How fascism breeds separatism (part 2)
by Chin Ce
Just as ‘One Nigeria’ assumed a mechanical sing-song among the beneficiaries of Nigeria’s unitarian structures, perennially sustained by the complicity of component units of its ethnic amalgamation, so did the members of Nigeria’s 8th legislative assembly in their most heinous 2017 action reject the restructuring of the pseudo democratic fascist state.
Their reason was not far fetched.
It was their knowledge that there was still enough oil from the Niger delta to sustain their hordes feeding fat on a bulbous corrupted form of federation.
In fact the discovery of oil, the continued exploitation of the oil rich delta, and wanton desecration of the environment of oil producing regions, have actually been powered and sustained by collective cynicism toward the Nigerian project from the moment of its early contraption before 1914.
We start with the British masters who bequeathed the northern oligarchical players the politics of divide and conquer.
They had sought willing allies in their bid to rule by proxy. Never forgiving the players from eastern and western regions who had dared to hound them from their colonial empire by asking for early independence, it was convenient to play out the educated and intractable leaders of those regions from the power game, and ensure that dominant control remained firmly with malleable northerners, whose feudal class system had been advantageous to their indirect rule in the heydays of the Empire.
This cynical colonial attitude towards the overall good of its own creation had provided the backdrop for the sickening pandemic of civil wars and ethnic violence that immediately pervaded every single African nation that had gained independence from their erstwhile colonial masters be they French English, Portuguese or Belgian. The West’s neo-colonialist designs on Africa was quite irreparable in the damage it had intended for a perpetually balkanised and disunited continent.
Unfortunately what the emerging new nations of Africa failed to do was break from the grasp of the monolithic empires and treat their manipulative past masters with deserved distrust. Rather, lured by the trappings of a commonwealth, succeeding Nigerian or English (and French) speaking African governments retained the same exploitative structures that had seen the rape of their continent for several generations.
Why is this background necessary for our examination of Nigeria’s failures with the attendant problem of Biafran separatist agitation that refused to end since fifty years of its rearing in the hearts and minds of citizens from the eastern region?
Nigeria’s failure is symptomatic of the continental syndrome that saw every tribal conclave of Africa immersed in the barbarism of violent struggles for domination over some perceived others. Not inclusiveness but separatism and otherness have been the hallmarks of Africa’s bloody history since its contact with Western nations.
Historically, few West Africa’s leaders save Nkrumah of Ghana and Macaulay-Azikiwe of Nigeria, perhaps, had embodied the integrative unity consciousness that was so important for the grooming of Africa’s liberating potentiality against Western slavery. For Nigeria’s leadership, the emergence of inordinate frauds, looters, tribalists and barbarians at best became the order of the day after the initial efforts of the liberationists.
The classic exemplars of this medieval rulership have ranged from the Gowon and Murtala tragedies through the Buhari, Babangida, and Abacha murderous gulags. Ironically these inglorious regimes had severally masqueraded as patriotic historical necessities.
The regime of Ibrahim Babangida will never be forgiven by Africans of the hemisphere for reversing a millennial declaration of cross-ethnic, cross-religious unification among Nigerian citizens in the June 12 1993 elections.
It was northern impunity and sheer political arrogance that ensured the annulment of the only free and fair election which this country has ever had towards progressive reformation. That action brought into government a stark illiterate product of the northern army in the person of Abacha, a general who could not even write a simple condolence message in coherent English, as officer and head of Nigeria’s army 1987 at the time of Obafemi Awolowo’s death.
Horrendous ethnic cleansing and elevation of northern mediocrity to top echelons began as soon as these entities climbed to power. It was their serial failures, given their further polarising of the country along the ethnic chauvinist fascism, that saw the rise in the agitation for self determination by restive youths of the Niger delta.
The youths had reasoned, rightly or wrongly, that the degradation of their lands and annihilation of the future of unborn generations was clearly fait accompli with draconian reptilians heading the ship of state.
Even as democratic president in 2017, it is predictable that Buhari’s failure to govern Nigeria fairly and justly, rather preferring the pull of nepotism and authoritarian politics, is further worsening the heated polity.
Playing the ostrich game with restructuring of the federation, it was Buhari and his paranoid breed of northern irredentists at DSS that created a hero out of a hitherto unemployed youth from Abia state who, with the help of junk media, effectively challenged the festering decay with an even sicker brand of posturing and bigotry.
The promise of anarchy, resultant with the neurosis that convulsed the hearts and minds of millions of youths at Massob and IPOB, is the direct creation of the fascism of the Nigerian state. Here, among the Uwazurike-Kanu of Massob-IPOB, include their second cousins in a Rochas of Imo, an El Rufai of Kaduna, and a lying minister called Lai Mohammed. Their revolting antecedents confirm fears that such dregs of fascism can never provide any intelligent, alternative good from their various caves of operation.
Adding the hosts of Nigerian senators and assemblymen, ministers and heads of administration, Nigerians seem doomed to walk the common plank they share in their lack of purpose and direction both as Africans and as humans.
Every Nigerian leadership product is still cut from the same unitarianism that ensured the inured dreams of promising generations who could have so reshaped the fortunes of this country as to evolve a nation every citizen would be proud to play a useful part.
Therefore the structure of Nigeria as conceived by the British and preserved by local cabals perennially empowering intellectual mediocrities will never work toward national cohesion. Only a subordination of the predatory, exploitative design of the Nigerian constitution to an overarching universal need to free the regional spirit, through a selfless collective motivation to restructure the Nigerian edifice, allowing for the independence of constituent parts to exercise their inalienable rights to determine their destinies, can we have the renaissance that Africa sorely requires from this delectable experiment in economic exploitation called Nigeria.