Revolution or uprising?
By
One of Nigeria’s most respected former leaders, a man whose "radical" credentials are considered to be impeccable, recently told our sister Sunday paper that he expects a revolution to unfold in Nigeria. If is not a surprising prediction, coming from this gentleman, because his most consistent political views have been his predictions of dire distress for the nation if he is not included in the scheme of things. However his opinions should not be taken lightly, because he clearly thinks long and hard over these issues. It is also clear that he has an agenda of governance mapped out in his brain, even if it has failed to materialise since he last served, several years ago. In fact this gentleman became maybe the first genuine martyr of the radical cause in the political system of the Second Republic when he was impeached as governor of Kaduna State. Since then he has been much more effective as a political prophet than as an active operator in the game.
One of the most important reasons why this gentleman’s apprehension over the coming revolution must be taken seriously is the fact that he is from the North. We are speaking of the former Governor of Kaduna State, Alhaji Balarabe Musa, and it is not what he foresees but why he foresees s it that should exercise our interest. Alhaji Balarabe believes firmly that the dichotomy of privilege and opportunity which has developed between the well to do and the underprivileged in Nigerian society will generate such bitterness as time goes on that there will eventually be an outburst from the underprivileged. He may very well be right, but what is not very clear is whether what he is foreseeing is an empirical revolution, or an irrational uprising. It should also be noted that his main rationale for predicting a revolution was based on what he perceives as the failure of the Northern leadership to raise the standard of living of the Northern peasantry. His utterances in that wise were far more chauvinistic than nationalistic.
Another reason why we find his prediction unclear on whether we are to expect a "revolution" or "uprising" is the fact that the leadership of the radical movement, which should provide the underpinning for any ethical revolution in the country, seems to be so impotent now. Alhaji Balarabe’s own political provenance is a case in point. As far as we know he has not proven to be either capable of sustaining a popular organisation which could rival the established party structures of the present dispensation, nor can we remember him actually providing a serious rallying point to resist the excesses of military dictatorship in the past. He has been consistent, and highly vocal, in his criticism, but noticeably reticent, in his activism. In fact like so many of his radical colleagues, in all parts of Nigeria, he appears to have succumbed to the traditional form of Nigerian radicalism, which tends to be rhetorical, rather than operational.
Even this, admittedly cynical, view of the provenance and the influence, which his political importance represents in present day Nigerian democracy, does not demean Alhaji Balarabe’s vision of the future. What is obvious is the fact that he cannot bring himself to be either complacent or optimistic about the nature of the society that is being forged out of the new order. He does not in fact believe that there is a new order in place, but is convinced that the Nigerian political experience is made up of successive waves of disorderly and corrupt power plays, and the enthronement of class privilege in place of social development from independence to date. In fact his latest prediction was made in response to a request that he comment on the state of the nation forty-one years after achieving independence. Although he did not put it in those words what he seemed to be saying was that Independence had actually ushered in a period of oppression rather than liberation for the majority of Nigerians. His vision of a coming revolution was therefore put forward as a necessity for the eventual creation of a truly free nation. This is what I wish to question here.
Recent experiences have made it clear that Nigerian nationhood is undergoing fragmentation, even though the rhetoric of both conservative and the liberal elements in the political arena profess to be seeking to find unity. The ascendancy of regional zoning as a conventional form of distribution of power within parties, and even within government institutions, has served to consolidate rather than to reverse this fragmentation. In addition to this, as economic distress and social dissent merge to form the underpinning of political responses in the society at large the impulse to fragmentation has become increasingly relevant to Nigerian existence. Religion and tribe have become increasingly visible as indices of differentiation rather than as symbols of national unity. Alhaji Balarabe is too well read in the historical consequences of social reactions not to be aware that, in these circumstances, any revolutionary outburst is likely to degenerate into an irrational explosion of violence. Unless he is suggesting that there are leaders who can shape and direct this process into meaningful nationalistic dissent, then his vision of a Northern peasant’s backlash must, of necessity create an uprising that will divide rather than unite the nation. The question then is where are these leaders and what role have they been playing in the ongoing democratic forum.
There is no sense of purpose in the development of disenchantment on the part of the underclass if this disenchantment is only being encouraged in order to destroy the material symbols of the middle class existence which Nigeria’s elite have installed. There can be no doubt that there is a lot yet to be done in the area of providing services such as proper educational opportunities, effective health delivery, and equitable opportunities for the development of an income based on production in the agricultural and industrial sectors in Nigeria. however the deficient nature of these sectors of social growths in our nation cannot be reversed by outright destruction. Nigeria needs a measure of tolerance and harmonious consolidation of those elitist gains to be able to spread them through distributive fairness to a larger number of beneficiaries. A revolution in the mental processes of the elite class can bring this about in concert with the true expressions of dissent and analysis which effective revolutionary leaders can provide. On the other hand, if what we are to expect is an uprising based on envy and anger, which is what Alhaji Balarabe appears to be foreseeing, then that "revolution" will lead this nation not to progress but to perdition.
November 2001