A Country without Nationhood

If a nation is a large aggregate of people united by common descent, culture, or language inhabiting a particular state or territory, it is hard or difficult to describe Nigeria as one. While Nigerians involuntarily inhabit a common land space christened Nigeria, they belong to hundreds of ethnic nationalities each with her own distinct, descent, language and culture.

Britain was the colonial power which forcefully merged various territories /kingdoms together and named it Nigeria in 1914. The either never wanted to make a nation out of Nigeria, or they purposely designed the country to fail, never to evolve into a nation.

This, we have a country, not a nation and a country without nationhood. The centrifugal factor which ought to have been well managed in order to develop some centripetal forces which could help move the country toward nationhood were and still being mishandled misused and misapplied.

Nigeria as a multi-ethnic, multi-lingual and multi-cultural country, speaking or having a lingua-franca alien to her and whose people are largely illiterate in their own native tongue has become a candidate of a failed state. This is partly because the country has never been fortunate to be a nation state –a sovereign state of which most of the citizen or subject are united also by factor which define a nation, such as language or common descent. Three issues are the underlying cause of this state of affairs; ethnic nationality, religious faith and linguistic diversities.

Since the military forced themselves into the political leadership of the country in 1966,the true federal system and structure of government area subverted and changed to the unitary and executive system and structure . So that instead of the constituents units enjoying self rule through regional autonomy in tandem with their peculiarities, the regions or federating units are emasculated and tied to the apron-string of an artificial, over bloated and all powerful center.

It thus emerged that which over group or individual controls the center foisted their own religious faith and ethnic nationality on the country in a nepotistic manner which often antagonize and instigate other nationalities in opposition, resentment or rebellion. With the central system of winners- take-all, it is not surprising that leaders often misuse their power of hire and fire, of reward and punishment, and of sharing the common wealth in a skewed manner to the discontentment of the majority. Unfortunately, this majority is only in the number and not in nationhood and so they are easily and always divided and could not take a united action to redeem their fate and or destiny

As Nigeria trudges on, her self-deceit is made manifest by the collapse or failure of her public institutions. A unitary state masquerading as a federal republic, the country has been hijacked by a tribal cabal through a system of patronage and clientelism oiled by religious hypocrisy. Both the patron and their clients are now known as mainstreamers running neocolonial structure.

Regardless of whoever runs the system and structure, whether the patron or his client, the country remains a non-starter in most indices of growth and development. Which is why development goals are often attained in the breach, although the lifestyle of the mainstreamers are a conspicuous picture of concupiscence and avarice. The poor majority, disparate and destitute of unity and commonality as ever, remain the butt of cruel jokes of the leaders: one of which is the demand that they be patriotic and remain burden bearers of a life –long sacrifice! It is yet to be seen a people who are continually fleeced by their leaders and will remain as patriotic or as docile as Nigerians!

Again, the reason or factor of their docility lies in their diversity and the lack of the ingredients of common nationhood or nationality. When and where the docility is the norm, it would appear that cowardice reigns supreme. Where everyone is helpless, no one is useful and every effort made by anyone ends in futility.

Meanwhile, the mainstreamers are waxing stronger, what with the familiar tool of divide- and – rule strategy. So that while ethnic, religious and linguistic differences are getting blurred between and among mainstreamers, these same factors are used to widen the gap between the poor majority. The two groups are sustained differently: one by their common thievery of public funds and the other by their common poverty. In other words, the shared poverty of the disparate majority sustains the devilry of the thieving minority mainstreamers. But for how long will this situation last?