Would Abiola Have Been a Good President?

maxsiollun · Jun 12, 2009 , 12:16 AM

http://maxsiollun.wordpress.com/2008...ome-president/

http://maxsiollun.wordpress.com/2009...1993-election/

Miliki Way · Jun 12, 2009 , 01:03 AM

Would Abiola Have Been a Good President?

I doubt it.

emj · Jun 12, 2009 , 01:08 AM

Maybe, maybe not.....he never did get sworn in...inspite of winning the election

But then looking at his history...he would have been really hampered by a lot of things and people...topmost of which would have been the Khaki Boys

And he could have turned out well....with the right people to work with.

And what exactly constitutes Good....Good President as in what? What are the qualities we are looking at...to come to the conclusion that Tompolo for instance will make a good President or some Tomashanko

Jun 12, 2009 , 01:17 AM

Absolutely not. Let 'us' not speak ill of the dead. In a nutshell,

He could not have been a good president for the following reasons.

He had a very 'busy' life. Had 113 children, 25 children failed DNA tests, he disinherited 15 children, and out rightly disowned 2 children. See FUJI HOUSE OF COMMOTION.

How could he have run Nigeria with all these to deal with?

It was a sad day indeed, for what could have been or not been in Nigeria's history. Perhaps God knows the best.

May the sweet soul of M.K.O. Abiola continue to rest in peace, as we remember him today.

Amen(observing my moment of silence)

Ranter · Jun 12, 2009 , 05:32 AM

He had too much alliances and groups to please, it woulda been a mess. Talking about mess, I think we arrived there without him.

lateesha · Jun 12, 2009 , 11:21 PM

Going by the way he handled women,NO

toksy · Jun 12, 2009 , 11:44 PM

Hell No, No!!! Not trying to "speak ill of the dead" o, but Abiola definately, wasn't the "messiah" nigeria, so badly needed in 1993. No way would he have ameliorated our sufferings then, but however in the same tone, IMHO, he wouldn't have compounded it half as much as the evil googgled monster did.

Dapxin · Jun 12, 2009 , 11:55 PM

Originally Posted by lateesha

Going by the way he handled women,NO

did he handle you ? I ll say speak for yourself baby, speak for una-self

lateesha · Jun 13, 2009 , 02:01 AM

Originally Posted by Dapxin

did he handle you ? I ll say speak for yourself baby, speak for una-self

You never know
This is afterall the hinternet.
He could have handled me

omaks · Jun 13, 2009 , 08:57 AM

The fact of the matter is that Nigerians were deprived of that luxury of finding out first hand whether or not he could have delivered the aspirations we all yearned for. All the same, what cannot be denied or taken away from the man is that he believed in a cause and fought for it to the end, paying the untimate price in the end. For that he will always be revvered, in spite of his many imperfections. Rest In Peace MKO.

Eja · Jun 13, 2009 , 09:15 AM

Categorical and emphatic NO.

And anybody who doubts this needs to look again at the man's history.

Like Babangida, Obasanjo and many others in that circle, Abiola was an asset of the so-called west. He worked for them and that was why, when the election was annulled, he thought the best thing to do was to come running to them.

He traveled to the capital cities of the empire to make his case - "I am the best man for da job sah!!" and, after a while, he was told to return home. He was given assurances but, unfortunately, in Sani Abacha, the empire had one stubborn servant. The consensus then became, "...lets not rock the boat. Lets see if Abacha can do the job. Anyway, this Abiola fellow is getting too big for his breeches. Look at what he's doing in Central Africa and, listen to him yammer on about reparations...Really fellas, do we actually want such an uppity nigra in charge of our oil?"

In my opinion, Abiola, like many others in the world today, had no firm principles. He was an "obey the wind". Which means that if the prevailing wind asked him to speak like a progressive, then he would but, the minute the wind changed and demanded that he did as the status-quo required, he would. Such a man was not (and is still not) what an unsteady country like Nigeria needed/needs.
.
.
.
.
.
PS: Several pipul don already talk am say na de same ting wey kill Abiola na im kill Abacha. What is rarely mentioned is how the same object is inside Obasanjo. It is called a binary. And its presence is why that man did as he was told while he was Presido of the prison-yard called Nigeria.

Dapxin · Jun 13, 2009 , 09:31 AM

I think the greater loss the country suffered, was not entirely the loss of Abiola, but the loss of the chance to solidify the road to credible elections;

This is fundamental to the sorry pass we are now with different shades of Iwu, consciences and 3 week elections being the benchmark.

Abiola's election was unanimous; Its nullification explains the deep we find ourselves. Whether he could/would have been a good president remains a patchy guesswork that I wouldn't bet upon.

Meanwhile, how was a good president to be defined in his day ?

Eja · Jun 13, 2009 , 10:50 AM

Dapxin, the loss the country suffered would have been the same had the man being sworn in. What must be kept in mind is that there are two power centres dominating the affairs of Nigeria (and other African/'under-developed' countries): One is indigenous and the other is foreign.

The foreign-based powers had no objection to Abiola being sworn in because they knew he belonged to them. The objection came from the indigenous brokers who saw ominous signs in what Abiola and his partner in Uganda (Museveni) were doing in Central Africa. One of the many fears was that eventually, Abiola would develop a military complement that he alone would control. And of course, the moment he did that, the nature of the relationship between him and the ones who up until then had possessed a sole monopoly over organised technical violence in Nigeria would change.

In the beginning of this post, I said that the loss the country would have suffered would have being the same. What I meant was, there would have being a similar level of disappointment in what the delivered mandate brought forth as there was with what the usurping regime produced.

In fact, the economic climate would have most probably being a lot worse because, unlike in a military regime where access to corrupt enrichment is limited to a relative few, in the civilian government, as we have seen, there are (approx) 360 times many more bottomless stomachs to feed. Keep the low price of oil (our sole source of revenue) as of that time in mind while you consider this.

The choice we had when we stood at that crossroad where one road led to an Abiola regime and the other led to the eventual Abacha regime was one between losing a limb to a wasting disease, and, losing a limb to a sudden trauma (e.g. chopped off with an axe).

The choice was made for us and, we lost the limb to a sudden trauma.

With regards to the last question about "how was a good president to be defined in his day?", well, I would say that the definition of a a good President (or leader) is the same in his day, our present day, and in all days to come: A good leader is one who places the interests of those who he serves above everything else. Now, is there any thing/event from the known history of Abiola that would make one describe him as a person who fit this definition?

Mikky jaga · Jun 13, 2009 , 10:52 AM

Would Abiola Have Been a Good President?

Definitely Yes. At least, he would have been better than both OBJ and UMYA combined.

He is the only elected president in Nigeria that successfully built a business empire from scratch. Many of the others have never handled anything successfully in their entire lives other than having right connections and being in the corridors of power.

The problem with Nigeria is we tend to put people who never knew how to make money in power. They were brought up looking to their parents for money, went to school depending on government for sponsorship, entered government looking for cheap oil money.

Abiola knew how to make money, invest money and manage money. His initials speak volumes about this - MKO - Money, Kudi, Owo. Sorry no ego in it.

In Awo, Nigeria lost the best president it never had. In Abiola, Nigeria lost the best president it ever had (unfortunately without allowing him to perform). Little wonder Nigeria had been ruled by brainless leaders since. That also explains why G20 demoted Nigeria from third world to last world (banana Republic).

RIP MKO. Nigeria and not you is the loser for not having you as President.

Dapxin · Jun 13, 2009 , 10:58 AM

e did that, the nature of the relationship between him and the ones who up until then had possessed a sole monopoly over organised technical violence in Nigeria would change.

that description........

Eja · Jun 13, 2009 , 11:05 AM

Mikky Jaga, Abiola made money from making what?

Please note that I asked "from making what"? not "from doing what", "from knowing who?", "from manipulating what?" or, "from internationally tiff tiffing what?"

And, what has happened to those much vaunted businesses of his today? Have they grown in scale and production? You see, I also ask this because, I am one of those who think that the greatest measure of a leader is to be found in not just what he does while he/she holds the big stick but, in the solidity, durability, and, adaptability that are built into the structures left behind.

So, even if Abiola had being a great President who made money for Nigeria the same way he made for his own businesses, can we say for certain in what direction his successors have being compelled/able to take Nigeria in as a result of the structures he would have left behind?

agensheku · Jun 13, 2009 , 11:34 AM

CAPITAL YES!anyone who can provide enough for his family and still have left to touch so many lives in nija,africa and the diaspora could be a very good president.God knew,and the wise ones said it that A NATION DESERVES THE LEADER IT GETS!so,lets keep groping in the darkness inflicted on us all by the greed of a few.

Albany · Jun 13, 2009 , 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by Mikky jaga

Would Abiola Have Been a Good President?

Definitely Yes. At least, he would have been better than both OBJ and UMYA combined.

He is the only elected president in Nigeria that successfully built a business empire from scratch. Many of the others have never handled anything successfully in their entire lives other than having right connections and being in the corridors of power.

The problem with Nigeria is we tend to put people who never knew how to make money in power. They were brought up looking to their parents for money, went to school depending on government for sponsorship, entered government looking for cheap oil money.

Abiola knew how to make money, invest money and manage money. His initials speak volumes about this - MKO - Money, Kudi, Owo. Sorry no ego in it.

In Awo, Nigeria lost the best president it never had. In Abiola, Nigeria lost the best president it ever had (unfortunately without allowing him to perform). Little wonder Nigeria had been ruled by brainless leaders since. That also explains why G20 demoted Nigeria from third world to last world (banana Republic).

RIP MKO. Nigeria and not you is the loser for not having you as President.

Mikky,

so any president that performs better than OBJ and Yar'Adua is qualified to be called a good president ? Have we sunk that low ?

Again, you want us to believe that since Abiola was successful in business, he would automatically have been a good president. Hello ? In effect, we should all vote for Dangote in 2011, since he is the most successful Nigerian businessman, ni ? Okay, now i understand why Yar'Adua's tenure has been a disaster....because he was a lecturer and not a successful businessman.

You equally seem to forget that though Abiola was swimming in money, he had a dysfunctional family. Do you believe that a man who couldn't manage his immediate family will be able to manage a nation ?

My take is that there is no way of knowing if Abiola would have been a good president, since he was never sworn in. Period.

omaks · Jun 13, 2009 , 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by Eja

Categorical and emphatic NO................

Eja Baba, you do well. I think you have some solid points there in your post, and i think it took courage for you to be able to come out in the open yard with your opinion. Not many people will like to court the rage of the Pro - Abiola camp. However, truth they say must be told no matter the price.

IMHO i find it very hard to agree totally with both sides of the divide though. I recognise MKO's foibles having been somewhat close to his family in the past, but i also recognise the great man's potentials and, adopting a semblance of impartiality i stand firm to say nobody can say categorically which face of Abiola we would have experienced. That experience was snatched away from us in daylight robbery.

What i do know and some people have made mention about it , is that the June 12 was not essentially about Abiola alone, but the collective desire of a country to experience and determine their own democratic future. This was essentially piloted by Abiola, who enjoyed immense political goodwill from all nook and cranny of the country, Nigeria. One which no one before him or up till now has ever enjoyed. That must say volumes about the person of Abiola, irrespective of whatever shortcomings he may have had.

By the same token, no man is an island. Abiola by himself could not have fixed all our problems in Nigeria, but he could have attempted and maybe succeeded in being an agent of positive change. As it stands, he was indeed an agent of Change, because the semblance of democracy we enjoy today was predicated on the struggles that arose during and after the debacle of 'Hope '92'.

omaks · Jun 13, 2009 , 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by Albany

You equally seem to forget that though Abiola was swimming in money, he had a dysfunctional family. Do you believe that a man who couldn't manage his immediate family will be able to manage a nation ?

Albany, you goofed there, where you said Abiola's family was dysfunctional or that he couldn't manage his family.

Let it be known to you that the man succeeded in his complex polygamous marital life, where many fell short in their monogamous ones. Abiola loved women and he never hid it from anyone, his wives and children inclusive. Not one of his wives or children will claim that Abiola was irresponsible to his family duties. At least he was open about his preference for polygamy and lived his life accordingly. There are many of our political/community leaders who by the day are Monogamous , but by night BROWSE through Brotels, and Tertiary Educational campuses in search for young FILLIES. That to me is a sign of DISHONESTY.