaction.com/MEMO_46.htm).
Know how (http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/black-matrix/30630-little-black-boy-great-insight.html).

Today modern system of psychological manipulation is so enthralling and sophisticated that it misleads many Blacks to believe that they are, themselves, their own worst enemies, therefore engendering an internalized aberration of self contempt that pulverizes Black unity and halts Black upward mobility.

Ethnicities in Nigeria must prepare themselves for its dissolution. There is one reason why people should not push for immediate dissolution for the colonial-remnant countries in Africa. Just as the butterfly mutates within the carapace of the corpulent caterpillar, the tribes should revive the shrines while they dangle the writhing form of the putrefying state.



5.00: What I'm saying is, until a significant/influential segment of the population gets an effective grip on the global purpose of what you call an African National Confederacy, chances are, whatever we come up with after the dissolution of Nigeria will be nothing other than a more chaotic version of what we are currently witnessing.

This is an optimistic estimate. Chances are, it will actually be worse. We will most probably be left with a situation where individualised grains of corn from the poisoned cob Nigeria produce bushels of uneatable corn.


Nigeria continues to serve its purposes. It is intended to be chaotic. There are those who seek "ordo ab chao": to create a new world order out of the global chaos. There are others who must be wary of orders that feed on chaos, weakness and poverty.

If African people are weak in any aspects of mortal or psychological combat, it is because we are not internalising and adapting to ourselves the lessons of history. Human society can be and is conditioned to seek hierarchy as a solution to anarchy. Hierarchy can be and often is built on conflict mitigated by deceit. Conflict can be and often is resolved by violence. There is no room at the top for the weak or the ignorant or the tolerant. Storm fronts (http://www.stormfront.org) gather before us. We can strengthen by acknowledging and confederating ethnic champions under a common "Afrikan" identity. An active identity that includes all people of African heritage worldwide.

Ishola Taiwo
Jun 30, 2008, 08:50 AM
My co-debater continues to disappoint.
Having sowed the wind (of inviting malcontent ethnic champions to put up and, so far, they have shut up) my co-debater must now reap the whirlwind. The task for our hero is to convince us all as to why and how Nigeria should be left to continue its path of self-destruction.



Iyaalata, I have noticed that you are actually involved in something different from what this challenge was set up to achieve and, it is now my intention to bring this to the formal attention of those who have been following this debate.

This challenge was set up to allow us to see once and for all if those who have been calling for the immediate disintegration of Nigeria can support their point of view when placed in a position where they have to engage in structured reasoning.

Interesting that you describe your tactics as "4th generation Warfare" but, even war has to make sense and, when you are deploying your forces to fight in the desert, an opponent that is nowhere near the desert and, has no intention of ever being in the desert, then what you are doing is nothing more than wasting your resources.

That makes no sense.

Iyaalata, since I never stated that I intended to convince anybody that "Nigeria should be left to continue its path of self-destruction", I see no reason why I should be the one defending what is actually nothing other than your own opinion.

Since you are the one who entered this debate with the intent to convince all of the necessity for Nigeria's disintegration, it may be better for you to seek ways of doing exactly that.

Until you can prove by quoting what I said that makes you think I believe "Nigeria should be left to continue its path of self-destruction", such a description by you remains your own opinion/misinterpretation and therefore nothing that I need concern my self with.

I will make statements to support what I believe and hopefully, you will do the same.

For example, how does the following statement by you support the calls that have been made on this website for the immediate disintegration of Nigeria?


Ethnicities in Nigeria must prepare themselves for its dissolution. There is one reason why people should not push for immediate dissolution for the colonial-remnant countries in Africa. Just as the butterfly mutates within the carapace of the corpulent caterpillar, the tribes should revive the shrines while they dangle the writhing form of the putrefying state.

You state that there is one reason why people should not push for the immediate dissolution of "colonial-remnant countries in Africa"...Iyaalata, you are supposed to be arguing on the side of those calling for the immediate dissolution of "colonial-remnant countries in Africa" - not finding more good reasons why what they are calling for should not take place...really, if you are not up to this, better for you to admit it...:wink:.



If African people are weak in any aspects of mortal or psychological combat, it is because we are not internalising and adapting to ourselves the lessons of history. Human society can be and is conditioned to seek hierarchy as a solution to anarchy. Hierarchy can be and often is built on conflict mitigated by deceit. Conflict can be and often is resolved by violence. There is no room at the top for the weak or the ignorant or the tolerant. Storm fronts (http://www.stormfront.org) gather before us. We can strengthen by acknowledging and confederating ethnic champions under a common "Afrikan" identity. An active identity that includes all people of African heritage worldwide.[/COLOR]

I agree with you; I absolutely agree with you...you make very good points, but, once again, these are arguments for a different type of debate.

By deploying these arguments here, it seems that you are willing to overlook the fact that ethnic champions are ethnic champions because they do not recognise a common African identity.

Please think on this. Then perhaps you will be able to see why the type of calls for disintegration that we have been getting are counter-productive with regards to what you claim to be in pursuit of.

Alata
Jun 30, 2008, 01:03 PM
Eni gbe igi to fi wo okiti eera wole, lo pe akika wa jeun.
One who demolishes the anthill and brings indoors the ant-infested wood, invites in the ant-eater to feast.

I enjoined this debate because of concern that any Afrikan trying to celebrate their ethnic culture or African heritage is nowadays called a 'tribalist', 'separatist', 'secessionist' or 'unpatriotic'. Not long ago, irredentist 'Nigerians' made it clear that heritage languages that define the very ethnicity of 'the people in Nigeria', - languages pejoratively called "vernacular" - were not welcome at a virtual Nigerian square not far from here. Just as the colonial-remnant Nigeria uses its monopoly power on law and order to impose culturecide on its citizens, so did the admins of the virtual Nigeria deploy censorship powers on its members.

The trap you set is obvious. All I did is move it so that it might catch the hunter.
It is not practical for anyone to disintegrate Nigeria, with immediate effect, unless by other than constitutional means. For example, a successful coup or external invasion may announce: "the country that used to be Nigeria is no more..." Any other means will likely take some time for conference and agreement. Nigeria has historically been hostile to such a 'sovereign national conference'.



5.00: To be continued.
We will most probably be left with a situation where individualised grains of corn from the poisoned cob Nigeria produce bushels of uneatable corn.


The people you set the trap for seem to be too affected by the 'poisoned cob Nigeria' to attend this debate. Let us hope they recover sufficiently courage of their convictions to contribute. In the meanwhile, we are mindful that you called for a full debate and not for just a presentation to which you would ask questions. As a debater, you are expected to state your own position and make your own case.

Please continue.

NextLevel
Jul 1, 2008, 05:17 PM
So far, the debate has been pretty clear and I don't think that any of my services have been really required. I was thinking about asking for some clarification of some points from both parties, but I could equally well let the debate continue in this fashion. Please, feel free to suggest which way I should go.

Alata
Jul 1, 2008, 07:40 PM
What clarifications are you thinking about?

Ishola Taiwo
Jul 2, 2008, 01:49 AM
1.00: A careful reading of the arguments presented by my opponent reveals something quite telling: while he speaks for disintegration, the advantages that he ascribes to this eventuality are nothing more than the advantages that come from restructuring. In other words, he is like the self-medicator whose preference for panadol is based on the curative effects of quinine.

1.01: This state of affairs exist (as had been said before) due to the sparseness of the logic that can be called upon to support a recommendation that is ultimately more like a yearning for a return to the comforts of the womb than it is a clear eyed look at the current cold realities of the world into which one has already being born.

1.02: Because of this, ones who who seek an escape back into the mythical state of primordial ethnic purity have no other choice than to rely on misdirection as a means of making their desire seem like an acceptable option.

1.03: Just as the architects of the so-called Global War On Terror used (and are using) false descriptions to shield what has been nothing other than attempts at colonising oil reserves, so too do we see the prospective founders of ethnically pure enclaves seeking to shield their purpose by conflating their intent with that of those who are calling for a more equitable (and orderly) restructuring of our African nation.

1.04: Another point that deserves re-emphasising is how separation from those who are currently called our fellow Nigerians will not solve the problems we are currently experiencing. The creation of a purely Yoruba State will not automatically transmit into the creation of Yoruba unity of purpose. This is because the same factors that are presently dividing Nigerians are also dividing the Yoruba.


Whether the Yoruba, Edo, Ijaw or Ibo break first, their success will depend on a tacit confederacy with mutual protection (not just defence) in trade and investment, military, and travel. None of these areas will agree to a common language or currency. But then the whole of francophone west Africa used to have one currency, the CFA, allied to the French franc. Nigeria has one official currency, the Naira, and an unofficial basket of foreign currencies. Ondo, Kwara and Kogi are likely to be sources of friction between the Yoruba and other tribes. The confederacy will determine how inter-tribal lands will be administered.

2.00: My opponent obviously expects that whichever one from the Yoruba, Edo, Ijaw or Igbo "breaks first" will be breaking with the full blessings of the other groups. He assumes that whatever territorial claims they make will be acceptable to the others. He assumes that having told the other ethnic groups that "we (the Yoruba, Edo, Ijaw or Igbo) wish to have our country because we can no longer abide being your fellow country-men...", the remnants from the Yoruba, Edo, Ijaw or Igbo will say "Yes, we feel the same way about you; we also cannot stand being in the same country as you anymore. So, go with our blessings - and take whatever land you want (along with all its resources) with you as you leave...beloved brothers..."

2.01: In short, my opponent imagines that those who embark on a mission based on chauvinism may expect that those being impacted by their actions will be always be ones with the advanced sensibilities of Pan-Africanists.

2.02: However, what I know of history tells me that actions based on chauvinistic attitudes only succeed when they are backed with superior military force. You cannot alienate people and then expect those same people to hand you what you are after in good cheer.

2.03: This truth remains unspoken especially by those who deceptively sing hymns to our so-called Southern Nigerian unity of purpose.

3.00: My opponent also wishes to present the devolution of the CFA as a common currency of 'Francophonie' West Africa as an example of a successful secession that led to a more amenable form of unification.

3.01: However, the truth of that matter is, the CFA devolved because France decided that its growing commitment to the evolving European Union had placed it in a position where it could no longer offer its client-nations in Africa the same business arrangements as that which had accompanied the previous existence of the CFA.

3.02: The CFA devolved because France decided that it's own current and future interests would be better served by removing from former African servants the advantages of collective bargaining and instead, placing them in a position where each country would have to compete with the other on the basis of unilateral agreements.

3.03: This means that France (and the EU) can now deal with the countries on the basis of their individual strengths and weaknesses. The collective bargaining power that the Francophonies used to have (weak as it admittedly was), is now virtually non-existent. And, with the advent of the detrimental Economic Partnership Agreements that the EU has succeeded in getting some individual African countries to sign, we witness the additional consequences that follow the loss of collective economic resources and the institutions they support.

3.04: In short, what my opponent has tried to present as an argument in favour of what he proposes actually serves as a warning of the consequences that attend the process of seeking to smash something up with the expectation of making its component pieces stronger.

3.05: Such an attitude is probably OK if one is the sole inhabitant of a Universe. You would have time then to experiment; to erase the board and start from zero. You will have the time and space to carry out any type of experimentation that come to mind. However, we do not exist in this Universe by our African selves. We do not have the time and space for experimentation so, when we move - if we must move - we must only move from as strong a position as we can get to what we are certain will be a better position of strength.

3.06: In our normal everyday world, strength, like everything else, does not come out of a vacuum. There is only ever so much and if one thing is to gain, its opposite must lose. I make this point because, if the prospects of Africans uniting on the basis of their commonalities is to become reality, then drives towards separation (in all their seductive incarnations) must be suppressed. Unity where it exists must be strengthened and divisors, where they exist, must be eradicated.


When the colonial-remnant countries were established (Nigeria in 1960), the borders cut through many incipient tribal nation-states. The Yoruba in republic of Benin (Dahomey) and in Togo are still Yoruba. The Ibo / Arochukwu in Cameroon are still Ibo / Arochukwu. The Hausa in Benin and Niger republics are still Hausa. Many tribes became transnational as a direct result of flag independence. Till today, they hardly pay attention to the country borders as they criss-cross to visit or do business.

4.00: The phrase "incipient tribal nation-states" is a misnomer. It implies that without the intervention of the British and other European invaders, the ethnicities in the areas that later became "colonial-remnant countries" would have become "tribal nation-states".

4.01: There is no evidence to prove that without the pressures that came from having to deal with these external (and extremely alien) forces, the Yoruba and the Igbo (for example) would not have simply carried on as they had for many millenia.

4.02: Which is to say that there is no evidence to prove that beyond knowledge of each other as ones who shared similar cultural icons, the people of Ijebu and Ekiti had any indigenous joint purpose that would have united them eventually as equal members of some pan-Yoruba nation-state.

4.03: Chances are that if it had occurred, the unity would most probably have being the enforced type that comes from being components of an Empire (like the one that had been established by the Oyo and later on, by the Ibadan).

4.04: What this means is that the nation-state that is being spoken of by my opponent will in fact be something that is totally new. Now, whether my opponent actually has more at this time than his stated intentions to rely upon when it comes to the creation of this new thing is something that remains to be seen.

4.05: It should be noted that all those who wish for disintegration need to do at this present time is carry on with their repeated offensive cacophonies. The effects of these provocations, which are often similarly offensive responses, completes the energy cycle that drive the engine of the vehicle they hope to ride to their objective.

4.06: However, those who wish for a more workable restructuring need to do a lot more than just call for an immediate break-up. They need to lay out, in prominent and accessible ways, the doctrinal foundations for the new dispensation that they wish to bring about.


For me, failure to accommodate and willingness to disregard 'so-called (ethnic) minorities' is the key reason why Nigeria and the other colonial-remnant countries in Africa have failed, while other colonial-remnant countries elsewhere may have done better. It is a sort of "tragedy of the commons". Ethnicity (TRIBE) is very important for the development of self-regard and national consciousness. Nigeria has always operated on the
fallacy that some tribes matter more than others. The country tries hard to suppress the ethnicities of its citizens in its bid to build a unitary 'national' identity.

5.00: The objective of the statement being responded to in the above quote has being misrepresented. The key phrase in that statement was "For the sake of summarising the argument, we can disregard some reality for now."

5.01: In other words, there was no recommendation that there should be a "failure to accommodate" minorities nor was there an intent in the post that could be interpreted as a willingness to "disregard" minorities. What was being done was to take so-called ethnic minorities out of the equation (temporarily ) to enable a closer look (within this debate) at the relationship between the ones referred to as the two majority ethnicities of Southern Nigeria.

5.02: My opponent goes further after this misinterpretation and tries to present my summarisation as an example of the way " Nigeria has always operated on the fallacy that some tribes matter more than others."

5.03: This is gross sensationalism. My co-debater, intent on preaching from as high up as possible to the choir, has a need to climb a ladder made up from hyperbole in order that he may distinguish himself from the choir.

5.04: The truth is, he is quite free to make statements that are based on his own conclusions, however, it would be better if he simply presents them as such instead of misrepresenting my words and then presenting his own as if they were legitimate responses to me.


More sensible countries try to implement policies that recognise and build upon multiple ethnicities, religions, languages and other social differences, Nigeria and other colonial-remnant countries try to destroy these differences and must then go further to try to fabricate artificial identities to represent the rootless country. Of course, the ethnic nations fight back: they must in order to survive. It may be that there was no 'Yoruba' or 'Hausa' people before 'Nigeria' was implanted unto the African landscape. The Anago, Ijebu, Oyo, Egba and ife used to be separate and sometimes-warring 'Yoruba' nations or kingdoms before the colonial invasions. They may be separate again after Nigeria's disintegration. The issue for the African National confederacy is how to support and build upon ethnic efforts at self-improvement and community development.

Of critical importance are the issues of land use and ownership, conflict resolution, and governance. I will address these issues when I resume on your part 2.


In continuation of why Nigeria should be dissolved sooner rather than later. I would like to touch on some issues that my co-debater has already called on us to omit as of minor importance. In this part 2 of my submission, I hope to build a framework that shows these "disregarded realities" are the under-currents that birthed Nigeria and account for why its failures to its citizens are its successes to its investors. I will then apply this framework to the part 2 of our co-debater's submissions. Please bear in mind that our co-debater does not want Nigeria to disintegrate into small countries only to benefit sundry foreigners. My point of debate is that the various ethnic groups within Nigeria should begin an immediate schedule to dissolve Nigeria, firstly to save themselves from intellectual, cultural and mental extermination, and secondly with the greater aim of founding one more vibrant and protective African National Confederacy.

6.00: I wish to address the bolded parts of the quotes above.

6.01: The Nigerian State is too intellectually disorganised to have any program of "cultural and mental extermination", and, it is totally incapable of implementing the destruction of differences between ethnicities, religions, languages etc. In fact, the same people who will oversee the disintegration of Nigeria (if given a chance), are the very ones who are intent on fabricating artificial identities.

6.02: Yes, it is individuals who are in various positions of influence - some in government, some in the media, the arts, and most especially 'religious' organisations - that are presently implementing the penetration of foreign ideologies into Nigeria and other African countries.

6.03: These elites, many of whom disguise their alienation from their indigenous root with a hyper-chauvinistic disdain for other African peoples/cultures, are first and foremost Christians or Muslims in countries where the fault-lines between Christian and Muslim grows deeper daily and, globalist free-marketeers/monopolists in countries that have been designated as the bottom rung of the global economic ladder.

6.04: These are the ones who at present have the resources and organised global support that will be required to grab power in any dispensation and, if that dispensation is one where Nigeria becomes a collection of independent sovereign nations, we can rest assured that the last thing these entities will allow is the existence of a " African National confederacy" that will "support and build upon ethnic efforts at self-improvement and community development."

6.05: In short, if my opponent (and others with high ideals like him) remains without a robust coalition that spans ethnicities, a coalition that has the resources and the knowledge required to bring about the implementation of an African Confederacy, then they should know that when Nigeria disintegrates, the ones who will wield power in the component republics/kingdoms/emirates will be the same people who held Nigeria back.

6.06: From what I have seen from various discussions (past and current) that touch on ethnicity and territorial claims on this web-site, I wish to inform my co-debater, an eagle of the proposed African National Confederacy, that he is flying in the company of vultures who will remain vultures even after the 'hated' Nigerian flag is lowered from its current heights.

7.00: Since I view everything else that follows in the quote below as excellent readings of our current state and, good arguments for the re-construction of our African nation, I will make no counter arguments (as I am not one who opposes re-structuring).


In the course of a long journey, it is often necessary to detour: for water or fuel, and especially to check our roadmap so as to ensure we are still going in the right direction. So too, must we enroute to dissolving the colonial-remnant countries across Africa - and dissolve them we must so that our people can thrive - we need to detour to deal with the issues of minority populations, land tenure, conflict resolution, and community governance. Minorities, land and governance are often talked about in terms of rights. "Minority rights should be respected". "Land (private property) rights should be protected" "A community has sovereign rights to self-rule", and so on.


Of rights and duties.
What we often hear less loudly of are duties and responsibilities. The duties of minorities and majorities of whatever categories to respect their neighbours and the laws of the land. The duty of property owners to care for and not unduly burden the public domain. The duty of the country or other community of the care and security of its people, to pass laws that favour and elevate its citizens above all foreigners, and to enforce its laws fairly and equitably among its citizens. It should be clear to us all that Nigeria has been unwilling and unable to deliver on its primary duties. Nigeria has failed as a country to even show intent to act on behalf of the people it claims as citizens. This failure is reasonable but not sufficient basis for Nigeria to be disintegrated.

Why should it not surprise us that people more loudly proclaim their rights and privileges than their duties and responsibilities. Is it because rights invariably favour the private estate, while duties are invariably contributions to the public wealth? Yes. Must we disintegrate the colonial-era countries we find ourselves in in order to build a community of which our rights and duties are of our making. Yes. Why disband and not restructure? Because the colonial-remnant countries were purposely set up to never favour or elevate us as their citizens. Because they endure us to legal systems and trade agreements made in foreign lands by and for the benefit of foreign, demonstrably hostile and historically predatory powers. Because they enfeeble our ability to educate, arm, defend or protect our families or properties at home or abroad.

How? By making foreign languages, education systems, weapons, religious doctrines into the monopoly of government power that are then used to make our own heritage systems illegal under the law. Because they make it illegal for us to learn of, copy or re-fabricate any and all foreign knowledge that might benefit or harm us.

Because they assign us as citizens unto unrepresentative laws on property rights that enable every foreign thief or local Akotileta to loot us blind under the sanction and authority of the law of the land.


Minority Rights In An Illegal Country
The colonial-remnant counties make it illegal for us to manage land resources, grow businesses, resolve conflicts, and govern communities in a manner that is sustainable. These countries conducted land theft on a massive scale all across the African continent by using unfair laws similar to Nigeria's Land Use Act(s). That stolen land is then placed in the care of an investment minority. This is the only minority whose 'minority rights' mean much to the colonial-remnant African country whose duty it is to protect them.

Similar theft of public domain property has been conducted in recent years as arranged market sales into foreign ownership and control of assets and investments left behind after flag independence or acquired since then. A country that can persist only by stealing from its own people has no right to claim sovereignty. The people who must call themselves its citizens have a duty to disintegrate the country and to start other arrangements for a more protective domain. But an even greater and more heinous theft is underway: the theft of memory.


The theft of memory
What is an ethnic minority? Presumably, it is the ethnic groups (tribes) that are the least in number in a given community. Who are the ethnic minorities that our co-debater will have us dismiss with such bare concern? What makes one ethnicity weigh more for another ethnicity to be considered minor: is it population size, economic and purchasing power, military allies and diplomatic strength. media projection? Some of the most vocal ethnic majorities in Nigeria turn out to be of surprisingly minor influence even in western-central Africa.

But the core issue of concern to this debate is that Nigeria is actively trying to erase the cultural and heritage memories of all its constituent ethnicities. The only clues to culture that Nigeria wants to preserve relate to English and Arabic. The clues are in the languages on its currency, its education and its public discourse, in its two semi-official religions: Christianity and Islam, in its legal and judicial systems: one borrowed from the masonic temples of law of Europe and the other from the masonic temples of sharia of Arabia.

A false-flag mis-education
The memory of "everything before independence" is erased from the public space and omitted from the mindspace represented by education, the media, and of course the religious houses that blanket the landscape.

Children are not educated of how African societies resisted invasion and domination. Adults are not educated as to how they can resist ongoing campaigns of African genocide by abortion, medical experimentation, internecine warfare, poverty and economic sanctions, and suicide due to mental frustration. Why does Nigeria, the colonial-remnant country, do these damages to us its entrapped citizens? Because it needs us to forget who we are in order for it to continue existing as a false-flag country. Nigeria was implanted onto the numerous ethnic peoples that now make up its citizens. it can survives and persist only by destroying whatever makes those people prefer to belong to different ethnicities so that it can have its own nominal people: the Nigerians.


An Stillborn Independence.
At least our co-debater would not mind Nigeria restructured. There are those who refuse disintegration due to a deceitful claim that Nigeria was created by God or other divine powers. This claim is a lie. Neither was Nigeria born of a war of liberation won by our people under the leadership of nationalist 'founding fathers' from colonial powers. The sad truth is that Nigeria was created to contain the wave of insurgency against ethnic and economic caste structures dominated by Europe - that flowed onwards from the liberation of the USA and of Haiti. Ethnic 'white' Europeans had thrown off the colonial shackles of the European continent to found the USA. Ethnic Africans in Haiti had taken advantage of Europe's distractions to throw off the contamination of European peonage and found African's first independent country.

Two rounds of European World War totally exhausted old Europe and suddenly, the game was up. Asians threw off European and Japanese drug-induced ennui and virtual slavery. India re-emerged. Now, the Africans in the USA and in Africa were getting restive for their own ethnic nation-states. Then as at now, Africans repeated the mistake of all ages: they handed-over their best and brightest for the enemies to educate and groom wholeheartedly without any 'home training'. Then as at now, Europe gladly took to the opportunity to tighten its grip.


The Akotileta Take Custody
The daughters and sons of Africa's royal and merchant families were literally gifted to Europe in the run up to and after flag independence. They still are. These gifts of Africa were welcomed to the classroom, the bedroom, and the factory but shunned from the members club, the laboratory, and the boardroom; educated to awe of Europe but disdain of Africa prior to European ravages; screened for right-thinking but excluded of African rites of passage; and handed custody of newly-independent colonial-remnant countries across the continent. Then as at now, Nigeria remains a limited liability business venture of our foreign direct investors. It is no coincidence that any European, Asiatic or Arabian is treated as royalty by Nigerian government officials from the President through the civil and military services. To an overwhelming extent, Nigeria and other colonial-remnant countries retain the implicit structures of racism 'white' supremacy as the platform for ethnic-subjugation, religious lobotomy, foreign exploitation, and mass ignorance of Africa's peoples.

Because unlike many people have done in Nigeria, the citizens of India remain quintessentially Hindu, Sikh, and so on while the Indian country practises religious neutrality as best it can. Indians know their strength is in their ethnicities as defined in spiritual belief systems that confirm that they are daughters and sons of the gods. To the Indians, a god looks like an Indian, not any rainbow-coloured foreigner. Even the Indian who has converted to Christianity and Islam needs not walk far to see himself or herself in the image of the gods that matter.

Nigeria is a plantation country. Its psychological parentage was in the agricultural plantations of the antebellum south of slavery era USA and Brazil. Its system of social and legal governance was furnished from apartheid USA and apartheid South Africa. Nigeria is a country under perpetual economic and social sanctions just like Haiti is and for the same reason: some people in Nigeria dared to hope without planning. Then they backed down without protecting. Then they begged without defending. And all Nigerians caught 'hell' on earth. Nigeria must be disbanded forthwith, but the Akotileta in charge will not do so.


The rise of African fascism
It is when we look at the dynamics of ethnicity that discover the criminality of colonial-remnant countries. It is in this sphere of human society that we find the utter genocides of culture and heritage and people across the African continent and across African communities elsewhere. Here we make the appeal for immediate dissolution of Nigeria and the other misbegotten countries before one and/or other of two things happen.

Nigeria may realise its purpose as an staging post for creating Africa without the Africans. There will be people here who will be known as Africans just as they always were. Except that to all intents and purposes they will be mental and cultural regurgitations of European, Arab or other proselyting world-views.

Africans-in-little-but-name already populate Europe and the Caribbean and North Americas. They may make up the bulk of the last three generations on Africa itself.

Alternatively, Nigeria will reach its logical conclusion and African fascism will bloom and will rage.

I had intended to further address my co-debater's submissions. But even Eja concedes that we will have very bad odds on a bet that Nigeria will even attempt anytime soon to raise standards of living for its poor. It is a lost cause to keep Nigeria going as it is in the hope it can one day deliver a nurturing environment. My co-debater has tried to make a case why Nigeria should not be dissolved, but omi po ju oka lo (water pass gari).

The very lack of substantial or even persuasive arguments for keeping up the appearance of Nigerian nationhood is a telling damnation that has already wasted three generations. We are left only with the spectre of foreign direct investors as they await, like hyenas and vultures, to feed on the colonial-remnant countries.

My extension would have been to consider the likely flowering and dimensions of a necessary African fascism when we examine emerging combinations of ethnic and environmental factors with the newly-revealed European new world order of socio-economic castes, and the history of Africa's cultural and militant heritage. It is a consideration that moves beyond the core of this debate.

For now, I rest my case with the observation that the militancy my co-debater notes in the Niger Delta, the wave of anti-social behaviour in all sectors of society, and the cultism recorded in the country's institutions are symptoms of a phenomenon the world does not yet openly acknowledge.

"Out of Africa, always something new" as the dewy-eyed used to say. The new Africa. It will be interesting, for real.

NextLevel
Jul 2, 2008, 02:11 AM
What clarifications are you thinking about?
I think Eja's current response highlights some of the issues that he would like you to address, such as the economic bargaining power of smaller nations and the realism (or idealism) that underlies the belief of a peaceful separation/secession. While he raises other issues which you might also address, I think that you should definitely address these issues in a response to him. One thing that is not clear is what kind of restructuring Eja considers workable and how he would expect this restructuring to work.

Rather than produce my list, maybe in the same vein, you could after you respond to him, highlight some of the issues you would like him to address?

Alata
Jul 2, 2008, 02:10 PM
4.05: - 4.06:


My duty in this debate is to argue why I want Nigeria dissolved in a manner that fosters our identity and builds on a protective alliance of the various ethnicities.



5.00: The objective of the statement being responded to in the above quote has being misrepresented. The key phrase in that statement was "For the sake of summarising the argument, we can disregard some reality for now."


The misrepresentation is not deliberate and would have been avoided if my co-debater had added this rider, earlier.



6.00: - 6.01:

To destroy the cultural and mental identity of its peoples, Nigeria needs only to continue to be the ant-infested wood that it is. As people who are concerned with our competitiveness in a hostile world, we simply cannot afford to be defined by this intellectually disorganised entity. We must fabricate a new identity that suits us better.


6.02: - 6.04:

My co-debater makes my point. Our enemy trained us, fed us, brought us up, preaches to us, for so long and so totally that of us comes our enemy. Of us have become the lovers of Christian Scientific Europe and Mohammedan Tolerance Arabia. Of us are the haters and fearful of Ifa and ancestral Africa. How will one ever attempt to surpass another when one worships divinity in the image of that other? Have we not seen our fathers kneel to call boys in cassocks "Father"? But, how to re-do ourselves if we do not want to recognise the enemy of our progress that we see in the mirror?


6.05: - 6.06:


An Alternative to Defeatism
I would enlist my co-debater as a fellow African eagle.
My purpose in this debate is to give notice to other fledging eagles that they are not alone against what often seem to be random forces or accidental events. I wanted also to inform on an alternative to the colonial-remnant-countries that are so servile to foreign hyenas; an alternative that goes beyond the ethnically cleansed nation-state that Akotileta vultures have been promoting but have proven too cowardly or negligent to defend in this debate.

The alternative of African National Confederacy builds on the foundations of many tribes, one nation. How to build this 'coalition' is a debate in itself, which I feel is beyond the scope of this debate. My observation is that fascism will have a role to play in building a 'coalition identity' beyond singular ethnic sectarianism. It is an unfortunate condition of human society that hatred impacts stronger than love; that negative incentives often outweigh positive incentives of equal magnitude. For example, fascism thrives on sustaining hatred for others far more than preaching unity or love for oneself. We have seen how effective religious (Christian, Islamic Hindu) fascism have been in building on the hatred of 'non-believers' far more than they build on the love of man or god. Racist fascism likewise builds more on the hatred of alienated ethnicities far more than they build bridges across socio-economic classes.


Globalisation is Disintegrating Nigeria
To our detriment. My co-debater knows Nigeria and other colonial-remnants in Africa are straw houses that need to be demolished so that stronger fortress(es) can be built on the continent (where ethnic "tribalism" is a potent force) and in the Americas (where "racism 'white' supremacy on people of African heritage is a potent force). Tribalism and racism are tools used by vultures in Africa and hyenas beyond to diminish Afrikan competitiveness. The Igi-Eera (or Trojan Horse) of African peoples may very well be their often-commented 'friendliness' towards people whose history of 'friendliness' is of wars of rape, exploitation and extermination. What did the 'Truth & Reconciliation' mean in South Africa, Namibia or Zimbabwe other than justification (triumph!) and reward for the Christian British/Boers for their attempted physical and psychological genocide of the African tribes there? What is the 'African Union' achieving if not political cover for Arabs to disarm pan-Afrikan ethnic nationalism while infiltrating African territory with mosques and sharia laws? Indeed, what is globalisation to achieve other than Europeans laying claim to extra-territorial assets by making themselves the beneficial 'citizens' whose rights should be protected by a global government and a monopoly of weapons of mass destruction? Even as we keep the colonial-remnant borders, have our Akotileta leaders not hollowed out and sold the African countries down the river via privatisations and over-generous concessions of our community assets?


Feeding the Crocodile
Our co-debater knows Africans cannot hide in colonial-remnant countries from the gathering storms. The history and currency of religious and racialist hostility towards African persons or identities indicate the fallacy of appeasement. Many people recognise the implication of military weakness in explaining 'friendliness' towards hostile foreigners. Would we dare recognise that religion and ethnic culture are or can be militaristic? Do we remember that slave rebellions in the Americas were quelled partly by swapping African heritage religions for Christianity, partly by inbreeding the already enslaved rather than bringing in new 'wild stock' from Africa? One who keeps a crocodile farm had better not let his children crawl around. Yet, we are so addicted in colonial-remnant Africa to religion, education and media that are foundations of non-African ethnic culture.


Smiling Dagger
Our co-debater asks
"lay out, in prominent and accessible ways, the doctrinal foundations for the new dispensation. that we wish to bring about.
Doctrines are hardly formed or accessible in the time frame (immediately) that this debate calls for. Neither are doctrinal foundations always prominent or accessible to everyone: they are necessarily 'elitist' in origin even when the ultimate beneficiaries are a wider majority.

For example, only a relatively few people defined the doctrine of 'free trade' and 'market liberalisation' as tools with which to fraudulently manufacture money out of 'thin air' and use this 'credit' to buy up real assets. Few people acknowledge the associated 'globalisation' as a worldwide socio-economic caste system in which the bulk of benefits accrue to ethnic investment minorities. Few people acknowledge that racism is a social doctrine of ethnic-tribal supremacy. Yet, very few Africans who 'access' European benefits through education, religion, marriage, or other appeasement strategies can escape racist socialisation.

So, we too must sheath our daggers with smiles.
_________________________
_________________________

I think Eja's current response highlights some of the issues that he would like you to address, such as the economic bargaining power of smaller nations and the realism (or idealism) that underlies the belief of a peaceful separation/secession. While he raises other issues which you might also address, I think that you should definitely address these issues in a response to him. One thing that is not clear is what kind of restructuring Eja considers workable and how he would expect this restructuring to work.

Rather than produce my list, maybe in the same vein, you could after you respond to him, highlight some of the issues you would like him to address?

Will address how to "sheath our daggers with smiles" on my next submission.

Ishola Taiwo
Jul 3, 2008, 06:43 PM
Bode Eluyera, since you claim to have superior knowledge of Eastern Europe, then it should have been easy for you to show, point by point, what I got wrong.

Show the right side up to what you called "upside down" and, show the correct measurement of what you called "exaggeration".

You will note that when I spoke, I did not just say "take my word for it", I showed sources that backed up every single thing I said. So, why would you think that simply saying "I have lived for 15 years in Eastern Europe" is enough to make your word gospel?

If I am not qualified to speak on what happened in eastern Europe, then from where do you get the authority to speak so definitively on what is best for the entire Yoruba peoples? Are you an Oba? A Chief or, a high-ranking member of an organisation like Afenifere?

You are neither speaking to children or to ones easily overawed with "been-to" declarations. You will need to work harder; show and prove.

Back to this presumption of yours that you speak for the Yoruba (i.e. "I am only speaking for the Yorubas")....I would like to know from what part of Yoruba land you come from.

Are you Ijebu? If so, how solid is the authority that you rely on as you speak on behalf of the Ekiti?

If you think this is a simple question, then you know little about intra-Yoruba politics.

Bode, are you an Eko man and if you are, what is that qualifies you to speak for those from Ilorin?

How many Yoruba communities have you lived among? In fact, when was the last time you lived in Yoruba land?

As a loyal son of the Yoruba and a respecter of our customs, I am sure that you know how much our hierarchical structures mean to us. I am also sure that you know how much we all value our individual freedoms. So, when you start talking about this thing that has never existed before, this Oodua Republic, ones like me first wonder where you get the authority from. When you then go further and seek to prepare wars for us from the comfort of your home in deepest eastern Europe, I start to wonder what your true intentions are.

You see Bode, what you are doing nothing more than planting the seeds for warfare. True, a real man does not run from violent conflict, but only a fool or a madman prays for it.

Those who have witnessed the worst of human nature - those who have first hand knowledge of what that situation looks like - pray never to see such again. Therefore, when making plans, such ones look for all options but the ones that will lead to conflict. It is only when they know for certain that there is no avoiding conflict that they start preparing the ground (so that those who may have to fight will not be doing so at a disadvantage).

Now, I know that we have not exhausted the avenues for the peaceful restructuring of our African nation. I know that chaos is not yet the only option and, I know that even if it were, the last thing anybody engaged in preparing for a favorable conclusion would be doing is coming on the Internet to show all intentions to potential adversaries and, to the ever waiting (ever ready) manipulators of chaos.

I ask : Where is the analysis of the situation from a perspective that places the local within the global? I ask this because aside from diatribes against 'the North', there is little else on offer in your multi-chaptered opus.

Really and truly, all you have to say could have been said in one line.

There is no plan for progress and nothing that hints (even vaguely) of yours as being a mind that is capable of planning for victory. At this moment in time my friend, you appear to be one of those people who are only capable of planting the seeds for conflict. Beyond that, it seems you are in the dark.

Yes, confronted with the challenge of presenting enhancers of Yoruba unity, the best you can come up with is hatred for 'the North'. Bode, I will like you to give me an example of any people in history who started out armed with hatred who did not come to a terrible end.

Then, I would like you to show an example of how you can unite African people without asking them to hate other African people. I wonder why this has never occurred to you before as being a worthwhile project....

You are challenging me to write an article. My friend, it is not about the number of articles. It is about the useful content in what is said.

I applaud you for taking up the challenge presented by this debate...I hope that is what you are doing...now, you need to examine each of my points and, demolish them. This shouldn't be hard (since you have already stated that : "Your arguments are TOO WEAK. They are full of many LOOP HOLES").

NextLevel
Jul 3, 2008, 07:40 PM
Eja,

Please show some restraint in dealing with Eluyera. He has posted to this thread and he should not have: he should have posted to the parallel thread. I will ask that an admin move/delete his post, depending on which you prefer. Since you have responded to him, my guess is that you would prefer that his post be moved along with yours.

NL

Alata
Jul 3, 2008, 08:20 PM
Eja,

Please show some restraint in dealing with Eluyera. He has posted to this thread and he should not have: he should have posted to the parallel thread. I will ask that an admin move/delete his post, depending on which you prefer. Since you have responded to him, my guess is that you would prefer that his post be moved along with yours.

NL
One option is to move the 2 posts together
Another option is to recognise that Bode might be one of the people Eja wanted to debate with, and so let the their discussions continue. if both are willing, I am happy to step aside.

Please do not delete the post(s)

NextLevel
Jul 3, 2008, 09:10 PM
One option is to move the 2 posts together
Another option is to recognise that Bode might be one of the people Eja wanted to debate with, and so let the their discussions continue. if both are willing, I am happy to step aside.

Please do not delete the post(s)

That is a possibility, but in that case, it might be better if that is formally agreed to so that the quality of the debate can be maintained.

So Mr. Eluyera, are you willing to take over the debate from iyaalata and go toe-to-toe with Eja on this issue?

Alata
Jul 4, 2008, 10:19 AM
Bode and Eja and all of us
It is one thing to indicate a person has said or done foolish things; and another thing to say the person is a fool. Even if a debate involves presentation of opposing views or antagonistic personalities, there is usually some common ground to work with. We should still try to avoid (over) personalising the insults.

BTW, if Eja is obviously too thick to agree with me, the more fool me for not applying the whip!

Ishola Taiwo
Jul 4, 2008, 01:07 PM
Eja,

Please show some restraint in dealing with Eluyera. He has posted to this thread and he should not have: he should have posted to the parallel thread. I will ask that an admin move/delete his post, depending on which you prefer. Since you have responded to him, my guess is that you would prefer that his post be moved along with yours.

NL

NL, I don't think the post should be deleted. If Bode Eluyera is willing to take over from Iyaalata, it can be left where it is, if not, it should be moved to the parallel thread.
_________________________
_________________________

Bode and Eja and all of us
It is one thing to indicate a person has said or done foolish things; and another thing to say the person is a fool. Even if a debate involves presentation of opposing views or antagonistic personalities, there is usually some common ground to work with. We should still try to avoid (over) personalising the insults.

BTW, if Eja is obviously too thick to agree with me, the more fool me for not applying the whip!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Alata
Jul 6, 2008, 09:18 PM
adama50,
please remove your post #34 from this thread and put it, if you must, in the parallel thread.
_________________________
_________________________
I am pleased with the above contributions by Bode. His is a perspective that I feel is relevant to the original purpose for which Eja sought to have this debate. I issued invitations for more contributions in threads across the NVS website but the separatist propagators will not be joining us.

I will appreciate keeping Bode's advocacy for an independent and strong Oduduwa nation, for the record. His is a healthy indication of the latent power of ethnic nations in Africa. He has understandably declined to say how the required prior dissolution of Nigeria is to be accomplished. My contention in this debate is that it is sufficient for Nigeria and other colonial-remnant countries to be disintegrated in order to realise socio-geographical reform into a African National Confederacy. Oduduwa as a homogeneous ethnic state allied with others within an supremacist Afrocentric (http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/board/parallel-threads/45666-afrocentric-i-e-africa-centred-perspective-17.html#post4295007299) nation will provide a protective, competitive and cooperative basis for meeting the challenges that we face.

In my last post, I mentioned that Africa's solutions are problems for the international community. Our perennially-combative compatriots on Earth (the self-styled "international community") have the means and the motive to destroy us, but not the will. We have motive, but neither the will nor the means to destroy our compatriots. We need to protect our efforts to build the will and gain the means. To "sheath our daggers in smiles".

Alata
Jul 7, 2008, 04:20 PM
Eja and NextLevel,
This debate was proposed to offer a platform for debate to those focussed solely or primarily on dissolution of Nigeria into separate ethnic sovereign states. I have tried to encourage the debate. However, none of target ethnic separatists have come forward to our satisfaction.

My further contributions are likely to focus on perspective of a multi-ethnic African National confederacy. The emphasis is on strengthening of the African ethnicities as much as alliance into a super-nationalistic society, rather than solely on weakening or disintegration of the colonial-remnant countries such as Nigeria. This will take us beyond core relevance for this debate.

I suggest that we retire at this point, pending the submissions of more relevant contributions.