By Usman Sarki
“General historical circumstances are stronger than the strongest individuals”, Georgi Plekhanov
The Gotha (Unity) Congress met in Germany from May 22 to 27, 1875, to fashion out a programme of action for the Socialist Workers’ Party of Germany. Because the “Programme” that was placed on the Congress’s agenda at Gotha detracted from the dialectical materialist propositions expounded by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels in their book, the “Communist Manifesto” in both its broad and specific terms, it was subjected to scathing criticism by Marx, as befitting its fate and nature. Today, likewise, those of us with the inclination to put things right and in their correct historical and ideological perspectives, would need to make some efforts to examine the state of the nation and offer some objective propositions regarding the way Nigeria should go or should be led.
Beyond that, we should submit the ideas and tendencies being proposed about remedying the Nigerian condition to serious criticisms of our own, in order to remove the cobwebs that are being deliberately woven in our minds by activists and propagandists. It is with this in mind that this series of articles on the current developments in the country are issued, also with the hope that they will serve to ground discussions on concrete and objective grounds rather than on fanciful ideas concocted to beguile and mislead unsuspecting Nigerians into a cul-de-sac of misery and perpetual disappointment. Much ado about nothing as they say, is happening around the nebulous notion of the national question especially on the issues of “restructuring” Nigeria.
This term has been bandied about so much so that it seems to have lost both its luster and currency. No longer content with advancing it as a proposition to be looked at intelligently by the Nigerian people, it has now been turned into an agitation by which means the proponents of the idea hope to stampede the country into acquiescence. The Nigerian condition today is that of flux and uncertainty, especially with regard to the fate of the country as a unified political entity with hopes and prospects for a brighter future together. Fissiparous forces are taking ground and mushrooming in diverse shapes and reflections, to bring about interruptions in the normal order of things and the smooth governing of the country.
No opportunity is allowed to pass without being exploited fully to dismay and discomfiture the government of the day, and the rest of law abiding citizens of the country. Like the advocates of the Gotha Programme, superficial remedies are proposed towards resolving the contradictions in the governance and administration of Nigeria especially by the “restructuralists” who see little or nothing good in the system we are operating today. Their bete noire which is the 1999 Constitution, has been subjected to so much scathing criticism and vilification to the point that it is seen as a trap or an obstacle imposed upon the country by an alien occupying power.
They see it as the sole obstacle to a better Nigeria and the cause of all the country’s woes. They have never taken the pains as far as I can recall, to delve into the history of constitution making in the country, and inform us about how the 1999 document came into being. All that we get from them is that it was a creation of the “military” that was “dictated” and “imposed” on the country. They accuse the constitution of lacking “legitimacy” and having no “pedigree”, therefore its acceptance is at best suspect or reprehensible at worst.
Not content with such nebulous posturing, they proceeded to question the legitimacy of Nigeria itself, blaming the British as having forcefully created the country without the “consent” of the various constituent parts. They have labeled Nigeria as an “artificial contraption” that should not have been created in the first place. The fallacy of this reasoning is very clear. All the countries in the world existing in their present forms and shapes, or in previous configurations, are without exception, “artificial contraptions”. There was no single country that was not created or fashioned out from the desire of people to come together, or were brought into being by force or by circumstances beyond the peoples’ control.
The historicity of state formation and nation-building seems to have been lost on the “restructuralists” when it comes to Nigeria! Because they did not come about spontaneously or without a design, and the fact that they arose out of deliberate processes of formation, consolidation and entrenchment, all countries and states are by their very nature “artificial contraptions” and Nigeria should not be made the sole exception! It was inevitable that Nigeria would be formed the way it was and by the forces that created it because of unavoidable historical and economic factors that were shaping and reshaping the entire world at the time.
Ignoring this fact or denying its centrality to the creation of Nigeria would be akin to burying our heads in the sand like the proverbial ostrich. Nigeria’s creation was part of the march of European imperialism whose economic motive force was to bring territories under the control of finance and industrial capital for exploitation and establishment of market monopolies for the metropolitan countries. Karl Marx clearly pointed this out in the “Critique of the Gotha Programme”, when he wrote, “But the “framework of the present-day national state”, for instance, the German Empire, is itself, in its turn, economically “within the framework” of the world market, politically “within the framework” of the system of states”. That simple explanation seems to have escaped the opponents of this country who are calling for its dissolution on account of its “illegitimacy”!
“Every step of real movement is more important than a dozen programmes”, Karl Marx
Objectivity demands that we should look at the Nigerian condition from the “people’s” perspectives and not from the narrow perspective of the elite class of the country. While the former’s standpoints are those of innocent cognition of the realities surrounding them and the desire to seek remedies where relevant, the perspectives of the latter are usually predatory, transactional and often driven by greed either for power or wealth, or both. As such, we would be doing ourselves great disservice if we were to ignore what the people want, and concentrate on what the elite classes “need” in order to continue their divisive and predatory antics at keeping Nigerians confused, bewildered and divided.
The Gotha Centre @ the University of Erfurt
Because of the ascendancy of enclave politics centered around “ethnic nationality” interests that have caused sharp divisions among Nigerians at a time when other countries are consolidating their national identities and developing their economies and productive forces, we are forced to contend with incessant agitations around superficial issues that demonstrate the shallow conceptions and understanding of the history of this country. These tendencies that are driven by elite posturing and class antagonisms between and among members of the ruling political and economic groups, are creating situations whereby alternatives are being desperately sought in place of a united and progressive Nigeria.
The alternatives of course are being sought in separation and breakup of Nigeria. That too of course, would not resolve the contradictions that are inherent in a neocolonial state whose fundamental attributes and social and economic organisations are based on exploitation of resources and distribution of accruing royalties. The fact that no part of Nigeria today can on its own stand up to international finance and industrial capital and develop its economy and productive forces independently, must allow us to reason that breaking up Nigeria into any number of parts will only multiply the primary evil and not resolve any difficulties in terms of reorganisation of the state or correcting of deficiencies and improvisations in the system of ordering the “countries” that would emerge from the broken pieces of the erstwhile Nigeria.
This fundamental consideration is what the opponents of a united Nigeria seem to overlook. Imperialism and its highest manifestation today, monopoly capital, want and need larger spaces to exploit, and more aggregated economies to control. By advocating to break Nigeria into smaller entities, the contrary expectations of international capital will be played out, and little interest will be shown by it. It is better and easier to deal with one authority or government representative of the whole territory than with several quasi-regimes representing a multiplicity of splinter enclaves.
The “Gotha Programme” deviated from the Marxist position with regard to matters like wages, labour, the organisation of the workers’ party, approaches to state structures, education, the conception of the state and so forth. These are both ideological and practical issues that guide the formation of societies in the capitalist dispensation while preparing for the social and political alterations that will usher in a socialist dispensation. In the same vein, here in Nigeria, instead of focusing on the elements that should unite the broad masses of the people around issues of common interests and concerns such as equitable distribution of the national wealth and access to free and qualitative education and healthcare for all citizens, they are being assiduously wooed away and herded towards dangerous territories of ethnic confrontation and regional exclusivism.
This should be opposed by every strand of ideological force that the people could muster and combatted with all the energy of the patriotic and progressive forces in Nigeria. Who actually wants to see Nigeria restructured? Is it the peasants? Is it the workers? Is it the middle class professionals? Is it the national bourgeoisie? What ideological impulses are driving this incessant calls for restructuring Nigeria? Is it nationalist ideology or the ideology of the free market capitalism? In fact, is it the ideology of international capitalism that wants to see Nigerian restructured? What problems or contradictions is restructuring the country aiming to ameliorate or to resolve? In whose interest is restructuring the country to be carried out? Which class would carry out this restructuring and along what ideological lines should this be done?
These are all issues that we shall have to take in sequence in subsequent articles in order to lay before the Nigerian public what the elements of discontent around the current organisation of the Nigerian state and governance systems entail, that would warrant such a vociferous call for their “restructuring” at all cost. In any case and under any circumstances, any reordering of the system of government and state structures in Nigeria must be in conformity with the wishes and aspirations of the vast majority of Nigerians from all parts of the country. They must also be carried out or brought about with the full participation of the most patriotic and advanced elements of the national population which are the workers and their associates in the rural population and the urban middle classes and professional groups.
The author is a former Deputy Permanent Rep of Nigeria (Geneva)
