TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE…………………………………………………….ii
CERTIFICATION…………………………………………iii
DEDICATION………………………………………………..iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT……………………………………v
TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………....ix
GENERAL
INTRODUCTION………………………………..………xi
Statement of the
Problem………………………..xv
Purpose
of the Study……………………………………………….….xvi
Scope of the Study…………………………….….xvi
Division of Work………………………………..….xvii
Brief Biography of Chukwuemeka Odumegwu
Ojukwu …….. xviii
CHAPTER ONE
THE BACKGROUND TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF
DETRIBALISM
1.1 Tribalism and Nigerian Political Development ..1
1.2 The Meaning of Tribalism………..…..7
1.3 Dangers of Tribalism…………………..11
1.3.1 Tribalism Leads to
Disunity…………………...12
1.3.2 Tribalism Enthrones
Mediocrity……………………13
1.3.3 Tribalism Creates Social
Injustice ……………………15
1.3.4 Tribalism Retards Individual
National Development 16
1.3.5 Tribalism Promotes Cultural
Underdevelopment . 17
1.3.6 Tribalism Leads to
Disintegration ………………..18
1.4 The Positive Aspect of
Tribalism ………………..…18
CHAPTER TWO
THE PHILOSOPHY OF DETRIBALISM
2.1 Tribalism: The Precursor to the
Philosophy of Detribalism ….… 22
2.2 Detribalism in Ojukwu’s Thought………….....………...23
2.3 The Practical Elements in Ojukwu’s
Detribalism …33
2.3.1 Detribalization of Award of Contract ………33
2.3.2 Broadening The Lines of Political
Parties ……….34
2.3.3 Exercise of Political Rights …………………..35
2.3.4 De-emphasizing Ethnic Origin………………….37
2.3.5 Abolishing Ethnic Ghettos ………………………..39
CHAPTER THREE
SOME MERITS OF DETRIBALISM
3.1 Detribalism Ensures National Unity ….………….…41
3.2 Detribalism Ensures Equal Political
Participation …….43
3.3 Detribalism Ensures Even and Rapid
Development .…….46
3.4 Detribalism decreases insecurities and
ensures political Stability ...48
CHAPTER FOUR
EVALUATIONS AND CONCLUSION
4.0 Evaluation .…………………….………50
4.1 Conclusion …………………...…….…..57
BIBLIOGRAPHY …………………………….…..60
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
The British
colonial masters made the first attempt to build a nation now referred to as
Nigeria in 1906. This they did by the amalgamation of the colony and
protectorates of Lagos and Southern Nigeria. This was followed by the subsequent amalgamation of the
Northern and Southern Nigeria. The marriage between the Northern and Southern
protectorates signified the birth of the nation, Nigeria. Ever since this bold
attempt was made, it has been struggles. The struggle to keep the colonial
masters at their proper place on one hand, and the struggle to convince the
apparently incompatible nations that make up Nigeria, of the need to forge
ahead as one united people on the other.
For a nation brought into being from
the political, but more importantly, the economic convenience, of the British
imperialist, there is no doubt that the word “unity” will mean a lot. Beneath
the real desires of many Nigerians is this unity. There were and still are many
struggles by Nigerians to ensure this all-important asset. We have had various
constitutional conferences namely: Richards’s constitution of 1944, McPherson
constitution of 1951, which introduced federal constitution that never achieved
its objectives, the 1954 London and Lagos conferences. Equally different
systems of government were introduced one after another all in the search for
unity, which constantly and conspicuously eludes us. This is to point out how
dear the word unity is to Nigerians. It will not be an overstatement to say
that every Nigerian desires this unity. Yet many engage in activities that are
rather inimical to the desired unity.
Having got their independence, many
Nigerians saw it as the sure foundation for the development of Nigeria. Instead
of serving as a great stepping-stone, the months after independence served as
the right time for many pseudo-politicians to show their true colours. It was a
period of revelation with regard to the real interest and orientation of many
of the so-called father founders. It was a time when the interest of one’s
region, tribe and (though not all that serious) party, must override that of
the nation, which some others have lost their lives to build. Bearing this in
mind, Ojukwu said, “the struggle for independence gave the Nigerian peoples a
togetherness but not unity. It gave Nigeria confidence but not strength”. There seemed to be no room for the
most desired gift, which is unity. B. Gbulie captures it all when he said;
“right from the country’s attainment of independence in October 1960, many a
tribalist parading as a politician had been busy farming the cinders of
tribalism into frantic life”. The politicians who appeared to
have believed firmly in national unity and had the courage to preach it to
fellow Nigerians had inadvertently ended up practicing the only brand of unity
that could favour the people of their own tribes, to the exclusion of others.
This no doubt made Gbulie believe that “some Nigerians purely by accident of
birth, or tribe of origin, had clearly become more Nigerian than others.”
This deadly separatist tendency
didn’t end up only in the civil society; it was also introduced covertly or
overtly into the army, an act that has sown the seed of eternal discord. As all
these were taking place, some even believed that Nigeria never was.
These
attitudes and our politicians’ predilection for the banal greatly provided the
fertile land for the speedy growth and maturity of tribalism, and under
tribalism, there is rancour, acrimony, disaffection, inequality, corruption and
so on. One thing they say begets another. Thus tribalism and its attendant
destructive effects gave the military the patriotic initiative to strike. As J. O. Ojiako rightly observed,
Nigeria’s special problems and complex
political forces had successfully overwhelmed our leader’s ability to
negotiate, made nonsense of our parliamentary system of government and plunged
the country into a civil war fought with bitterness and vengeance.
As we go into the analysis of Ojukwu’s thoughts, we shall
see his passion for unity. Nearly every page of his book has one thing or the
other to say about unity. He believes we can unite, but we cannot do that with
our tribe-oriented postures. Therefore, his thoughts are all about reducing the
impact of our tribal affiliations in order to be truly united. And this for him
is achievable through detribalism.
i. Statement of the
Problem
As a
country, Nigeria is troubled by a lot of problems. But the biggest problem is
that of unity. There is a kind of ‘to your tents oh Israel’, because everybody
wants to protect his tribe of origin to the detriment of the whole nation. This
being the case, Nigeria becomes a foreign land to Nigerians while their tribes
of origin become their real homes. Several attempts have been made through
conferences to solve this problem, but many of them failed. What then is the
cause of this disunity? Certainly, it is not the outcome of our divergence and
that is why Ojukwu maintained that: “the problem here, in Nigeria, cannot be
rooted in our divergence. It is our will to unite that is at fault.”
ii. Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is that
same purpose that pushed Azikiwe, Macaulay, Ojukwu, and other nationalists to
fight for one Nigeria. It is an attempt towards finding the best option for
Nigeria, where tribalism will give way for detribalism. That is to say, the
effort aimed at encouraging Nigerians to diffuse their ethnicity and work for
the unity of the whole country for it is only in such a condition that Nigeria
will make progress. It is a way of creating still some kind of awareness
concerning the dangers of tribalism and its numerous brothers as nepotism,
favouritism on one hand, and exposing the benefits accruing from unity-a
situation where the above mentioned ills are non-existent, when all Nigerians
will say like Ojukwu “Nigeria is my home and it is only in Nigeria that my
destiny truly unfolds.”
iii. Scope of the Study
The scope of this study still remains
the Nigeria political environment, which is fraught with all forms of
tribalism. In doing this, the principles or philosophy of Ojukwu, which has
been described as the philosophy of detribalism, will be the main focal point.
It is mainly concerned with making Nigeria a home where every body will feel at
home. This philosophy cannot claim to hold all the ideas needed to make Nigeria
better; it is only an attempt and a contribution, perhaps one out of many
already made by many others. Ojukwu was aware of this when he said, “I have no
pretension to a monopoly of political wisdom”.
iv. Division of Work
This work is divided into four
chapters. The first chapter looks at the background to the philosophy of
detribalism. It examines tribalism exposing its inherent dangers. Chapter two centers properly on the
philosophy of detribalism as Ojukwu conceptualizes it. In chapter three, we
shall look at some merits of the philosophy of detribalism, while chapter four
takes care of the evaluation and conclusion. The method to be used in this work
is purely hermeneutical, analytical, and explanatory.
v. Brief Biography of
Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu
Dim Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu was
born on the 4th day of November 1933, at Zungeru in Northern Nigeria, to Sir
Louis Odumegwu Ojukwu of Nnewi in the present day Anambra state.
He had his
early education in Roman Catholic School, Anglican Grammar School, and Kings
College all in Lagos. In 1949, at the age of 13, he gained admission into Epsom
College, a reputable British public school, where, apart from his academic
attainments, he won medals in Rugby and athletics. At the age of 18, in 1952,
he went to Lincoln College, Oxford, where he graduated in 1955 with bachelor’s
degree and M. A. degree in modern History.
He came back to Nigeria in 1956, and
joined the civil service in Eastern Nigeria as an administrative officer at
Udi, in the present day Enugu state. He joined the Nigerian Army in 1957 as the
first indigenous University graduate. In the same year, he entered Eaton hall
officer Cadet school in Chester, England, where he was commissioned with the
rank of second Lieutenant. Later, he attended officers’ courses at Hythe and
Warminster, returned to Nigeria in December 1958, and was instantly appointed
company commander of fifth battalion of the Nigerian Army.
While in the Army, he had to his
credit, an impressive variety of activities and responsibilities, such as the
Cameroun Campaign in 1959, against armed uprisings in the Bamaliki area of the
French Cameroon. His task in that assignment was to guard that sector of the
Nigerian border. As a full lieutenant, he was also a lecturer in tactics and
military law at the officers Training School of the Royal West African Frontier
Force in Teshie, Ghana; Deputy Assistant Adjutant and Quartermaster to the
First Nigerian Brigade in 1961; U. N. Operations in Luluabourg. In May 1962, he
attended the joint services staff college in Latimer, England. In December 1962,
he was promoted to lieutenant Colonel and was appointed Quartermaster General
of the Nigerian Army, the first Nigerian to hold the post. At the end of the
second year at the post, he was transferred to Kano where he was in charge of
the fifth Battalion of the Nigerian Army.
On January 19, 1966, he was appointed the
Military Governor of Eastern Nigeria following the January 15, 1966, military
putsch. He later became the Head of State of Biafra, as well as the
commander-in-chief of its Armed Forces. By a unanimous resolution of the
Biafran Consultative Assembly, he was promoted General in May 1969. As the Head
of State of Biafra, he manifested high leadership qualities, which enabled him
and the Biafrans pass the difficult days of the war. Under his leadership, the
latent resourcefulness and ingenuity of the Black African was brought to bear,
thus making false the claims of the Whites that Africans lack ingenuity. During
those difficult days, Biafran engineers were able to construct a functioning
airport, effective weapons, and petroleum refineries. It is on record that it
was the fear of the catalytic effect a technologically advanced black Biafra
will have on the global power equation that motivated the erstwhile colonial
master, Britain, the USSR, and the entire Arab world to take an active part in
the war against Ojukwu’s Biafra.
As a result of his ardent belief in
peace through dialogue, he handed over power to his second in command, Chief of
General Staff, major General Philip Effiong of the blessed memory, and left for
Cote D’ Ivoire on the 9th of January 1970 at the invitation of President Felix
Houphet Boigny. It was during his stay in that country that Biafra collapsed.
After thirteen years stay in Cote D’ Ivoire, Ojukwu returned to Nigeria in 1982
and was accorded a hero’s welcome. His people of Nnewi gave him the now famous
title of ‘Ikemba’ of Nnewi. In actual fact his return has not been a return to
rest for since then, he has involved himself completely on any issue that
affects the well-being of the people of Nigeria. For instance, he used the
occasion of the launching of his scholarly book, Because I Am Involved,
to demand for the immediate release of chief Gani Fawehinmi and the other human
rights activits that were then being detained without trial.
Without
being economical with the truth, Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu means different
things to different peoples: a challenge to the government, the delight of the
men of pen profession, an orator to political scientists, a Hero to the
victimized, a detribalist for those who believe in Nigeria, a true leader for
the Igbos and for me a political philosopher of no mean magnitude. Though born
wealthy, he is an advocate of the Welfare state, a confirmed anti imperialism,
and a firm believer in the destiny of the black man. He is at present married
to Barrister Bianca Ojukwu (nee Onoh) and has children.
CHAPTER ONE
THE
BACKGROUND TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF DETRIBALISM
1.1
Tribalism And Nigerian Political Development
Ever since
the marriage between the Northern and Southern Nigeria became a reality,
Nigerians have made several attempts to preserve this marriage; but constantly,
it has nearly broken up. No doubt Ojukwu said that;
Since Nigerians took
their own destiny into their own hands, every national intercourse has borne
the sterile aspect of a coitus
interruptus-a primitive method but very effective in preventing the birth
of a new nation.
For a strong
political, economic, and infrastructural development, the various ‘nations’
that make up Nigeria should be united to achieve these. Several efforts have
been made, albeit some are pseudo-efforts, to see that Nigeria is united.
However, tribalism has constantly threatened the road to Nigerian unity.
At
independence, and subsequent first republic, Nigerians had expected that the
political actors then would have used that period as a time for laying a solid
foundation for a united Nigeria. This never was; rather the so-called father
founders considered it paramount to play tribal politics that stunted the
growth of the nation. Nigeria is basically below the waters today because
wonderful opportunities that would have fostered national development were
dashed at the early days of her life as an independent nation.
A good number
of politicians in these early days of this nation did not consider Nigeria a
reality, let alone, work for her unity. This was evident in their utterances
then. Some of them are Obafemi Awolowo, Ahmadu Bello, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa,
Yakubu Gowon, to mention a few. Commenting on these differences, Gowon said,
Suffice it to say
that putting all consideration to test, political, economic, as well as social,
the base for unity is not there.
On his own
part, Ahmadu Bello, the Sarduana of Sokoto and a tribalist par excellence said,
Nigeria is so large and the
people so varied that no person with any real intellectual integrity would be
so foolish as to pretend that he speaks for the county as a whole.
Still
skeptical about this word unity, Alhaji Tafawa Balewa, the first prime minister
said “ since the amalgamation of the southern and northern provinces in 1914,
Nigeria has existed as one country on paper”
One cannot
forget so easily the ignoble statement of Awolowo that “Nigeria is a mere
geographical expression”. These are
not the only ones; they have a lot of disciples, however, their positions made
them outstanding. In fact, they made these statements when they have the
opportunity to retreat into tribe in order to check their more successful
rivals from other parts of the country.
Tribalism
retards development especially political development, and since other
developments hinge on that, all other aspects of development will also be
grounded. A lot of instances from the first republic up until the present third
republic show how tribalism has left Nigeria in a comatose. First, it is
generally believed that Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe won the premiership of the then
Western region, but could not occupy the position because he was of the “wrong”
tribe, albeit he showed a bad legacy by rushing to the East and manipulating
himself into power by edging out Chief Udoma. In 1964, a group of young
Nigerian officer cadets mainly Northerners, were declared academically unfit
and repatriated by the Canadian military authorities. These cadets were
declared commissioned by the Nigerian Federal Government no sooner than they
had arrived at the Ikeja Airport. In 1961,
the premier of the North and Sarduana of Sokoto paid a visit to the Royal
military Academy, Sand Hurst and wanted to meet with the Nigerian cadets. When
he eventually appeared to see his fellow Nigerians, he asked an embarrassing
tribal question to one of them: where do you come from? From Nigeria, was the
answer. But the premier was not satisfied, so he went on, where exactly in
Nigerian?. In 1962,
the then Federal Minister of State for the Army, Alhaji Tanko Galadima,
officially visited the Nigerian Military Training College [NMTC] Kaduna. As he was about to leave, he presented both
pocket money and kola nuts to only the Northern officer cadets. As
expected, this caused great ripples in the army then. In 1960, shortly after
independence, the then prime minister, Alhaji Tafawa Balewa, directed the
principal of Kings College, Lagos, Mr. P.H Davies, to secure available places
annually, for at least fifteen boys from the North, whether or not they passed
the required entrance examination.
Collaborating the existence of
tribalism in the army, Janet Mba-Afolabi said:
records have shown that the army is one in which an
officer’s ethnic origin determines the nature of strategic appointments he
holds.
The absence
of Federal presence in certain areas of the country has no other reason but
tribalism. The whole of South-east has up until this stage, no international
airport or seaport irrespective of the fact that there is a big market they
will serve. The federal roads in this same zone and other zones are death paths
rather than high ways. It is even a “divine decree” that people from certain
areas can never be among the service chiefs, inspector of police, defence and
agriculture ministers to mention just a few. Many of the policies initiated by
various governments had, in all intent and purposes, tribal undertones. A case
in point is the indigenization policy.
In the
various states of the federation, there is rancour everywhere because a
particular part of the state will like to take all. People tend to forget that
“we cannot dominate; all we can do is to accommodate”. These
instances show the extent we have allowed tribalism to take us. It is against
these that Gbulie observed that:
… the most dreadful of
our county’s insuperable monsters was tribalism, Nigeria’s number one killer
disease, a canker worm as old as the hills, the fundamental factor of the
problems of Nigerian unity.
1.2
The Meaning of Tribalism
Etymologically,
the term tribalism has its root and origin from the Latin “tribus” (tribe)
meaning “one third” which originally referred to one of the three peoples that
united to found Rome. The Encyclopedia
Americana defines tribe as ‘a group of families who have a feeling of community
through occupying a common territory and following similar customs.’ In the
same vein, the Chambers 21st Century
Dictionary defines tribe
‘as a group of people, families, clans or communities who share social,
economic, political ties, and often a common ancestor and who usually have a
common culture, dialect and leader.’ More
recently, the term tribe has been applied to any people having a common
territory and customs who are not part of a state society. One thing that is
basic with tribe is that the members of a tribe are usually held together by
common dialect, customs, social, economic, political sameness as well as
observing major religious ceremonies. Tribe and tribal have been observed as
convenient terms for indicating that a people still follows customs rather than
state law.
In view of
the relatedness of tribe with ethnicity, it is pertinent to define ethnicity as
well. According to the Chambers 21st
Century Dictionary ‘ethnicity
means relating to or having a common race or cultural tradition, seen from the
point of view of race, rather than nationality.’ In other words an ethnic group
consists of a people who share the same culture, and we know, culture comprises
the whole gamut of what the people do. This being the case, tribe and ethnicity
are interwoven. This perhaps explains the reason why Ojukwu used both of them
interchangeably. In this write up therefore, the two terms will be used to
express the same idea.
Tribalism is
the extreme and obsessive protection of one’s tribe to the detriment of the
whole nation. The chambers 21st century dictionary defines it ‘as the
system of tribes as a way of organizing society, the feeling of belonging to a
tribe.’ It is a political attitude guided by tribal customs. While tribe sets
out to define a people, tribalism is mainly that negative political attitude
that tends to favour only persons from one’s tribe. But this usually retards
national growth. Tribalism promotes such
evils as social injustice, inefficiency, moral decadence, unproductivity, and mediocrity.
Tribalism thwarts every effort towards unity and integration in any
multi-ethnic/tribal nation.
In an attempt
to explain tribalism, Achebe has it that “tribalism is discrimination against a
citizen because of his place of birth”. This for me is
a practical definition of tribalism, but something appears to be missing in it.
One’s place of birth may not be his tribe. A Yoruba may be born in Onitsha.
This does not make him an Igbo. Tribalism applies more to one’s tribe of
origin. A lot of southerners are born in the North, but they greatly feel the
pains of discrimination irrespective of the fact that that is their place of
birth. Likewise, a lot of Northerners have various places in the south as their
places of birth, yet they are seen as strangers. For Achebe,
tribalism manifests
itself in acts such as preventing a citizen from living or working anywhere in
his country, or from participating in the social, political, economic life of
the community he chooses to live.
In what seems
to be the most insightful explanation of tribalism, Ojukwu has it that
tribalism is nothing
other than ethnic nationalism i.e. a limited, constricted nationalism, a
stunted growth. It means a nationalism that has become fixated in adolescence.
Tribalism is a consciousness, which emerged as the broadest viewpoint in a
society organized on personalities. Tribalism, as a social philosophy, is based
on the construction of a series of imaginary boundaries which establish the
“us” and the “them” dichotomy.
These
explanations show that tribalism is such a negative force. It divides a nation
more than it builds it together. One factor that encourages tribalism, I think,
is the fear for the truth about how the various components of Nigeria are; we
are afraid to come together. Many
Nigerians, no matter the intellectual heights, are afraid of coming together as
a united entity. Hence, tribalism has become the proper avenue of dealing with
this fear.
1.3 Dangers of Tribalism
Tribalism
breeds a lot of dangers impeding the overall development of a country. In
Nigeria, for instance, tribalism performs the function of a political tool.
According to Ojukwu “tribalism manifests
itself more as a function of politics than as an innate xenophobia amongst the
various groups in Nigeria”. Achebe adds
that
a word will stay
around as long as there is work for it to do, in Nigeria, in spite of our
protestations, there is plenty of work for tribe, our threatening gestures
against it have been premature, half hearted, or plain deceitful.
There is some work for tribe in
Nigeria, and as it does its work, there are bound to be many effects on those
who use it and those on whom it is used. Hence, below are some of the dangers
of tribalism in Nigeria.
1.3.1
Tribalism Leads To Disunity
Since the independence, every regime sets out to achieve
the unity of the country. But these regimes fail regrettably in this project.
Most Nigerians have intense desire for this unity, but at forty-five years of
existence, we have lived more disunited than we had expected. It is the desire
for this unity that has taken Nigeria through various experiments namely: the
North-South dichotomy of early colonization, federalism or rather
pseudo-federalism, the famous three regions structure and later four, the
unitary system of government, the imposition of a twelve state structure,
nineteen state structure, a twenty-one state structure, a thirty state
structure, and at present, a thirty-six state structure, constitutional
conferences particularly the 1995 constitutional conferences, and the just
concluded national political reform conference. All these efforts have been to
ensure unity, but we have always had pseudo-unity. Disunity comes in when
people are attached to their tribes. As Ojukwu said,
the biggest obstacle
to unity is that which is commonly known and referred to as tribalism.
Commenting on the dangers of disunity, he noted that
disunity
is a danger that the people of this country can no longer endure. Disunity has
laid to waste all the noble dreams of our founding fathers. Disunity has
nullified all our efforts at national reconstruction and disunity has led us
into war. Disunity has also destroyed our peace. The consequences of disunity
are too terrible to contemplate and too obvious to require any further demonstration.
The legalized barbarism of the contemporary Nigerian situation is the fruit of
disunity.
The first
danger posits by tribalism is disunity. This is not a mere ideological
disagreement, but the type that constantly makes us stand “on a soil soaked in
fratricidal blood”.
1.3.2 Tribalism Enthrones Mediocrity
Tribalism
favours mediocrity. However, this advantage is the type that destroys not only
the persons involved, but also the nation. Mediocrity reigns where tribe of
origin is placed over and beyond merit and competence. Tribalism encourages
mediocrity mainly in the award of contracts and in employment and promotions.
Two contractors may be campaigning for a particular contract, and most often
the less qualified “contractor” wins the job, while the one with better
qualifications goes home a loser. The amateur contractor wins because he is of
the “right” tribe while the other is not. As expected, the so-called contractor
eventually messes up the job. In all these,
the greatest sufferer
is the nation itself which has to contain the legitimate grievance of a wronged
citizen, accommodate the
incompetence of a favoured citizen, and more important and of greater scope,
endure a general decline of morale and subversion of efficiency caused by an
erratic system of performance and reward.
The same
thing is experienced in employments. These days, certificates worth nothing
once you know somebody in a higher position, your area of specialization not
withstanding. It is still a living memory that Bola Ige was appointed a
minister to man a sensitive power and steel ministry, despite the fact that he
never specialized in that. At the early stage of our nationhood, the effects of
tribalism with regard to mediocrity were so evident. Lamenting about the
existence then Gbulie observed that
the terms ‘long legs’ and
‘as man knows man’ had been injected into the vocabulary of the Nigerian
public. Thus, double standards had been created which, in turn led to
frustration among millions of Nigerians. Mediocrity now sat unchallenged on the
throne—mediocrity that was sustained by blind leadership. For merit meant
nothing. Nor did talent and industry mean anything.
Against these
backdrops, Ojukwu maintained that:
no amount of
sanctimonious injunctions and no amount of erudite constitution-writing, can
lift Nigeria from her mediocrity, to the greatest she deserves.
1.3.3
Tribalism Creates Social Injustice
Tribalism goes with a great deal of social injustice. A lot of injustices have been perpetrated in
Nigeria, as a result of our myopic comprehension of the term tribe. Some
Nigerians, because of their tribe, can never rise to he position of permanent
secretaries in their ministries, some can never become the inspector general of
police, defense and agriculture ministers. Certain industries must not be sited
in certain places, and if they were put in place, a substandard firm would be
assigned to handle it. This kind of situation does not help for any
development.
1.3.4 Tribalism Retards Individual /National
Development
A nation
cannot exist without the citizens. In the same way, Nigeria cannot exist
without the concerted mental and physical efforts of Nigerians. Because
tribalism is separatist in nature, it retards the development of the nation.
Tribalism retards development because in such a situation like Nigeria, due
process is thrown to the winds and as such the people who are qualified for
certain positions to keep the nation moving will not be given the opportunity.
This being the case, the individual’s potentialities are left undeveloped,
which in turn affects the entire nation.
1.3.5 Tribalism Promotes Cultural Underdevelopment
Variety, they
say, is the spice of life. One major advantage that accrues from the existence
of many tribes is the capacity of producing a variety of cultures that will
eventually add more beauty to the national life. The languages and cultures of
the various peoples that make up Nigeria have in different ways something to
offer for national integration and development. Every culture ought to be open
to other cultures, and through that way grows. But when people are too attached
to their tribes as well as cultures to the exclusion of others, the cultures
will hardly experience any growth. The
silent adherence to tribe has made this possible, and as such, the various
cultures remain dormant and underdeveloped.
1.3.6
Tribalism Leads To Disintegration
In a
tribalism-infested society, there is always uneven distribution of the
available resources, denial of equal opportunities, double standard, the born-to-rule mentality, and neglect of
persons from other tribes. In such a scenario, some people tend to be
marginalized. As expected, they will seek to defend themselves. And one way of
defending themselves is to assert their autonomy and work towards secession. In
this way, the things that hold the country together will start to fall apart.
This is exactly what is happening in Nigeria.
1.4
The Positive Aspect of Tribalism
Tribalism is
a word every individual who believes in Nigeria as a united country
abhores. It would be very difficult for
any Nigerian to envisage something good in it. The general understanding of
this word has been and still remains in the negative.
On the
contrary, the term tribalism is not entirely bad, if anything, it is the way
people use it that is bad. “Tribe is very natural and normal; no one is without
a tribe.” According to Azikiwe, the fact of tribe is
not specific to Africa alone, it is a universal fact. However, irrespective of
tribal differences, the common identity in the association with one another as
a nation should uphold and endure.
Discussing
tribalism as a pragmatic instrument for national unity, Azikiwe maintained that
tribe has a positive meaning, the positive meaning of community. This means
that tribalism could then become a pragmatic instrument for national unity not
disunity. Thus Azikiwe said:
if the concept and
practice of tribalism would be a mode of adaptation to reality, then tribalism
is an instrument for national unity.
Still for
Azikiwe, tribe is an anthropological fact. A tribe is made up of race, language
and culture, and these, as it were, are the major anthropological factors that
determine the level of integrability and assimilability among the tribes.
Countries such as Switzerland, United States of America, U.S.S.R are examples
of countries that are made up of less integrated tribes. Yet, they maintain
their identities as single nations. This goes to show that over two hundred and
fifty tribes that make up Nigeria are not disasters but great assets.
In this line
of thinking, Achebe notes also that
everyone agrees that
there are manifestations of tribal culture, which we cannot condemn such as
peculiar habits of dress, food, language, and music.
These
and many other manifestations are positive and desirable and confer richness on
our national culture. They add to the beauty richly embedded in African
culture.
Tribalism has
some positive benefits, and for Nigeria to achieve the desired positive aspect
in tribalism, Azikiwe was of the view that loyalty to tribe must be transferred
to loyalty to Nigeria as a nation. This will be well achieved when, according
to him, “permanent guarantees of a constitutional, political, and economic
nature are met”.
Our
differences are therefore assets rather than tools for destruction. The
practice of tribalism, I will maintain, is a defective attitude of the mind
that eventually manifests itself in the utterances and actions of men.
Login To Comment