Traditionally, a number of causes have been adduced for the lack of the Nigerian model of democracy to engender growth within the Nation. Whereas Western democracy fostered growth, Nigerian democracy imposed underdevelopment. Consequently, this evaluation deploys the Principle of the Publish-Colonial State to elucidate how clientelist relations between the Nigerian petit-bourgeoisie and the metropolitan ruling class impacted negatively on the effectiveness of Nigerian democracy to precipitate growth. It proceeds from the belief that the inordinate affiliation/attachment of Nigeria’s ruling petit-bourgeoisie to international monopoly capital endangers Nigerian democracy and diminishes its capability to advertise growth. Accordingly, we hypothesize that democracy just isn’t the issue of growth in Nigeria; somewhat, the operators of democracy are the issue of democracy; and due to this fact, the issue of growth in Nigeria.
The Marxist notion of Democracy is ensconced within the assumption that Democracy is what the ruling class perceives it to be. This notion instantly creates the idea for the various conceptualizations of the idea by the differing political conjunctures adopting Democracy because the ideological foundation for the group of presidency. Due to this fact, because the conceptualizations of Democracy are diverse, so are the strategies of software and outcomes arising from the appliance of the idea. Accordingly, we argue that the historic characterization of Democracy as an agent of underdevelopment in Nigeria seems misdirected, given the obvious disregard for the position of the human issue within the evaluation of democratic governments. Consequently, the perverted structuralism which perceives democracy as performing by itself within the administration of democratic jurisdictions has develop into anachronistic.
Edward Mentioned’s “Orientalism” (1978) is commonly credited with creating the earliest foundations for the Principle of the Publish-Colonial State. Moreover, Frantz Fanon’s efforts to discover the intricate relationship between Imperialism and Nationalism notably within the period of Decolonization can be thought of as having crucial influence on the event of the Principle of the Publish-Colonial State. The Principle is anxious with the results of Western imperialism and its attendant colonial rule between the 18th and 20th centuries. In essence, the Principle of the Publish – Colonial State seeks to elucidate the results of colonial rule on the political, financial, aesthetic, historic, spiritual and varied features of the economies of the previous colonies. The Principle might be helpful in reviewing the query of democracy and underdevelopment in Nigeria, notably by way of Nigeria’s colonial and neo-colonial experiences.
Learn Additionally: Popularity Of Coups Means Democracy Failing In Africa – GEJ
Globally, democracy is taken into account as the very best type of authorities. That is regardless of the opposite views of the most important philosophers of the Classical interval like Plato who described it because the rule of the mob and due to this fact thought of it harmful to the wellbeing of society, or Socrates who despised its propensity for demagoguery which may sway the individuals to vote irrationally. Moreover, the Age of Enlightenment heralded the appearance of 18th Century Liberal Democratic Thought which glorified democracy by its characterization of the idea as guaranteeing growth and political stability by consultant democracy vis-à-vis periodic elections, multiparty politics, rule of regulation, the primacy of elementary human rights and so forth. Nevertheless, regardless of all of the accolades accorded democracy, it’s but to show its mettle in post-colonial Nigeria, not essentially as a result of it has not proved itself elsewhere, however just because the dissimilar human attributes of the Nigerian political conjuncture has been a major intervening variable within the viability of Nigerian democracy to advertise growth.
Democracy is perceived to have didn’t engender growth in Nigeria because of a number of synthetic causes. First, the construction of authoritarian liberalism bequeathed to Nigeria’s indigenous ruling bourgeoisie by the retreating colonialists at independence allowed for administrative banditry by the ruling class which may do something it favored so long as its loyalty to the previous colonizing energy was not compromised. This meant that though the spirit of the previous colonizer was at all times watching the leaders of the unbiased former colony, it was not for the aim of guiding democracy to evolve growth. Fairly, it was primarily to safe the colonial channels of useful resource appropriation which their Nigerian political protégés now supervise. Secondly, neoliberal reform insurance policies of the post-colonial political management in Nigeria don’t come up out of Nigeria’s existential challenges and due to this fact, can not assure true and sustainable growth. As an alternative, neo-liberal reforms are sometimes meant to additional imperil and impoverish the “growing” economies which undertake them, such that normally, these economies develop into worse than they had been earlier than implementing the reforms. Shining examples on this regard are the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) of the Nineteen Eighties, the privatisation of the Nation’s energy sector, the devaluation of the Naira, restricted public spending by the removing of fertilizer and petroleum subsidies, the so-called deregulation of the downstream sector of the petroleum trade which has now created a humorous state of affairs through which the Nigerian proletariat experiences untold hardship when the value of crude oil goes up within the worldwide market, and so forth. To buttress this level, the privatisation of the telecoms sector underneath the Obasanjo administration of 1999-2007 was much more profitable by way of outputs and outcomes as a result of the reform was indigenously impressed to handle the problem of fast and efficient communication for a growing financial system like Nigeria. Accordingly, the poisonous neo-colonial diplomacy of commerce liberalization which weakens the capability of the Nigerian ruling class to make decisions within the worldwide system additionally predisposes it to all method of recommendations from former colonial masters in search of to destroy the Nigerian financial system within the curiosity of international monopoly capital. Sadly, the Nigerian ruling class is duty-bound to implement these so-called reforms an indication of loyalty to the metropole and as a method for regime safety/survival. This singular undoing creates the distinction between the democracy of the West which fosters growth and the Nigerian democracy which fosters underdevelopment.
Moreover, the roles of corruption, faulty coverage planning and implementation in addition to incompetent administration of sources that are all anticipated in a neoliberal financial system represent the human elements that impede growth regardless of the presence of democracy. On the stage of partisan politics, the “illiberalism” of Nigerian political events which frequently suffices within the lack of inside democracy vis-à-vis the handpicking/imposition of supposed occasion flag bearers by so-called occasion chieftains/financiers who see political events as their private property is one more reason for the failure of democracy to facilitate growth in Nigeria. Lack of intraparty democracy would give rise to the factionalization of the ruling bourgeoisie, triggering an efficient however malignant opposition to authorities, governance and growth. Imposition implies that a faction of the bourgeoisie may really feel short-changed and slighted, and would do the whole lot to impress its relevance on the political conjuncture. Accordingly, Nigeria’s underdevelopment within the democratic period is captured by the Principle of the Publish-Colonial State to the extent that the handpicked occasion flag bearers – particularly on the presidential/nationwide stage – would have been introduced to the previous colonial masters who would usually “display” them to find out the impeccability of their loyalty to the reason for unhindered Western entry to Nigerian sources. That is the idea of the Chatham Home pilgrimages often embarked upon by presidential candidates in Nigerian elections. Curiously, Nigerian presidential hopefuls don’t go to some other “Home” other than that of the previous colonial grasp, and due to this fact, Nigeria doesn’t belong to some other “commonwealth” other than that which was established by the previous colonial grasp. In some circumstances, the previous colonialists or their allies are recognized to have demonstrated their endorsement by bankrolling the elections of the favoured presidential candidates in order that when these candidates develop into President, their allegiance is to not the Nigerian state and other people, however to the metropolitan ruling class and their monopoly capital. Consequently, partisan politics which is without doubt one of the main planks of Western democracy is seen to fail woefully in deepening democracy by free and honest elections which enliven uncensored widespread participation to reinforce political stability, in order that growth might be availed the required ambiance to thrive. We due to this fact conclude that democracy just isn’t the issue of growth in Nigeria; somewhat, the operators of democracy are the issue of democracy; and due to this fact, the issue of growth in Nigeria.
The ‘Different Viewpoint,’ penned by Flight Lieutenant Christopher Uchenna Obasi (Retired), is a complicated weekly column that delves into the advanced dimensions of socio-political points. Whereas it concentrates totally on the African context, the column additionally casts a wider analytical web to embody world affairs. By incisive commentary and in-depth evaluation, it goals to supply various views that problem mainstream narratives and provoke considerate discourse on crucial issues.