- If you were a member of a particular ethnic group in
- How have the frequent shifts from civilian to military rule and back again exacerbated the country’s many social and economic problems?
- Are political parties the best option for divided societies such as
Friday, April 10, 2015
Group Nine Discussion
Blog post due at 11:55pm on April 14 and comment due at 11:55pm on April 17.
Nigeria
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
If you were a member of a particular ethnic group in Nigeria, what would be your attitudes towards democracy?
ReplyDeleteNigeria face challenges of peace and stability as changes become apparent in Nigerian government with political and economical expectations. The competition for land, money and power is a constant struggle among ethnic groups that share the same cultural history, traditions and origins. With concerns of government and social trust, and to consolidate new institutions to craft effective leadership to achieve stability and to build the economy, affects attitudes which brings forth concern.
My attitude as a member of any ethnic group in Nigeria would be one of hopelessness. I would be frightened with the job of raising my children in a nation with little national heritage. People have learned to survive on beating the system via corruption. There is not much to be proud of as a citizen of Nigeria....just simply finding a way to survive day by day.
DeleteHow have the frequent shifts from civilian to military rule and back again exacerbated the country's many social and economic problems?
ReplyDeleteI think that the constant shift from military to civilian rule has only made the country weaker than ever. Nigeria to this day has a weak central government that can barely provide for it's citizens. None of the civilian or military regimes in recent history has done much for the citizenry. Nigeria is the most populated country on the African continent and is rich in resources like oil. However, the constant shifting of governments, weak governing by those in power, and more recently foreign interests, continue to plague the country.
I agree with your comment you made about Nigeria being made a weak country; because until Nigeria is empowered or governed by strong leaders who can strengthen the country economically,socially, and politically, and help Nigeria become a strong, stable, and independent county, then will the citizens be able to benefit from the country's resources for economic growth.
DeleteMatt, I agree with your assessment but am curious about what support system you see the rest of the world offering Nigeria. I think that a country that is so rich in resources will be able to get whatever help it needs in making the transition from a colony to a democracy. Oil, agriculture and land are powerful draws in our international community!
DeleteI also agree about Nigeria being weak. There is strength in numbers and until they come together somehow as a unified nation they will remain that way. As far as another country coming to their aid, I don't forsee it. Nigeria has no unity and there are too many different ideas and not enough strategic ingredients being thought of to help solve their economic crisis and in my opinion Nigeria would become a liability instead of an asset.
DeleteMelissa, China has made huge investments in Nigeria in terms of infrastructure and military aid. When the military training forces were withdrawn by the United States, China stepped in to train and equip the Nigerian forces. This had a two-fold effect for China, in that it was able to acquire oil at favorable terms, as well as be able to establish strategic bases in which to resupply and sortie navel forces into the Atlantic.
DeleteWith the insurgent problem in the north, Nigeria can ill-afford to turn down the modern weapons and training that China offer for its military, and the economic benefits are a boom to the local economy.
How have the frequent shifts from civilian to military rule and back again exacerbated the country's many social and economic problems?
ReplyDeleteA weak, constantly shifting government is always susceptible to corruption and Nigeria is no exception. Since most of Nigeria's economy is run by the government, the constant shifts leave most of the people at the mercy of whoever happens to be in power. The country was dragged, by its leaders, from a self-supporting agricultural economy to a self-supporting oil economy, which then had to be restructured with help from the international community in order to survive. Taking the economy (somewhat) out of the government's hands through privatization and a renewed focus on economic reforms have been undertaken to salvage Nigeria's economy.
Socially, independence in 1960 seems to have let loose constant fighting, takeovers, fraud, violence and bloodshed in NIgeria's search to govern itself. Democracy is, however, showing signs of taking hold, through the Constitution and setup of government. It is impressive to me that the Nigerians still try so hard to make their own way as a part of the international community.
How have the frequent shifts from civilian to military rule and back again exacerbated the country’s many social and economic problems?
ReplyDeleteAlthough the frequent shifts of government have likely hindered the social and economic prospects of Nigeria, the overwhelming cause of the hardships have been ineffective leaders as well as a culture of corruption within the ruling class regardless of whether it was civilian or military rule. Ministers who were in charge of large swaths of the economy used their positions to line their pockets, through inflated contracts, misappropriation of funds or outright embezzlement. Furthermore, the steps taken to curtail corruption were done behind closed doors (such as the "Okigbo Panel Report on the Reorganisation and Reform of the Central Bank of Nigeria" written in 1994, but held from public view for years) which helped to incubate further corruption from the ruling class. The democratization of the country has also failed to eliminate the problem, as the political parties have proven to be as corrupt as the previous leadership, perpetuating the problems the country faces even further'
It is because of the siphoning of funds from the treasury that Nigeria has failed to meet its fullest potential. The lack of funds has ushered in years of austerity in regards to public works, infrastructure improvements, development and discovery, as well as quality of life issues such as health care and other social programs.
In summation, I would submit that the all too frequent changes between military and civilian rule are not the root causes for the country's poverty, but rather the ineffective leadership of all the governments since the 1960 coup that has allowed corruption to thrive to the point of it being ingrained within the culture. It is sad that a country that is so rich in raw materials has been looted to the extent that it is one of the poorest nations on earth.
It is also easy to see why con artists have been sending "Nigerian Prince" emails almost from the beginning of the internet age. Every good con has an element of truth in order to rope the mark.
http://www.unh.edu/nigerianstudies/articles/Issue2/Political_leadership.pdf
Do you think that now that Nigeria has had a fairly free and open election the issue of corruption will be addressed more effectively? My understanding is that Buhari had a short temper for incompetents when he was dictator, and he ran partially on an anti-corruption platform. I suppose only time will tell, but I think that with a stable democracy and (hopefully) a swift victory over Boko Haram and other insurgent groups, they may finally be able to tackle the ever present issue of corruption.
DeleteI do believe that the election of Buhari might be beneficial for the people of Nigeria, but I'm not willing to concede that the government of the country has turned a corner just yet. As I indicated in my original post, the sense of entitlement in the ruling class has become almost ingrained, and Buhari will have his work cut out in trying to root out the corruption from all levels of the government, while also having to quash Boko Haram and reunite the many factions that divide the country. I can easily see that the pressing problems with the insurgents will distract from the monumental task of dealing with the graft, and with almost 50 years of "business as usual" the problem will not disappear overnight.
DeleteI would also suggest that with the depleted treasury, the government will be hard pressed to deal with the insurgent problem, due to the fact that the military has been in decay for years. The Nigerian army has become nothing more then a glorified police force, as previous civilian administrations have decreased spending levels, leaving it an under-trained and outdated in terms of equipment. This was done to lesson the chance of another military coup, but has rendered the force ineffective as a fighting force. That being said, the Boko Harem forces are a more modern military force. Analysts consider them to be a full fledged fighting force, showing signs of being well trained with a solid command structure capable of carrying out sophisticated military movements.
So, in answer to the original question, I think that true democracy in Nigeria is still in its infancy, and therefore, very unstable. The internal pressure of an ingrained culture of corruption, as well as the external threat by insurgent groups will keep the new leadership occupied, much to the detriment of the general population of the country.
How have the frequent shifts from civilian to military rule and back again exacerbated the country’s many social and economic problems?
ReplyDeleteWhen there is constant change in the way a state is ruled, there are obvious social and economic problems that arise. Without consistency in government, it’s virtually impossible to establish a successful society or economy. Since Nigeria’s independence from the colonial rule of Britain in 1960, the country has been a victim of ethnic and religious power struggles. Since the central government controls access to most resources and economic opportunities, the party controlling government controls virtually everything. This dynamic has sparked corruption in government, fostering this perpetual cycle.
I agree, and furthermore with the country's ability to produce oil it could have a very strong economy, but as it stands Nigeria's corruption issues and power struggles have left the country barely standing and most of its public functions almost non-existent (education / health systems). The power struggles continue to rip the country apart as you outline.
DeleteAre political parties the best option for divided societies such as Nigeria, or are there more efficient channels through which citizens can express themselves and be governed? One of the major issues in Nigeria is corruption and at the root of corruption in usually greed. Nigeria is a large oil producing country and make billions of dollars per year in oil exports. However, Nigeria is one of the most starved and polluted countries in the world. The corruption is part of the problem of the religious divide also creates issues with governance as the wealthy class oil producing Nigerians are predominantly Christian while the lower middle and lower class are predominantly Muslim. When you add the greed, corruption and religious divide you get a violent and dysfunctional country. I think the country would be better served by some sort of single party system that can drive change and deal with corruption.
ReplyDeleteIf you were a member of a particular ethnic group in Nigeria, what would be your attitudes towards democracy?
ReplyDeleteIf I was a member of a particular ethnic group in Nigeria I would feel better represented under a democracy, in the sense that I would be able to chose my political leaders, but I wouldn't feel any safer. Even under democracies there is still a strong chance that the majority ethnic group will assume power over the minority ethnic groups. The U.S political model isn't flawless; in theory everybody is equal but in practice there is prejudice, racism, and misrepresentation stowed upon minorities. This type of thing could happen in any democracy, so if my ethnic group was a minority I would fear that there would be potential for an imbalance of power.
If you were a member of a particular ethnic group in Nigeria, what would be your attitudes towards democracy?
ReplyDeleteNigeria has long used ethnicity as a way to fuel their political support. Under the British rule, the country was divided into three regions and they continued this division after they gained their freedom from them in 1960. They started out as a country divided and with all the corruption, competition, fighting, power struggles, and the distrust one group has against the other, it is hard to see them coming together to rule as one in a democracy.
In democracies, people tend to invest goodwill in the affairs of their country; in general, they love their country more than any other country in the world. However, this attitude is not common in Nigeria, they tend to blame the collective attitudes of Nigerians on one or two presidents. Yes, leadership is important, but the patriotic attitudes of Nigerians goes beyond the actions or inactions of one or two presidents. The society seem to be lacking morals. Take any average Nigerian, the level of personal virtues such as integrity, doing-the-right-things, doing-right-by-your-neighbour, hard-work, patience and honesty are all virtually gone from the society. And it seems that the next politicians are currently getting groomed with no moral fabrics either, and many are not concern with state and federal affairs. For example, many former armed forces members and retired civil service members are not receiving their deserved benefits and or have to beg go them. Meanwhile the politicians aren't doing much to aid them...this is the actions that would cause one not to take pride in their country or want to defend it
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that Nigerians sort of blame each other on certain differences. I also agree that their society lacks moral, because they tend to use a lot of violence towards each other. This is not the democratic way.
DeleteQuestion 1: If you were a member of a particular ethnic group in Nigeria, what would be your attitudes towards democracy?
ReplyDeleteObviously, states with multiple ethnic groups, and potentially even many nations (the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta is a nationalist movement, for example) is going to have difficulties. However, in Nigeria, "the idea of Nigeria has taken root among the country's ethnic groups almost 50 years after independence." The division of local and federal power causes issues, obviously, but I believe that a national character can take shape. While parties have been largely ethnic based and the legislature has been largely powerless under the military dictators, the recent peaceful election of Buhari promises a democracy that is actually functional. As an ethnic minority, I would still be cautious, but hopeful. The new party system which demands wide support for a party helps focus the party on subjects, not ethnicity. Overall, I would be more worried about the political process dealing with religious differences and protecting minorities religious groups than ethnic differences.
ABRAHAM, I question any new ideology getting off the ground in Nigeria. The lack of funds to develope new infrastructure, or even support the military to fight the insurgent groups makes changes developed by Buhari unlikely to ever be implemented. I hope that I am wrong..I would like to see the other leading democratic and republic nations make an investment into the future of Nigeria. China's interest in raw materials could be a start to gather funding to at least start kick start the economy.
DeleteIf you were a member of a particular ethnic group in Nigeria, what would be your attitudes towards democracy
ReplyDeleteOf course with any group marginalized in a society, one would be wary of others' interest toppling your own, but the participatory way the newest democracy was created sought to involve citizens first.
Departing form the trend of mimicking a parliamentary system, Nigerians chose a more Americanized version of democracy. This bicameral representation allows for debate among many parties, which I would imagine would be positive for a society with unique sections of the population who all need to feel represented.
The frequent shifts from civilian to military rule and back again leaves the Nigerian government unstable.The government is riddled with corruption during military as well as civilian regimes. The political rulers have used their power for personal gain, using public funds for their private use. Most Nigerians are very poor and there is a huge gap between the rich and the poor. This corruption has caused Nigerians to have little trust and receive little assistance from the government. Economic struggles are further fueled by Nigeria's dependence on the unstable oil industry.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 1:
ReplyDeleteIf I were at member of a particular ethnic group in Nigeria, I would of course like the idea of the state being a democratic one. Unfortunately, Nigeria has so many ethnic groups that conflict with each others' ideas and beliefs. Nigeria is also corrupted with a violent way of trying to solve ethnic differences. The ethnic and civic divide in Nigeria does not leave room for democracy, but democracy could certainly play a major role in managing Nigeria's society.
Since the departure of colonial authorities over 50 years ago the Nigerian government can only be described as iconsistent and full of corruption, whether ruled by military or civilian dictators. There seems little hope for the people of this bankrupt nation to support anything political , no matter how good it may appear. No infrastructure, a weak unstable economy, and a poorly funded military that cant even control its own population...filling with insurgents contributing to even greater instability. There is only one hope and It is not democracy at this point....only a benevolent dictator has a chance to create consistant change, Democracy needs a strong economy backed by capitalism ....even with good policy makers elected to office, there is no treasury to implement the needed changes
ReplyDelete