In this piece, I argue that politics should be allowed to evolve in Nigeria based on values, history and dynamics of the country without insisting that it must follow the same trajectory of the United States. Also, many assumptions about democracy in Nigeria are wrong, as we shall prove.
Without justifying anything or holding brief for anybody, there is nothing undemocratic or illegal about decamping to another party. It is playing by the rules. Prominent Americans like President Theodore Roosevelt, President Ronald Reagan, and Hillary Clinton also changed parties. Reagan even argued that, “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party. The party left me”. He won presidential election as Republican candidate.
Americans call people who change parties “party switchers”. They would not have a name for it if it were alien to them. And they attribute it to factors like opportunism, “flip-flopping” (weak conviction), and “evolution of views” – change of perspective based on new information or circumstances. Even Winston Churchill, former British Prime Minister and war hero, changed parties in his political career.
Nigerians should not be wasting their time creating problem where there is none. If the parties are the same, are the candidates always the same? Why do people vote because of money or ethnicity rather than character and competence? Why should they be imposing their personal views on national issues that should be guided by the constitution and extant laws? If somebody changed his party five times, what is your business, can’t you reject him at the polls?
Let the politicians continue to decamp to any party as many times as they want. Whatever problems that may arise from the decamping en masse to the ruling party will be taken care of by history and political evolution process.
Is the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), a former ruling party, not on its way to oblivion? What stops any politician in Nigeria from joining and building any party of his choice other than the ruling party?
It is important to note that all advanced democracies have their sizeable shares of mistakes and recklessness, as products of specific history and values. For example, since the inception of democracy in 1778 in the United States, blacks and women were not allowed to vote until February 26, 1869 and August 18, 1920, respectively.
Also, advanced strategies of rigging like GERRYMANDERING were common in the history of the United States. Of course, it is an American, not African word. Also, The London Economist magazine of February, 8-14, 1997, reported:
“The overwhelming evidence from America is that dollars now speak louder than ideas; that access is bought and sold; and that, unless they have funds of their own, challengers and third parties are often drawn out… Certainly many countries – Japan, Italy, France and Belgium, to name but four – have had far more severe episodes of political corruption. But no developed country suffers a money chase, or voter disillusionment, on anything like the American scale.” (p15)
In the same magazine, it is also stated:
“Ever since partisan appeals were chiselled into the walls of ancient Greece, election campaigns have cost money. And ever since the first political contribution changed hands, money has been used to influence the process of government. The lust for power and advantage is human nature. Democracy is supposed to restrain it. Elections demand fairness; when the tally is made, every vote counts equally. Yet before that, some people, using money, will always try to speak louder than others – and will often succeed.” (p23)
A number of times, I saw people on television arguing in favour of what they call party supremacy, which does not exist in the presidential system. Some will even go to the extent of citing a misleading example of how strong Chief Adisa Akinloye was as Chairman of the ruling National Party of Nigeria (NPN) in the Second Republic. This tragic assumption is informed by Nigeria’s experiment with the Parliamentary System in the First Republic.
Nigerians always talk about lack of ideological differences amongst the parties in the country. But this is not unique to Nigeria because, generally, political parties are not fundamentally different in liberal democracy, which is built on free economy, as an UNCOMPROMISING ideology. This is the ideology of the dominant parties in our model countries; the United States and the United Kingdom.
What is the ideological difference between a party that advocates more taxation and the one that advocates less taxation. At least they share the same principle of the need for taxation.
I’m also amazed when I hear Nigerians chanting dangerous political mantra like the statement of President J. F. Kennedy of the United States: “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” This mantra can lead to a brutal dictatorship because as political philosophers like Thomas Hobbes and John Locke argued, government is a social contract in which citizens surrender some of their rights to “a sovereign authority” to enforce law and order to avoid “state of nature” characterised by “perpetual war and fear”.
Therefore, if a businessman can go to court to enforce a business agreement, why should somebody who entered into a contract about life and death not insist on the terms of the contract rather than always asking for what he can do for his country? A country exists for citizens, not the other way round.
The search for a viable political culture in Nigeria should be based on what will work efficiently to ensure the greater good for the greater number. For example, there is only one political party in China, which has not only pulled millions out of poverty but also built one of the strongest economies in history. Also, Saudi Arabia is a monarchy, but it recently hosted President Donald Trump of the United States and President Vladimir Putin of Russia for a meeting on the Russia-Ukraine war. Who among them would have preferred Nigeria for such a meeting simply because Nigeria is a democracy and Saudi Arabia is a monarchy without elements of democracy?
Take it easy, my brother. We should not be unnecessarily hard on ourselves because of a dying religion called democracy. There are many books on how it is dying.
Dikko resides in Abuja
