The presidency Nigeria deserves
Font size: By Ignatius Wachukwu 24/03/2011 00:00:00

Large democracies invariably have a silent majority, a mass of ordinary citizens more pre-occupied with attaining economic and emotional well-being than with being politically relevant. They may opine freely on what sort of government should lord it over them but they rarely get involved in bringing about such a vista. Their fantasised government is an ideal one that hardly ever becomes reality.

The politically active sub-population on the other hand, is that segment that holds membership of political parties: seekers and occupants of electoral office and those canvassing for or against them. They ultimately, by their successes and failures, are responsible for the extant regime. The objective of their politics is to ensure the dissonance between what they offer and what the silent majority craves does not become untenable to the point of popular revolt. In other words, they give the nation the government it deserves and not necessarily the government it wants.

It was Joseph De Maistre, a staunch royalist in early nineteenth century France who first pointed out that every nation has the government it deserves. He spoke both historically, in terms of the kind of leadership the French people had endured in the past, and prophetically considering the steady rise of Napoleon Bonaparte to power in rudderless post revolutionary France.　 Since then, there has been considerable debate about the origins of revolutionary leadership. Can a failing system still produce the right kind of transformational agents to uplift its fortunes? If it did, then would it still be apt to describe such as a failed system if such positive products could emerge from within it?

From an existentialist standpoint, the ultimate purpose of government is to create the best possible milieu for citizens’ legitimate pursuit of happiness. When a long-suffering silent majority decides that it has had enough of bad leadership, they rarely effect change through regular polls. Eventually, they become so distrustful of the electoral process that they take matters into their hands and march onto the streets. Recent events in Tunisia, Egypt and elsewhere in the Arab world have served as a timely lesson on the ultimate power of the ruled over their rulers. The North African example, when coupled with the rather very impressive nationwide turnout recorded during the just concluded voters registration exercise has given fair warning that anything short of credible elections in April may precipitate widespread social unrest.

The most significant public demonstrations to have held in recent Nigerian history were those organized by the Save Nigeria Group in December 2009 during the heated crisis of a presidential vacuum created by the late President Umaru Yar’Adua’s failure to transmit power to his Vice on departing the country for medical treatment abroad. Convened by social activist and pentecostal Pastor Tunde Bakare and with the support of notable personalities like Nobel Laureate Wole Soyinka and a number of prominent artistes and musicians, several hundred Nigerians joined the celebrities in marching to the National Assembly to press for adherence to the constitutionally stipulated procedure on succession. For a nation the size of Nigeria and with such a critical issue at stake, the turnout may have been less than expected, but nevertheless it indicated the possible reawakening of people power in Nigerian politics. For not even at the height of the general angst surrounding the

heavily-criticised 2007 polls did any significant protesting occur – much to the disappointment of opposition politicians.

In the not too distant past, key members of the present ruling class were principal figures in the opposition movement. They criticised both the character and policies of the government in power, and many ordinary people agreed with them. Today however, they have their chance. Needless to say the citizenry are as disillusioned as ever. It is widely agreed that crisis of leadership has been the bane of Nigeria’s underdevelopment since independence. Despite the relatively high turnover of a dozen different heads of state over a 50-year period, successive Nigerian governments have hardly ever succeeded in kindling a collective sense of national progress amongst the populace. Nothing best illustrates the alarming level of disconnect between the Nigerian political class and public opinion than the enormous, mind-boggling wage bill commanded by the legislative arm of government.

It was a similar scenario of free-for-all squandermania that characterized the last days of the Second Republic, abolished with popular approval by the army under Muhammadu Buhari. For once, the people seemed to have gotten the government they craved! But such a dispensation is inherently unfeasible, and Buhari’s regime was duly overthrown less than two years after by an apparently more pragmatic Ibrahim Babangida. Ever since, Buhari has been portrayed as an overly strict and uncompromising disciplinarian and has struggled to attract more sympathy in a country weary of decades of military dictatorship. Some have even gone as far as suggesting he is an Islamic fundamentalist. But nothing could be further from the truth; and successfully co-opting a fiery Pentecostal pastor in the mould of Tunde Bakare as running mate for April’s presidential elections should conclusively dispel all such notions. Buhari has been the victim of an entrenched regime of

self-aggrandizing political jobbers who see him as simply "bad for business." Passing him off as a fundamentalist is their way of denying him vital support in the Christian South and Middle Belt.

As a soldier, he employed what tools that were immediately available to him i.e. whips and gun barrels to attempt to instil sanity back into the political class. Backed by a democratic mandate and this time utilizing civilian means, Buhari is the best bet to comprehensively reform the Nigerian political system. In concert with Tunde Bakare who has remained at the vanguard of social activism in Nigeria, the option espoused by Buhari’s Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) is a strategic alignment of Northern and Southern reformist forces which represents the most credible challenge yet to PDP’s hegemony in Nigerian politics.

These two politically correct thorough-bred conservatives may actually be Nigeria’s best opportunity to introduce a semblance of ideology into her political firmament. Their ascent to power could spark a revolution of ethos, a revolution of ideals. Furthermore, a dubious victory for the ruling party at the polls will need a motivational activist like Bakare to serve as an arrowhead in mobilising disaffected citizenry onto the streets. Unlike some other politically aspiring preachers whose modus operandi is to proclaim that "God" has asked them to contest for elective office, this Man of God has specifically stated that it was his personal decision and not necessarily a divine mandate. His sincerity will no doubt appeal to many of the silent majority.

The voting pattern at January’s PDP presidential primaries suggests that the so-called core north is yet to be won over by President Jonathan’s good luck euphoria.　 The same ‘core’ north unsurprisingly has been the major voting bloc for Buhari in previous elections. Disaffection with Goodluck Jonathan’s opportunism is likely to push even more of such voters to Buhari’s side and coupled with Pastor Bakare’s radical appeal in the more Christian south could result in an April stalemate and consequently Nigeria’s first ever run-off elections. The competitive excitement of run-off elections will itself be a huge boost, a watershed moment of puberty which will be a positive prognosticator of a thriving democratic culture.• Dr. Wachukwu, a political scientist writes in from Lagos.

Genbuhari3:

Disaffection with Goodluck Jonathan’s opportunism is likely to push even more of such voters to Buhari’s side and coupled with Pastor Bakare’s radical appeal in the more Christian south could result in an April stalemate and consequently Nigeria’s first ever run-off elections. The competitive excitement of run-off elections will itself be a huge boost, a watershed moment of puberty which will be a positive prognosticator of a thriving democratic culture.

I think the part in bold font here highlights some of the key loopholes (among others) in the BB strategy.

1. The choice of VP was a huge mistake. The VP candidate has never been a popular figure anywhere in the country not even among christians.
2. The hope of a run-off is the beginning of failure! (If you want, I can explain further).

^^^ pls. explain 1.

Buhari Bakare 2011:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nx08Zc0DPD8

fried-rice:

^^^ pls. explain 1.

Ok. Point number 1;

Politics places more emphasis on interests and less on personalities. While some people may admire his fiery preaching (like me), there are many others who feel he has attacked their beliefs directly. In other words, they feel threatened by him. Unfortunately, this is politics. It is all about how many people you can get to accept you. The people who will act as "foot soldiers" to mobilize votes on the d-day are those who have something to gain directly or indirectly. By "mobilize votes", I do not mean rigging. I mean compelling people to go out, using their resources and energy to get people to vote, etc.

Among the core muslims, there will also be many others who will automatically repel the idea. The hardcore pro - sharia guys can not be comfortable having a serving pastor as their VP. Not just any pastor, a fiery one! To paint a picture for you, how many christians do you think will support a ticket where the VP is an imam? especially an imam who has made strong religious remarks.

Among the christians, I will leave it to your judgement. How many christians do you actually think accept his ideology? There are many others who completely frown at the idea of a pastor getting involved in politics. So if bringing him in was a strategy to win the hearts of christians, then it was clearly a wrong move.

Note: These points do not represent my personal feelings towards him. I am only making an effort to see into the minds of others who make up the voting population. You can correct me if my theory is wrong.

efisher:

Ok. Point number 1;

Politics places more emphasis on interests and less on personalities. While some people may admire his fiery preaching (like me), there are many others who feel he has attacked their beliefs directly. In other words, they feel threatened by him. Unfortunately, this is politics. It is all about how many people you can get to accept you. The people who will act as "foot soldiers" to mobilize votes on the d-day are those who have something to gain directly or indirectly. By "mobilize votes", I do not mean rigging. I mean compelling people to go out, using their resources and energy to get people to vote, etc.

Among the core muslims, there will also be many others who will automatically repel the idea. The hardcore pro - sharia guys can not be comfortable having a serving pastor as their VP. Not just any pastor, a fiery one! To paint a picture for you, how many christians do you think will support a ticket where the VP is an imam? especially an imam who has made strong religious remarks.

Among the christians, I will leave it to your judgement. How many christians do you actually think accept his ideology? There are many others who completely frown at the idea of a pastor getting involved in politics. So if bringing him in was a strategy to win the hearts of christians, then it was clearly a wrong move.

Note: These points do not represent my personal feelings towards him. I am only making an effort to see into the minds of others who make up the voting population. You can correct me if my theory is wrong.

My brother, these are your own biased thoughts towards him, (ofcourse as a GEJ supporter who would do anything to discredit the opposition, and turn a blind eye to the mortal sins of GEj and the PDP which is as clear as the daylight sun). the massive open minded, unbiased majority would not share your theory.

^ I like that: OPEN MINDED. That is the key word. How many Nigerians are open minded? I only mirrored what I think is the mindset of those who make up the voting population. Point at the issues I raised and tell me if those factors do not exist.

Once again, I am not a PDP supporter. I am a realist.