Buhari Corruption Fight Is Selective, Not Sincere With Corruption Fight—Sagay

[Ikhide]

"Does that mean that as the head of the advisory committee on corruption, you are not satisfied with the whole thing?"

"As much as I am not a politician, one thing I know is that the anti-corruption crusade is selective, but most of the people being pursued by the EFCC are corrupt. What we are saying is that all others in the APC that are stealing should also be chased if President Buhari is really serious about this corruption of a thing. It is only then that the fight against corruption can be seen as fair and balanced. When there is no equity and justice, people will begin to doubt your integrity in whatever you are pursuing. For instance, if we recall 1983 when Buhari/Idiagbon came to office, immediately they knew there was corruption, they changed Nigerian currency so that all the people that had stolen money and kept it at home had such rendered useless and all corrupt officials were arrested.

But you also have to remember that Ambrose Ali died in prison; Adelakun, who was deputy governor to Bola Ige, died in prison; Olabisi Onabanjo developed kidney problem in the prison. Most of these people were Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) governors. But in whose house was N50 million cash belonging to the government was found? That person was only given a house arrest, because he is a Northerner. No Northerner was treated the way they treated the Southern governors. That is why as much as I respect President Buhari, I know that his sincerity is not total."

http://universalreporters247.com/2015/12/buhari-corruption-fight-is-selective-not-sincere-with-the-fight-against-corruption-sagay/

- Ikhide

[John Mbaku]

What we are failing to understand and appreciate in this discussion about the control of corruption in Nigeria is that no matter who the president of the Federal Republic is, he or she cannot fully and effectively control corruption in Nigeria within the existing institutional set-up. Nigeria's existing  governance architecture is not capable of dealing fully and effectively with corruption. Until the country's institutional arrangements are totally transformed and the country provided with a governance architecture that guarantees the rule of law, the government will continue to fail in its efforts to clean up corruption. As I have said before on this forum and elsewhere, leadership is a necessary but not sufficient condition for effective governance, including the control of corruption. Sufficiency requires that the country be provided with institutional arrangements that guarantee the rule of law. 

--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

JOHN MUKUM MBAKU, ESQ.
J.D. (Law), Ph.D. (Economics)
Graduate Certificate in Environmental and Natural Resources Law
Nonresident Senior Fellow, The Brookings Institution
Attorney & Counselor at Law (Licensed in Utah)
Brady Presidential Distinguished Professor of Economics &  John S. Hinckley Fellow
Department of Economics
Weber State University
1337 Edvalson Street, Dept. 3807
Ogden, UT 84408-3807, USA
(801) 626-7442 Phone
(801) 626-7423 Fax

[Sadiq Manzan]

I agree with you, but doesn't it also take leadership to build the requisite institutional structures?  And does an anti-corruption leader have to wait for the years and years it will take
to have those structures in place before acting against corruption?

[kenneth harrow]

how one changes a culture that involves corruption seems very complicated to me. there are obvious things, but some are not. i remember reading years ago about the high degree of corruption with the customs officials at ports involving import duties. just like much i've heard in cameroon and senegal. in cameroon it was the most desirable post, a guarantee to becoming rich.

i am reasonably sure of corruption among boston police when i was in college in the 60s. i remember my mother "tipping" a policeman so she could park in front of a hotel, and my eyes went wide. as a kid i learned to "tip" a maitre d at night clubs if you wanted a good table. children have to learn to do this.

i believe that officials who are not paid enough for a relatively comfortable living will look to opportunities to augment salaries, and i am afraid to say that this was often the case among university faculty. i was told in nigeria a couple of years ago that salaries had been raised and were decent; and a few year before that, the same in senegal. before that, senegalese, and cameroonian, faculty augmented their wages with translation or business activities, that made it impossible to think about serious research or even time devoted to teaching. and the administration was completely indulgent, as if it were a norm.

when i was told salaries were increased, it was always accompanied by the claim that that would improve the teachers' abilities to devote themselves to their work, but that some were not really interested in scholarship, except to the extent they were forced to publish.

from that i generalize: pay people a decent wage, try to apply the laws then and only then, and chances of changing a climate are improved.  but there are other factors that matter more, and i think john, as expert in this topic, can enlighten us more about how to change a climate, what are the key factors involved, the key impediments.
the notion that this arises because of historical reasons (i.e., during the colonial period african scholars were disparaged, so now it would seem to be colonial to sanction them), or cultural (involving transitions to urban cultures) often appear as less than totally convincing to me.
i would love to know how john reads the key factors responsible for culture.

last point: the corruption involved in doing business--the "cost" of doing business--may run into millions, and is not just of a different order but essentially structured by the economic system, i imagine. so it would be confusing apples and oranges to equate it with a schoolteacher, say in the congo who hasn't been paid by the state in years, demanding payments from his or her pupil's parents.

-- 
kenneth w. harrow 
professor of english
michigan state university
department of english
619 red cedar road
room C-614 wells hall
east lansing, mi 48824
ph. 517 803 8839
har...@msu.edu

[Adeshina Afolayan]

The leadership-institution debate is literally a dead-end if one attempts to privilege one over the other. It is similar to the individual-society debate. But in most cases, one needs a strong man who is enlightened enough to jumpstart the evolution of strong institutions which will in turn become the framework that circumscribe the arbitrariness of individual whims and caprices. Nigeria needs to la the foundation of strong institutions, and this cannot be done except there are committed leaders with the strength of purpose to lay the foundation. It is in this sense that we keep repeating the mantra of leadership deficit in Nigeria.

  

 

Adeshina Afolayan, PhD
Department of Philosophy
University of Ibadan

+23480-3928-8429

[John Mbaku]

Yes, it takes leadership to build the necessary institutions but the effort must not be top-down; it must be bottom-up and must involve grassroots efforts, led by civil society, to reconstruct the state. 

I published a paper in 1996 about institutional reforms and corruption cleanups and someone presented me with similar questions: do we have to wait for the many years that it would take to reconstruct the state? My answer then was: What alternative do we have? 

Given the existing governance architecture that currently exists in Nigeria, if the new government convicts anyone of corruption, his supporters, many of whom are most likely going to be members of identity groups, would call the prosecution (a) a witch-hunt; (ii) ethnic persecution; and/or (iii) political opportunism on behalf of the president. Most Nigerians continue to pay allegiance to their identity group and not to the state and its institutions. The state (and organs of the state) are viewed with suspicion--they have little or no trust in or respect for the government, especially the federal/central government. Anything that the federal government does, especially if it negatively affects a member of their group or the group itself, is viewed by group members as persecution. Under such a system, individuals who engage in corrupt activities, including those who embezzle large sums of money from the public treasury, are usually not condemned by their kinsmen, especially if such unscrupulous public servants are generous with the ill-gotten gains. Even members of groups that are not part of the ruling coalition are not likely to engage in condemnation of the opportunistic civil servants and/or politicians, nor will they advocate a change in existing institutions. Why? Because they believe that their day to "chop" will eventually arrive and then they would not want anyone interfering with their efforts to feast at the national trough. Hence, the continued interest in a rotational presidency, which would offer all ethno-regional groups the opportunity to sit at the national table and take turns chopping. 

There cannot be effective corruption cleanups in Nigeria until the country has provided itself with laws and institutions that are acceptable to a majority of the citizens. 

[Samuel Zalanga]

When I was in Graduate School, they brought one White lady who was an anthropologist to talk to us about writing your dissertation.During her presentation, she commented on people like Clifford Geertz who did much of his fieldwork in Indonesia. She said, she felt frustrated because she did not have the gift of grace to come up with esoteric anthropological insights about culture and society the way Geertz's work suggests. He saw roosters fighting and was able to draw some insights from the fighting on the social structure of Bali, if my memory is correct.

Interestingly, in Thomas Piketty's book "Capital in the 21st Century" thought an economist by training, his main explanation for the kind of relatively fair distribution of wealth and relative social inclusion that took place in the postwar period, did not focus on individuals per se, i.e., leaders; nor did he attribute it to some magical processes inherent in capitalism, assuming it is reified. Rather, he said what emerged in the postwar period was a product of particular constellation of social movements that shaped the state, the dominant discourses of the time, and the social environment / leaders that emerged. And within such an environment, certain individuals emerged. LBJ in terms of biography was not the number one candidate that one would think will make the case for the war on poverty or go and make a major speech on affirmative action Howard University. Social movements matter in shaping or changing institutions.

William Julius Wilson in one publication of his called for a reorientation of affirmative action to class inequalities because he argues that in a democratic system such as the one today in the U.S., the New Deal Coalition that supported such public policies that were relatively more congenial for social inclusion and social justice, is no more there. Politically, it is difficult for a politician to be successful with such policies. Maybe with focus on class, the policies can get more broader support. I am not sure about that because some will still accuse the proponents of such policies of class warfare. Still, social movements can shift the conversation. There has been more public discussion on widening social inequality in the U.S. because of the 99% movement that protested for some time. If nothing, they mainstreamed the discussion on widening inequality in the U.S.

I can recognize the importance or need for such leaders,  no one will deny hat. But as a social scientist, it will be assuming too much for me to not ask serious questions about where such leaders are going to come from. What sort of mechanism and process is supposed to lead to their emergence and sacralize them for this daunting task? We cannot just wish them into existence.

For ideas, vision and courage to thrive and flourish, they have to be nurtured. And there are certain social conditions and environments that do better in allowing such things to thrive and flourish.  It does not sound very inspiring to for one to expect that the future of Nigeria will be built around the idea of "Great Men" and "Women" of history as Hegel would say, who are presumably beyond moral reprimand.  Social movements mediate the gap between institutions and the lonely individual who is expected to perform great things. The idea of genius as just people dropping from no where because they are genius is sociologically too simplistic. Asian students according to research do better in the U.S. because culturally they do not see performing well in school as a function of being smart, but rather being disciplined and diligent.

But increasingly the powerful in the world are afraid of social movements. Even here in the U.S., they try to co-opt any kind of social movement that has the potential to bring about a major paradigm shift. Those leaders we are thinking of need to be part of a new social movement that is broad-based and committed.

On this forum, there are many defenders of culture and tradition. And what that means in many Nigerian situation if unqualified is you allow the elders to do what they can because if you say one thing or another as a young person, you are disrespecting them. Ideally, the concept of being an elderin Africa means broad-mindedness, inclusion, honesty and fairness etc. Such elders command respect; they do not have to ask people to respect them. People value their contribution.  But this has changed. We need to form a social movement that will cut across Africa, not just Nigeria, that is committed to justice, fairness and inclusion so that when the individuals that will lead emerge, they will be part of a broad-based movement that has a vision for a new Africa --- an African renewal. It will be a new language and vocabulary all over the continent. But instead, we are waiting for a some messiahs to emerge from somewhere.

With all the limitations of the first generation of nationalist leaders who led Africa out of colonial rule, they have contributed a lot and generally the depth of thinking some of them exhibited even with all critiques, still remain very inspiring. But there is still a history and context for the emergence of people like Nkrumah, Nyerere, Mandela etc. And they had to mobilize a lot of people.

 Indeed, sometimes, after independence in the 1960s, many African leaders demobilized ordinary people because they were afraid of high expectations and the consciousness of the people -- the "can do" sense of agency that they had acquired. In Guinea, in one book I read about the nationalist struggle in that country, (http://www.amazon.com/Mobilizing-Masses-Ethnicity-Nationalist-1939-1958/dp/032507030X), market women contributed immensely to the struggle. In some cases, women even denied sexual intercourse to their husbands in order to nudge them to engage the anti-colonial struggle more seriously. I was surprise to read that. This is why one feels terribly bad at how people who were mobilized like this to legitimize the anti colonial struggle and create a broad-based movement, were later abandoned. Indeed many of the leaders were shaped and nurtured by the collective social movement itself. by that I mean, they were not self-made leaders as such, but they evolved with the social movement.

In many African countries, class struggle is often shrouded in ethnic or religious struggle. Unless if we are going to ask astronauts that are now in space to find out whether they can bring some 100% clean people to govern Nigeria or other African countries, and be sure that the system will not corrupt them when they arrive and start leading in the continent, the most realistic thing to think of his how to create  social movements that will shake the continent or country and then produce leaders that will themselves know that the struggle is not about them and the miracles they will perform as some kind of super-humans. Rather, it is about the movement and what it represents as a new dispensation in the struggles of African people for their human dignity.

When social movements institutionalize their vision of justice, fairness and inclusion and enforce them, then leaders will even find it easier to lead because they are backed by a strong tradition. In the case of Nigeria, given the way the political system is structured now, even if you bring someone from Mars to govern the country, unless the person can pray the devil out of the country, the person will have to work with some people who are voted by their constituencies but that are not the type of men and women with integrity -- a point that many have made on this forum.

 Even if one assumes that Buhari is Mr. Perfect, it is unrealistic, knowing the Nigerian political system and how it functions today, to expect that he would automatically work with angels. This does not mean that he should not scrutinize people. Like some on this forum, I agree that some of the people in his party are not clean. Yet he would have to start somewhere.  But such is the situation; hopefully someone in the future can push the social changes beyond Buhari and then another will even push it further until we develop strong institutions, that the mere breach of procedure for personal gain will generate serious reaction. I am skeptical about expecting this one person that has the wisdom to just transform the country. This is a collective business. Yes, people who have institutional power have more influence, but the question is what are the institutions made up of? John Rawls argue that justice is not just applying principles, but the principles of justice should inform the design and functioning of institutions. We want a society where what you get is not a product of what the person on the table feels, but what the process says.

To conclude, Thomas Piketty was right in his analysis by paying attention to the role of social movements in shaping the form and substance that institutions in postwar Western society assumed. Social movements are important but becasue of their role in shaping institutions that represent a new vision for society, and hopefully a vision that is defined by justice, fairness and inclusion for all. They mediation gap between the single individual with great vision and ideas that is just alone, and societal institutions on the other end.

Samuel

[kenneth harrow]

hi samuel, a good answer. i would add one small point. you highlight social movements, which i think is good, and personally belong to a "social movement" in my home town in order to press the state and population on social and political issues. but sometimes our actions fall on deaf ears, while other times we can mobilize many in the population. a social movement must have a broad resonance among the members of society to have any heft. and there the other conditions, including class or economic, and historical, matter.
can you call those moments conjunctures? and take it from there, instead of seeking the one factor that might seem to prevail over others?
ken

-- 
kenneth w. harrow 
professor of english
michigan state university
department of english
619 red cedar road
room C-614 wells hall
east lansing, mi 48824
ph. 517 803 8839
har...@msu.edu

[Samuel Zalanga]

Hi Ken,

Yes, you are indeed  right. I have been significantly influenced by Weberian methodological way of thinking where a good explanation aims at looking at the intersection of factors, processes and issues that come together to constitute a good causal explanation. For instance Weber argues that the chances for politicians to act on an issue is best when the issue represents an intersection of their social and material interests. This opens up a huge discussion.

And the point you are making is highlighted in the article that I am attaching to this message. I subscribe to the the Foreign Affairs Journal or Magazine and the most recent issue is on "INEQUALITY" which for me is godsend. One of the contributors wrote on how Latin American people have tried to deal with the issue of inequality. The article emphasizes the role of collective struggles of people who went out on the street and expressed their displeasure and insisted on change. --social movements. The countries that have made the significant progress in the region are those that have had social movements that met several conditions that are too numerous for me to highlight here.

The progress did not come about through people going for pilgrimage in large numbers to Jerusalem or Mecca, while ignoring doing the right things; neither did they just say prayers or perform religious rituals, good as they maybe. Rather, in addition to all other things, more importantly, they went out and struggled on the street. In some cases they were successful and in others they were not. But success did not come by relying on the goodwill of an elected official. Even leaders such as Lula of Brazil who presumably was close to the masses did not end up with clean hands. In effect, people may get into office with a good sense of what to do, but get derailed if left on their own.

The main lesson for African countries is that they should think beyond waiting for a political messiah (e.g., Buhari in Nigeria); they should also not rely on a miracle just coming from somewhere to solve their problems. It is organized social action that can do that for them. Of course in some countries, foreign support, helped empowered local social movements and institutions. The judiciary has an important role to play, which opens another huge question because that is an institution. But above all, the ordinary citizens of a country (e.g., Nigeria) must set a minimum standard of human decency for themselves in terms of what kind of country or system they are willing to tolerate. If they are willing to tolerate oppressive corruption in the name of predestination, until eternity, nothing will change for them.

To conclude, yes, it is not just one factor that explains the success. It is the intersection of several processes. For instance, what is the size of the middle class, how educated is the average citizen, what is the degree of internet penetration in the society, how are religion and ethnicity manipulated as explanation of problems that are at their core justice and human dignity questions.

Samuel

[Ugo Nwokeji]

Thanks, Ikhide, for posting this.

The issue is clear: the head of Buhari's own Advisory Committee on Corruption has himself come out to state without equivocation what some of us have been saying for long. 

Two points stand out for me from the contributions that have addressed this issue head-on. On the hand, John Mbaku points out that the lack of appropriate institutions will continue to undermine the anticorruption fight. On the other, Sadiq Manzan has called attention to the critical role of leadership. Both are correct. Thus, I agree with Adeshina Afolayan that the two go hand-in-hand.

The leadership to nurture the requisite institutions and prosecute an effective and lasting anticorruption fight is one that transcends narrow partisanship or prejudice. That is exactly what Itse Sagay is talking about. 

If all this administration can do do is merely to continue or escalate the partisan or prejudicial the anticorruption strategy of the past, we are in for a long night, at the end of which no tangible gains are made. The fight against corruption must be above board to receive from the citizenry the broad support so critical to its success.

I thought Buhari would have been capable of doing this, both because of his famed austere disposition and the goodwill (domestic and international) he has enjoyed. So far, this is not on the horizon. Again, that is what Sagay is talking about.

Ugo

G. Ugo Nwokeji

Director, Center for African Studies

Associate Professor of African American Studies
University of California, Berkeley
686 Barrows Hall #2572
Berkeley, CA 94720
Tel. (510) 542-8140
Fax (510) 642-0318

Twitter: @UgoNwokeji

Facebook: facebook.com/ugo.nwokeji

LinkedIn: linkedin.com/profile/view?id=243610869

[Tade Aina]

http://www.tribuneonlineng.com/node/25364

Above is the retraction from the Nigerian Tribune and the actions taken on what obviously is a fabrication of some kind.

Nigeria is too complex to jump to hasty conclusions! Even the retraction might have incredible sub-texts and twists. But caution always to those of us who care about what we write and who we influence! 

Also basic professional ethics and attention to detail, elementary honesty and fact checking are all in short supply. Of course, they are fueled by the laxity that our much valued Internet democracy( and indeed we must preserve it) provide for what my old teacher used to call:" charlatans , impostors and adventurers"! 

These are the struggles we face with both our leaders and the next generation of Nigerians too.

We also face them in other African countries.

Working with universities and scholars directly on the ground in 15 core countries and more than 23 affiliated countries, I have learnt to second check, and maybe check a third time before jumping to conclusions.

Tade.

Sent from my iPad

[Ikhide]

Sir, perhaps this lecture of yours should be reserved, not for (the innocent) respondents, but for the Tribune. IF folks have to wait ten days before reacting to what comes out of the Tribune, a veteran newspaper that is at least 40 years old, what kind of country are we living in? Where is the outrage? Give yourself a break. IF we can no longer believe the Tribune of all newspapers, what are we still doing around here? Yup, there may be charlatans, impostors and adventurers here, but the vast majority of them are on the ground in Nigeria, using pretend processes and institutions to scam any and everyone in sight. Credibility and integrity are two valuables that Nigerian institutions have lost - forever it seems.

Sir, your rage, as understandable as it is, is misplaced. I have absolutely no problem with those who responded, I actually learned a bit from some. In any case, as in the Nigerian situation, we have not heard the last of this. Tomorrow we will wake up and there will be another story. In a real nation, this outrage would be publicly prosecuted for the benefit of everyone. The newspaper would name and names and explain in great detail how they ended up with a black eye. Not Nigeria. There will be noise and noise and noise until the next drama. And the beat goes on.

  

- Ikhide

 

Stalk my blog at http://www.xokigbo.com/

Follow me on Twitter: @ikhide

Join me on Facebook: www.facebook.com/ikhide

---

From: 'Tade Aina' via USA Africa Dialogue Series <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>
To: usaafric...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 10:00 AM
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Buhari Corruption Fight Is Selective, Not Sincere With Corruption Fight—Sagay

To subscribe to this group, send an email to mailto:USAAfricaDialogue%2Bsub...@googlegroups.com

--

To subscribe to this group, send an email to mailto:USAAfricaDialogue%2Bsub...@googlegroups.com

Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com

To subscribe to this group, send an email to mailto:USAAfricaDialogue%2Bsub...@googlegroups.com

[Abolaji Adekeye]

inspite of their bravado, they've got egg on their face and it stinks.

In their unceasing opposition to the war on corruption, on behalf of
their benefactors / sponsors and kin, there is no depth of ordure they
would not plumb. Infact, in their assault on the war on corruption,
the atrocity they would not commit has not yet been conceived,

They have tried to guess Itse Sagay into their narrative through a
fake interview which tribune has now disowned. It would become even
more worrying if they claim not to have any connection to the hoax
because it would mean that their desperation has evolved into a
Pavlovian reflex.

On 12/21/15, 'Tade Aina' via USA Africa Dialogue Series

[Tade Aina]

Dear Ikhide,

Thank you .

Yes, we most probably haven't heard the last of this! In our Nigeria, you never do. But lest us look with lenses that see across many landscapes. You and I and the rest of us!

Many of us on this listserv influence too many young minds. In class rooms, in our writings, on social media and by the sheer force of what we have done!

You in particular do and I am not lecturing, my current vocation has moved from that " Humboldtian trap", and if I am doing so, my sincere apologies, but honestly people are reading us, posterity will read us, I know we all care and I don't doubt our commitment to a better Continent but I now meet young Graduate students who say " What do you think of Pius, what do you think of Ikhide? They don't ask about Buhari, Uhuru or Mahama, the Ikihides, Piuses and others are helping them make up their minds!

We have our differences, but I am sure we all agree that a " better Africa is possible"! It is hard, it is cliched but can we help by giving more opportunity to question in a more complex and nuanced way?  We are truly in the Season of Anomie , going beyond WS to Durkheim, can we all including myself and yourself make it easier for those coming after us. 

Our people are mired in the " neo- liberal subject condition, struggling with elites and leaders that deny history, convolute the present and mock the future! From Lagos to Linlogwe, Dakar to Djibouti, Cairo to Cape Town, it is a horrible betrayal of our possibilities and opportunities.

I am sorry if I am lecturing no one should be spare the truth but it must be based on verified evidence! 

I wish you well  but with Burundi, BH, the latest Al Shabab attack and many other sad " issues"  on our dear Continent, it is hard to rise above pain, anger and rage!

But our ordinary people will don festive outfits, they will transcend pain and suffering, they will forgive enemies and those who have hurt them, maybe there is a lesson.

Papa Ikhide greetings .

Tade.

Sent from my iPad

[olaka...@aol.com]

"The Sunday Tribune published an interview in its December 20, 2015 edition with the headline: "Buhari not sincere with corruption fight--Sagay." A lot of issues have since cropped up on that interview with the supposed interviewee disclaiming it through an online medium. We have done a preliminary in-house investigation into how the interview was conducted and on what could have gone wrong with it."-- Tribune

"Sir, perhaps this lecture of yours should be reserved, not for (the innocent) respondents, but for the Tribune. IF folks have to wait ten days before reacting to what comes out of the Tribune, a veteran newspaper that is at least 40 years old, what kind of country are we living in? Where is the outrage? Give yourself a break. IF we can no longer believe the Tribune of all newspapers, what are we still doing around here? Yup,"--Ikhide



Comment:

Ikhide et al:

Today's date is Monday Dec 21, 2015.

We have not waited for 10 days to get a retraction from The Tribune--

unless of course some of us are using an exponential calendar!

A period of  24 hrs.-- is adequate for any publication anywhere

in the world to issue a retraction considering that the newspaper would need to conduct an investigation before

issuing a retraction if at all necessary..

what we are witnessing reminds me of the statement first credited to Mallam Nuhu Ribadu,

 the first Chairman of the EFCC:

"When you Fight Corruption; Corruptions Fights You Back."

Unfortunately for Nigerians some of the foot soldiers helping Corruption fight back

are busy doing so on Nigerian cyberspace!

Can we now expect retractions from the respondents who bought the fake interview hookline and

sinker?

Or does the retraction from the Tribune male any difference to these anti-Buhari respondents--as

long as the means justifies the means.

Bye,

Ola

[Nimi Wariboko]

December 21, 2015
 

Fighting Corruption and National Development

Professor Ugo Nwokeji in reviewing the contributions of John Mbaku and Sadiq Manzan concluded that “appropriate institutions” and “critical role of leadership” are what it takes to fight and defeat corruption in Nigeria. In this way, he agreed with Professor Adeshina Afolayan “that the two go hand-in-hand.” Anyone who has followed the discussions on this forum, perhaps, also knows that these two factors are often stated as the “things” that need to be in place for Nigeria’s socio-economic development—or, at least, as among any set of factors any reasonable person can put forward to cure the long standing economic woes of Nigeria. I agree with this view, only to a limited extent. These discussions have often left out ethos. Ethos shapes the character of leadership and the fundamental nature of institutions and they in turn shape ethos.

At the minimum, to combat corruption or engender socio-economic transformation in Nigeria, these three factors need to function at some healthy level: ethos, institution, and leadership. The problem about Nigeria is not only about poor institutions and corrupt or inept leadership, but it is also—and perhaps fundamentally—about a shattered ethos. The type of ethos the country needs for social transformation, economic development, and strong political commitment to nation building is in ruins. We, therefore, need to understand what kind of ethos will form, reform, or legitimate the inner moral fabric of Nigerian institutions and leadership.

Ethos concerns the operational morality of a people, their deepest presuppositions, the inner guidance system of their society that defines the mutual responsiveness of citizens to one another, that conditions the kind of relationships deemed appropriate between leadership and institutions, and evokes the necessary loyalty of citizens to leaders and systems. It is ethos that shows what is the “fitting” thing to do in a situation and the “proper” expectations, roles, and functions in any given environment. What is the “proper” thing to do by institutions or leaders requires what anthropologist Clifford Geertz calls “thick descriptions.” Those morally formed in a particular society have the “thick descriptions” of any interactions at their fingertips. They orient their behaviors, legitimize their actions, and condition their spiritual energies.

The tendency of our policy makers to ignore this critical dimension of national development—the proper way to do things and what is not acceptable—is an hindrance to building enduring national institutions and engendering good leadership. If we do not understand a country’s ethos and what drives it, any talk or transplanting of institutions will not go very far. We can transplant the best of institutions in the West and even their leaders to Nigeria they would not amount to much insofar as we have ignored the operating ethos in the country. The transplanted institutions and leadership will not function very well if we do not create a new ethos or transform a dysfunctional ethos.

Institutions and leadership do not organize themselves in a systematic trajectory of national transformation, except from a particular ethos. This ethos amounts to a nation’s fundamental belief about co-existence, value premises of how life hangs together, virtues and capabilities that make for human flourishing, and the pursuit of the kind of social environment that will enable each citizen to be all the best that he or she could be. Nigeria’s present ethos is not serving the common or highest good of her citizens.

Aristotle understood the importance of leadership, institution, and ethos for the development of any society (polis). He wrote the Nicomachean Ethics and Politics to address these three. While the Nicomachean Ethics investigates the ethos, virtues, and capabilities necessary for a flourishing human life (eudaimonia) and shows the importance of exemplars in building right character, Politics show what kind of society (institutions and leadership) sustains the right ethos. He believes that morally bad state will make it difficult or impossible for morally good persons to be morally good citizens. Hence the importance of ethos which shapes not only institutions, leaders, and exemplars, but also good citizenry.

Max Weber in his book, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism shows that the economic transformation wrought on the northern European society was dependent on a religion-induced transformation of ethos. Engendering economic development goes beyond material and technological improvements to include the ethos, worldview or ideological presuppositions of social life. Of course, Weber’s ideas as expressed in his book are debatable, but his point that ethos shapes economic development has been widely accepted by social scientists and ethicists.

This is the overall point of my intervention in this ongoing conversation about Nigeria’s corruption or economic development: we need strong institutions, morally good leadership, and transformation of the ethos. I am sure Ugo, Mbaku, Manzan, Afolayan, and others understand this. I only want to ensure as a group we do not easily forget this third pillar of national socioeconomic development.

 
Nimi Wariboko
Walter G. Muelder Professor of Social Ethics
Boston University

On 12/21/15, 9:05 AM, "Ugo Nwokeji" <u...@berkeley.edu> wrote:

Thanks, Ikhide, for posting this.

The issue is clear: the head of Buhari's own Advisory Committee on Corruption has himself come out to state without equivocation what some of us have been saying for long. 

Two points stand out for me from the contributions that have addressed this issue head-on. On the hand, John Mbaku points out that the lack of appropriate institutions will continue to undermine the anticorruption fight. On the other, Sadiq Manzan has called attention to the critical role of leadership. Both are correct. Thus, I agree with Adeshina Afolayan that the two go hand-in-hand.

The leadership to nurture the requisite institutions and prosecute an effective and lasting anticorruption fight is one that transcends narrow partisanship or prejudice. That is exactly what Itse Sagay is talking about. 

If all this administration can do do is merely to continue or escalate the partisan or prejudicial the anticorruption strategy of the past, we are in for a long night, at the end of which no tangible gains are made. The fight against corruption must be above board to receive from the citizenry the broad support so critical to its success.

I thought Buhari would have been capable of doing this, both because of his famed austere disposition and the goodwill (domestic and international) he has enjoyed. So far, this is not on the horizon. Again, that is what Sagay is talking about.

Ugo

G. Ugo Nwokeji
Director, Center for African Studies
Associate Professor 

of African American Studies

University of California, Berkeley
686 Barrows Hall #2572
Berkeley, CA 94720
Tel. (510) 542-8140
Fax  (510) 642-0318

Twitter: @UgoNwokeji
Facebook: facebook.com/ugo.nwokeji <http://facebook.com/ugo.nwokeji>
LinkedIn: linkedin.com/profile/view?id=243610869 <http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=243610869>

On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 10:16 PM, Samuel Zalanga <szal...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Ken,

Yes, you are indeed  right. I have been significantly influenced by Weberian methodological way of thinking where a good explanation aims at looking at the intersection of factors, processes and issues that come together to constitute a good causal explanation. For instance Weber argues that the chances for politicians to act on an issue is best when the issue represents an intersection of their social and material interests. This opens up a huge discussion.

And the point you are making is highlighted in the article that I am attaching to this message. I subscribe to the the Foreign Affairs Journal or Magazine and the most recent issue is on "INEQUALITY" which for me is godsend. One of the contributors wrote on how Latin American people have tried to deal with the issue of inequality. The article emphasizes the role of collective struggles of people who went out on the street and expressed their displeasure and insisted on change. --social movements. The countries that have made the significant progress in the region are those that have had social movements that met several conditions that are too numerous for me to highlight here.

The progress did not come about through people going for pilgrimage in large numbers to Jerusalem or Mecca, while ignoring doing the right things; neither did they just say prayers or perform religious rituals, good as they maybe. Rather, in addition to all other things, more importantly, they went out and struggled on the street. In some cases they were successful and in others they were not. But success did not come by relying on the goodwill of an elected official. Even leaders such as Lula of Brazil who presumably was close to the masses did not end up with clean hands. In effect, people may get into office with a good sense of what to do, but get derailed if left on their own.

The main lesson for African countries is that they should think beyond waiting for a political messiah (e.g., Buhari in Nigeria); they should also not rely on a miracle just coming from somewhere to solve their problems. It is organized social action that can do that for them. Of course in some countries, foreign support, helped empowered local social movements and institutions. The judiciary has an important role to play, which opens another huge question because that is an institution. But above all, the ordinary citizens of a country (e.g., Nigeria) must set a minimum standard of human decency for themselves in terms of what kind of country or system they are willing to tolerate. If they are willing to tolerate oppressive corruption in the name of predestination, until eternity, nothing will change for them.

To conclude, yes, it is not just one factor that explains the success. It is the intersection of several processes. For instance, what is the size of the middle class, how educated is the average citizen, what is the degree of internet penetration in the society, how are religion and ethnicity manipulated as explanation of problems that are at their core justice and human dignity questions.

Samuel


On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 9:40 PM, kenneth harrow <har...@msu.edu> wrote:

   
 hi samuel, a good answer. i would add one small point. you highlight social movements, which i think is good, and personally belong to a "social movement" in my home town in order to press the state and population on social and political issues. but sometimes our actions fall on deaf ears, while other times we can mobilize many in the population. a social movement must have a broad resonance among the members of society to have any heft. and there the other conditions, including class or economic, and historical, matter.
 can you call those moments conjunctures? and take it from there, instead of seeking the one factor that might seem to prevail over others?
 ken

 
 
On 12/20/15 10:26 PM, Samuel Zalanga wrote:
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
When I was in Graduate School, they brought one White lady who was an anthropologist to talk to us about writing your dissertation.During her presentation, she commented on people like Clifford Geertz who did much of his fieldwork in Indonesia. She said, she felt frustrated because she did not have the gift of grace to come up with esoteric anthropological insights about culture and society the way Geertz's work suggests. He saw roosters fighting and was able to draw some insights from the fighting on the social structure of Bali, if my memory is correct.
 
 
 Interestingly, in Thomas Piketty's book "Capital in the 21st Century" thought an economist by training, his main explanation for the kind of relatively fair distribution of wealth and relative social inclusion that took place in the postwar period, did not focus on individuals per se, i.e., leaders; nor did he attribute it to some magical processes inherent in capitalism, assuming it is reified. Rather, he said what emerged in the postwar period was a product of particular constellation of social movements that shaped the state, the dominant discourses of the time, and the social environment / leaders that emerged. And within such an environment, certain individuals emerged. LBJ in terms of biography was not the number one candidate that one would think will make the case for the war on poverty or go and make a major speech on affirmative action Howard University. Social movements matter in shaping or changing institutions.
 
 
 William Julius Wilson in one publication of his called for a reorientation of affirmative action to class inequalities because he argues that in a democratic system such as the one today in the U.S., the New Deal Coalition that supported such public policies that were relatively more congenial for social inclusion and social justice, is no more there. Politically, it is difficult for a politician to be successful with such policies. Maybe with focus on class, the policies can get more broader support. I am not sure about that because some will still accuse the proponents of such policies of class warfare. Still, social movements can shift the conversation. There has been more public discussion on widening social inequality in the U.S. because of the 99% movement that protested for some time. If nothing, they mainstreamed the discussion on widening inequality in the U.S.
 
 
 I can recognize the importance or need for such leaders,  no one will deny hat. But as a social scientist, it will be assuming too much for me to not ask serious questions about where such leaders are going to come from. What sort of mechanism and process is supposed to lead to their emergence and sacralize them for this daunting task? We cannot just wish them into existence.
 
 
 For ideas, vision and courage to thrive and flourish, they have to be nurtured. And there are certain social conditions and environments that do better in allowing such things to thrive and flourish.  It does not sound very inspiring to for one to expect that the future of Nigeria will be built around the idea of "Great Men" and "Women" of history as Hegel would say, who are presumably beyond moral reprimand.  Social movements mediate the gap between institutions and the lonely individual who is expected to perform great things. The idea of genius as just people dropping from no where because they are genius is sociologically too simplistic. Asian students according to research do better in the U.S. because culturally they do not see performing well in school as a function of being smart, but rather being disciplined and diligent.
 
 
 But increasingly the powerful in the world are afraid of social movements. Even here in the U.S., they try to co-opt any kind of social movement that has the potential to bring about a major paradigm shift. Those leaders we are thinking of need to be part of a new social movement that is broad-based and committed.
 
 
 On this forum, there are many defenders of culture and tradition. And what that means in many Nigerian situation if unqualified is you allow the elders to do what they can because if you say one thing or another as a young person, you are disrespecting them. Ideally, the concept of being an elderin Africa means broad-mindedness, inclusion, honesty and fairness etc. Such elders command respect; they do not have to ask people to respect them. People value their contribution.  But this has changed. We need to form a social movement that will cut across Africa, not just Nigeria, that is committed to justice, fairness and inclusion so that when the individuals that will lead emerge, they will be part of a broad-based movement that has a vision for a new Africa --- an African renewal. It will be a new language and vocabulary all over the continent. But instead, we are waiting for a some messiahs to emerge from somewhere.
 
 
 With all the limitations of the first generation of nationalist leaders who led Africa out of colonial rule, they have contributed a lot and generally the depth of thinking some of them exhibited even with all critiques, still remain very inspiring. But there is still a history and context for the emergence of people like Nkrumah, Nyerere, Mandela etc. And they had to mobilize a lot of people.
 

  Indeed, sometimes, after independence in the 1960s, many African leaders demobilized ordinary people because they were afraid of high expectations and the consciousness of the people -- the "can do" sense of agency that they had acquired. In Guinea, in one book I read about the nationalist struggle in that country, ( <http://www.amazon.com/Mobilizing-Masses-Ethnicity-Nationalist-1939-1958/dp/032507030X> http://www.amazon.com/Mobilizing-Masses-Ethnicity-Nationalist-1939-1958/dp/032507030X), market women contributed immensely to the struggle. In some cases, women even denied sexual intercourse to their husbands in order to nudge them to engage the anti-colonial struggle more seriously. I was surprise to read that. This is why one feels terribly bad at how people who were mobilized like this to legitimize the anti colonial struggle and create a broad-based movement, were later abandoned. Indeed many of the leaders were shaped and nurtured by the collective social movement itself. by that I mean, they were not self-made leaders as such, but they evolved with the social movement.

 
 
 In many African countries, class struggle is often shrouded in ethnic or religious struggle. Unless if we are going to ask astronauts that are now in space to find out whether they can bring some 100% clean people to govern Nigeria or other African countries, and be sure that the system will not corrupt them when they arrive and start leading in the continent, the most realistic thing to think of his how to create  social movements that will shake the continent or country and then produce leaders that will themselves know that the struggle is not about them and the miracles they will perform as some kind of super-humans. Rather, it is about the movement and what it represents as a new dispensation in the struggles of African people for their human dignity.
 
 When social movements institutionalize their vision of justice, fairness and inclusion and enforce them, then leaders will even find it easier to lead because they are backed by a strong tradition. In the case of Nigeria, given the way the political system is structured now, even if you bring someone from Mars to govern the country, unless the person can pray the devil out of the country, the person will have to work with some people who are voted by their constituencies but that are not the type of men and women with integrity -- a point that many have made on this forum.
 
  Even if one assumes that Buhari is Mr. Perfect, it is unrealistic, knowing the Nigerian political system and how it functions today, to expect that he would automatically work with angels. This does not mean that he should not scrutinize people. Like some on this forum, I agree that some of the people in his party are not clean. Yet he would have to start somewhere.  But such is the situation; hopefully someone in the future can push the social changes beyond Buhari and then another will even push it further until we develop strong institutions, that the mere breach of procedure for personal gain will generate serious reaction. I am skeptical about expecting this one person that has the wisdom to just transform the country. This is a collective business. Yes, people who have institutional power have more influence, but the question is what are the institutions made up of? John Rawls argue that justice is not just applying principles, but the principles of justice should inform the design and functioning of institutions. We want a society where what you get is not a product of what the person on the table feels, but what the process says.
 
 
 To conclude, Thomas Piketty was right in his analysis by paying attention to the role of social movements in shaping the form and substance that institutions in postwar Western society assumed. Social movements are important but becasue of their role in shaping institutions that represent a new vision for society, and hopefully a vision that is defined by justice, fairness and inclusion for all. They mediation gap between the single individual with great vision and ideas that is just alone, and societal institutions on the other end.
 
 
 Samuel
 
 

 
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 6:58 PM, 'Adeshina Afolayan' via USA Africa Dialogue Series <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
 

 

The leadership-institution debate is literally a dead-end if one attempts to privilege one over the other. It is similar to the individual-society debate. But in most cases, one needs a strong man who is enlightened enough to jumpstart the evolution of strong institutions which will in turn become the framework that circumscribe the arbitrariness of individual whims and caprices. Nigeria needs to la the foundation of strong institutions, and this cannot be done except there are committed leaders with the strength of purpose to lay the foundation. It is in this sense that we keep repeating the mantra of leadership deficit in Nigeria.
 
  
 
 
 
Adeshina Afolayan, PhD
 Department of Philosophy
 University of Ibadan

 +23480-3928-8429

 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 

 To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com <mailto:USAAfricaDialogue%2Bsub...@googlegroups.com>  

 Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
 Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
 ---
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 --
 Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin

 To post to this group, send an email to  <mailto:USAAfric...@googlegroups.com> USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
 To subscribe to this group, send an email to  <mailto:USAAfricaDialogue%2Bsub...@googlegroups.com> USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com

 Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
 Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
 ---
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
 
 
 

[Tade Aina]

Thank you Professor Wariboko.

You are right on the mark.

Tade.

Sent from my iPad

[Ikhide]

Prof,

Thank you, you have said it and you have said it well. I have no amendments, friendly or unfriendly, lol! 

Have a great new year ahead. 

- Ikhide

[Ugo Nwokeji]

"We can transplant the best of institutions in the West and even their leaders to Nigeria they would not amount to much insofar as we have ignored the operating ethos in the country. The transplanted institutions and leadership will not function very well if we do not create a new ethos or transform a dysfunctional ethos. 

Institutions and leadership do not organize themselves in a systematic trajectory of national transformation, except from a particular ethos. This ethos amounts to a

​​

nation’s fundamental belief about co-existence,

​​

value premises of how life hangs together, virtues and capabilities that make for human flourishing, and the pursuit of the kind of social environment that will enable each citizen to be all the best that he or she could be. Nigeria’s present ethos is not serving the common or highest good of her citizens.

"

​ -- Nimi Wariboko​

​You are spot-on, Nimi. Your point is well-made.

I can't fault your important addition. I believe the War Against Indiscipline would have been the most enduring legacy of the Buhari military administration of the 1980s had it not been truncated by Babangida and co. Since the late 1990s at the latest, many Nigerian roads are either constructed or repaired without lane markers, and nobody asks questions. When I mention it, people say it is corruption, in the sense that the approving authority do not ask questions because they collected bribe. What kind of approving authority is that that won't require a contractor to draw lane markers that saves the lives of everybody, including the contractor and approving authority, even if they had taken bribes? And lane markers cannot even account for a significant cost of building or repairing a road. This kind of behaviour is plainly way beyond corruption.

In fact, I have held the view long before the current administration that we fixate with corruption to the extent of distracting us from other -- perhaps more -- important problems we have -- the lack of conscientiousness in our leaders (and the citizenry generally). What separates us from most other very corrupt nations (because they many of them than people usually think) is that the leaders in those places get things to work in spite of being deeply corrupt. They wake every day thinking of how to improve their country, even while lining their pcokets, whereas improving our country seems at best a secondary consideration for most Nigerian leaders. Back in 2009, a Chinese friend told me a story of her career in China prior to migrating to the US. What shocked me was how innocently and matter-of-factly she described processes that would have been obvious to most Nigerians that they were talking about corruption. But who in their right mind would doubt the effectiveness of the Chinese leadership in virtually all spheres of life and levels of organization?

I definitely agree with you. Neither can I argue against the point about the lack of "​nation’s fundamental belief about co-existence, ​​value premises of how life hangs together, virtues and capabilities that make for human flourishing, and the pursuit of the kind of social environment that will enable each citizen to be all the best that he or she could be." This is where the debate should be in the 21st century, rather than how ethnic groups should work to capture the state and dominate others.

Ugo​

G. Ugo Nwokeji

Twitter: @UgoNwokeji

Facebook:facebook.com/ugo.nwokeji

LinkedIn: linkedin.com/profile/view?id=243610869 

[John Mbaku]

I do agree with Professor Wariboko that ethics are important--in fact, effective institutions can only be built on a sound moral foundation. Nevertheless, it is important to emphasize the fact that I do not advocate the importation of institutions from abroad into Nigeria or any other African country. That is why, in my work on governance in Africa, I have been very careful to emphasize the need for a bottom-up, participatory, inclusive, and people-driven approach to institutional reforms and institution building. The institutions that a country builds for itself must reflect the values of its constituent parts--that is, all its relevant stakeholder groups. The only way to produce such institutions is for the people to be granted the wherewithal (e.g., language interpreters and forums) for them to participate fully and effectively in the process of determining, especially the political principles that would undergird both the constitution and the governing process. What are some of these principles as regards state reconstruction in Nigeria? The Nigerian people could agree, for example, that citizenship in the Nigerian polity not be based on ethnic identity but on the concept of a Nigerian nation dedicated to peaceful coexistence of all identities, be they ethnic or religious; equality of all persons before the law; respect for the sanctity of life; respect for religious freedom; respect for human rights; the right of a child to a name and nationality, etc. Through robust national dialogue, the people, informed by their diverse cultures and traditions, can develop these governing or political principles. These principles can then form the foundation for the constitution--elected representatives can then write a constitution that is informed by and based on these principles. The constitution, once adjudged acceptable by the people, can then become the law of the country and the foundation for all its institutions.

[Anunoby, Ogugua]

Knowledge and skills get better because they are cumulative. One person has an idea, another adds to it. The idea gets better. There is not much that is wrong with borrowing institutions, practices, and systems from others. Borrow, adapt, and you sooner or later will have what you might claim to be your system which in time becomes your model. 

I do not see that there are any new, or if you like, original ways to govern a country. The only real choice today is a democratic system. It is there. It cannot be reinvented. The challenge for every country is

to figure out what democracy means for her- in other words,  how do they organize and run the business of government for the good of our country and country. Questions include the following: How do we choose our leaders? What are the expectations of them? What powers do we grant them? How do we hold them accountable? How do we fund government? What laws do we have? How do we enforce them? 

China some say, is a communist country. Is it really?  Not in the way it was under Chairman Mao certainly. China has borrowed from left and right and come up with a model that works for her. She keeps working on it. Contrast the China experience with Nigeria's- borrowed the American political system and is resolute in her determination to continue to make a mockery of it.

oa

Sent from my iPhone

[Ugo Nwokeji]

Ogugua,

My understanding of John's position as he has expressed it here over the years is not one that opposes borrowing per se, but that the mindset should be to customize a system that in tune with a people's way of life but also accommodates certain core principles of the modern democratic national state, such as he eloquently articulated in his latest post. Some of those principles can be called "borrowing", if a person chooses to do so. John could have written your core sentence "The challenge for every country is to figure out what democracy means for her..."

Ugo

[kenneth harrow]

ogugua's point about borrowing is an important one. when i studied lynn white's work on medieval technology, a million years ago, i learned that all technologies spread, that only a small portion of the technological knowledge of any culture on earth is developed indigenously. things as basic as the heavy plow and stirrup and gunpowder were typically developed in one location and as they spread had radical effects that changed social orders.
applying that concept to african humanities is not always intuitively obvious, especially when it is a question of "western" knowledge being used to read an "african" text. but if you look more closely, neither the west nor africa are entities that developed their cultures in isolation from each other.

afrocentrics might wish to dispute this, but, nonetheless, they accept the notion of wide diffusion of knowledge from the beginning, so to speak, by attributing egyptian foundations to african cultures.
the point i would want to emphasize, however, is not precisely which cultural aspect, or technical aspect, lies at the foundation of what knowledges, but rather than only a small percentage of our knowledge is indigenous, and that the spread of knowledge is not accomplished by design, but rather by serendipity. when a trader carried a belief, and told his buyers, it wasn't necessarily so as to convert them. he was selling salt, they were exchanging it for gold, and both had other things on their mind. but someone noticed how the horses were saddled, that there were stirrups, and said, hmmm, good idea, i'll try it.
no doubt words spread the same way: no one is going around deciding which words will be adapted into their language, but it happens every time we speak to another person.
new words come in; new practices come in; old ones die or change. to speak of origins, authenticity, purity, is to try to reconstruct the world on ideological grounds, retrospectively, just as nations reconstruct their histories, retrospectively, so as to result in the outcome they want.
ken

-- 
kenneth w. harrow 
professor of english
michigan state university
department of english
619 red cedar road
room C-614 wells hall
east lansing, mi 48824
ph. 517 803 8839
har...@msu.edu

[John Mbaku]

Dear Ugo:

Thanks for that excellent summary. I could not have done a better job. Stay well. John 

[kenneth harrow]

footnote, i agree also with john's notion that not only we borrow, we adapt. there is a third point to be added to this scenario. sometimes the thing you are borrowing has attached to it a power and prestige. let's call it a foucaultian notion of power, which means, in my view, when american academic standards are borrowed by african universities, sometimes they have attached to them a status and power which has nothing to do with their adaptability or appropriateness. how then to take the good parts becomes difficult. (think of the pressures to publish, for instance, and how that has been "translated" into african university scholars' work)
 in the case of politics, i spend half my time on facebook complaining about the failures of the american democratic system (remember, i come from michigan, the worst gerrymandered state imaginable), and then read posts about the failures of african, or arab, states to function in a transparent manner or a democratic manner. this is where we have to be careful about thinking through this issue of borrowing, and realize that the term borrow is inappropriate for what is happening.
i can think of the parallel in cinema when a cineaste learns techniques from, say, the russian, or the hollywood schools, and then, like sissako or sembene, translates them into their own personal styles. those styles become adapted by others at home, and the process carries on.
for better or for worse.
ken

[Anunoby, Ogugua]

Hello Ken,

You are right. Your exemplification with technology is instructive as is exemplifying with law- Babylonian (Hammurabi), Roman, European; and religion - Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The new borrow from the old with changes here and there it seems to me.

OA

Sent from my iPhone

[M Buba]

Ngugi's essay ('Recovering the Original'), though primarily about language, seems to me to be a pointer to the goal of any localisation process. Just as Ngugi argued about the existence of 'a genius in every language', it is not difficult to imagine the existence of the genius of democracy in every society. The point, then, is to delve into the past and seek to recover this genius in all its local manifestations. Then, can we begin to address the nature and extent of the borrowing -adaptation; incorporation; apocopation. 

I believe the Chinese as well as the Japanese, and perhaps all industrialised societies have had a fully specified 'original' (in language, culture and tradtions) before they embarked on their much-envied modernisation programmes. 

So, TF's renaissance agenda of providing the tools (concepts and methods) with which to begin this recovery process is a big step towards making modern African democracies work for the people. Ethos, strong institutions and great leaders are products of our values in need of recovery.

Malami

Prof Malami Buba

Department of English Language & Linguistics

Sokoto State University

PMB 2134, Birnin-Kebbi Rd,

Sokoto, NIGERIA

[kenneth harrow]

hi malami
i think many will agree with you. i am more reticent. i try to avoid all notions of their being some essential or authentic or fundamental basis to a culture, a people, a society. in that i am at odds who find points of pride and identity in such.
i also try to be open about this, and locate as best i can the heart of this issue. one way of seeing this is how we view the past. i very much hold to stuart hall who states not that we have an identity that can be located in the past, but that we construct our identities in the stories we tell about the past. that says it all for me
ken

[Anunoby, Ogugua]

Dear Ken,

Every culture and people has genius. Their culture at every point in time fully reflects their genius and in my opinion has been shaped by full employment and internalization of that genius. At every point I time therefore, a culture for me has fully utilized it's genius just like at each point in time, the market price of an asset has taken full account of all publicly available information about it hence its price- fair whether high or low. Price may change as new information becomes publicly available to all buyers and sellers. 

A people do not go to sleep on their way of life. They live as they do until they see or know a different, hopefully better way to live, or change is forced on them. A people' way of life is in my opinion therefore, a reflection, summation of their original and evolving genius. Can it be improved? May be. Is it superior/inferior? What do you mean and why would be my question? 

An achieving progressive culture looks outside itself, sees what it lacks, misses, or needs in another other culture, and chooses or not to borrow, adopt it. This adoption/ borrowing enriches, renews the culture and what have they got- culture change. 

oa

Sent from my iPhone

[M Buba]

Dear Ken,

The recovery process I have in mind is very much about such stories and their retelling in the light of new experiences/encounters. I also see it as an affirmation of an identity and location. TF organised a whole conference aroubd this issue at Austin.

Serendipity, in this context, tends to take place at intersections, with traders (and scholars) as 'cultural brokers' and 'interpreters', as you rightly point out. The problem, as I see it, is that genuine cultural brokers are so few and far between nowadays, because of the rise of extremism in all corners of the world. However, the very existence of this forum bodes well for the future.

Malami

Prof Malami Buba

Department of English Language & Linguistics

Sokoto State University

PMB 2134, Birnin-Kebbi Rd,

Sokoto, NIGERIA

[Anunoby, Ogugua]

Dear JM,

How does what you propose as necessary get done? Is it not by government enforcing existing laws fairly and equitably- not being selective in implementation of the law which some in this forum and elsewhere are unsure is the case now? The existing institutional set-up may be short but what is the likely utility of this set-up or any other if it is employed selectively-abused or misused? Is it not such or other abuse or misuse that causes citizens to lose faith in whatever set up- corrupt system is in place? 

oa

oa

Sent from my iPhone

[John Mbaku]

OA:

If the present government is really serious about dealing fully and effectively with corruption and other governance-related problems in Nigeria, it should do what other administrations have failed to do, and that is, engage the Nigerian people in a robust discussion on the reconstruction of the state and the development of institutions that reflect their interests. That conversation, as I have argued many times on this forum and elsewhere, must be inclusive and participatory and must not be relegated to urban-based intellectuals. Again, as I said earlier, any efforts to deal with corruption through existing institutions will fail as they have done in the past and will be considered by most people, either as political posturing or an effort by the incumbent government to punish members of the ancien régime. Consider the fact that as military ruler, Gen. Buhari had significantly more power than he now has as the elected president of the federation. Yet, as military ruler, he was unable to force Nigerians into compliance. Why would anyone now believe that he would be successful this time, working within the same dysfunctional governance architecture?