When Technical Debate Meets Workplace Dysfunction

The Facts Always Win

In a lengthy set of exchanges on a technical forum, we tried to resolve what became an exception to the rule that proved a process was not functioning as intended or designed.

It was the second of such conversations where, again, one assumption about facilitating something could not be proven by the evidence gathered. My engineering background compels me to seek out and gather the evidence proving a point. Once I have that evidence, I can only be dissuaded with superior data.

My work life is filled with many such arguments where, as far as I am concerned, electronic data is more reliable, convincing, and conclusive. If you cannot present the evidence of the facts in play, then you are left adrift, subject to illogical premises redolent of clutching at straws.

Poorly Reading the Room

I appreciate that I can be quite forceful, but I make no apology for that. Whilst I am neither infallible nor omniscient, I am quite thorough and won't mind painstakingly reviewing whatever viewpoints I have reached if there is any doubt that the means for making those assertions are suspect.

Caught in the flow of these conversations, someone mistook the technical commentary for social banter. Taking exception, he suggested we take our liaison to a private space and, once we had consummated our tryst, we could return with the baby.

You pause and wonder what had got into them. You might take into consideration that they might have had a bad day, but to intrude and insinuate in that manner was uncalled for. The fact is, I have to countenance many impolite, uncouth, bad-mannered, and ill-disciplined people in the managerial cadre who exhibit little respect for their reports.

Another Place, Another Face

Having been a freelance consultant for three decades, I am quite likely to understand this more and better than those who have only been the archetypal corporate person. Anyone has the prerogative to shimmy and slide up or down the greasy pole in obedience and obsequious genuflection for pecuniary advantage. I have seen the best and the worst of the lot, but not at my expense.

My interlocutor was having none of it. Just one unfortunate abuse of privilege and an inadvertent level of tone can quite seriously piss people off. Our accuser was swiftly told off before a feeble apology came in response. I do not have to always be the vocal contrarian, and, likely, my card is already marked, but I am unperturbed.

There is an art to office politics and the power plays of the little-minded that amuse no end.

If the axe is dull,
And one does not sharpen the edge,
Then he must use more strength;
Wisdom is profitable to direct. Ecclesiastes 10:10

We've been at this game long enough to know where to use a dull axe, how it needs to be sharpened, when to use more strength, and wherefore the wisdom to see people for who they really are. In the same vein, all is vanity, vanity.

Withstand the narrative

What They Are Saying

The immigration debate, if there ever was a decent one where polite conversation with a frank exchange of ideas was possible, is becoming so coarse that it is difficult to appreciate whether the utterances have been seriously thought through, or whether this is a race to the bottom in a quest to gain the populist crown.

One Tory MP deemed to be a future party leader suggested at the weekend that legally settled families be deported to make the UK "culturally coherent". Apparently, those with a legal right to stay in the UK might have their status revoked to force them to "go home". [The Guardian: Tory MP criticised after demanding legally settled families be deported]

I am neither shocked nor alarmed; we have heard many variations of the same theme going back to the time of Enoch Powell, whom my father withstood in a Wolverhampton pub soon after his "Rivers of Blood" speech. [Wikipedia: Rivers of Blood speech]

What is evident is that people with influence and a prospective handle on power are putting their thoughts into words, for the record, that we can now read, quote, and choose not to forget. I hope we do not just wring our hands in disgust but work against this narrative as a seed that could become the rallying cry of the unwittingly led to endorse odious views inimical to social cohesion and progress.

What We Must Withstand

The perilous trajectory of these words aims to undermine and erode the foundations of fairness, justice, human rights, and the rule of law in society and the community. We must hold firm to the spirit, the letter, and the defence of the quote often attributed to many great men of the past: "What is morally wrong can never be politically right."

Condemning the viewpoint should just be the beginning, even if the person apologises for their choice of words that convey intent rather than action. The impetus is on us to challenge these narratives with data, facts, the truth, and better-argued points that engage our better nature, rather than appealing to our basest instincts.

We all have the capacity for intelligent conversation; we should resist the inclination of the malevolent to drag it to the gutter of humanity.

Mind your tone or get stoned

Mind your (use of) language

Many years ago, during my postgraduate programme, there was a class interaction where I challenged an assertion and demanded the proposer defend their position or rescind their premise. This was supposed to a rigorous and robust exchange of ideas and opinions, I did not think anything about it until our lecturer sent me a stern email asking me to apologise and withdraw my comment.

I apologised and withdrew my comment even as my colleagues could not see or understand why I was asked to reflect on my way or tone of expression. Within an international setting of the use of English, the lecturer had set the lowest common denominator of expression that mollified tone, crippled expression, eliminated nuance, and elevated the perfunctory to making an art of the bland.

Language is getting difficult

If anything, it stifled debate because no one was sure of what the arbitrary rules were as different versions of English sought a level of uninspired thought processing, each of us walking on eggshells just biding our time through the 8-week module in the hope that we will not lose purpose for the next challenge.

I now find that the language of our once globally understood and easily accessible discourse is evolving so rapidly into Shibboleths of war; you get usage, context, meaning, structure, tone, or grammar wrong, and you risk punishment and losing everything at the onslaught of excoriation and disapproval. It is like there is a cohort of readily offended seekers with feelers sniffing any mode of communication to find something to be offended by and set off a pile on.

The shifting sands of meanings

It is literally impossible to keep up with the terms and the redefinition of terms, the surfeit of sociological and anthropological jargon in search for a situation to contextualise in psychobabble, and whilst I have kept up with gay changing from happy to homosexual in common parlance, when I woke up this morning, I realised woke hardly referred to getting out of bed but a sense of awareness that triggering culture wars. Whatever that means.

Wiser counsel would suggest one keeps out of the global conniptions that pass for healthy debate. It left me wondering, if you have to qualify a noun, then the noun is qualified because it cannot stand alone for understanding, appreciation, and context at first use, else there is no need to qualify the noun in the first place.

Dare I even mention the noun in dispute? Not if I want my peace. I can contend with the debates in my head it is when you have to deal with people who are unpersuadable and entrenched, fully convinced of the rightness of their apparently unassailable views; it is a case of banging your head against a wall. Fundamentalist and extremist, they are, just avoid them.

Jo Cox MP (1974 - 2016)

A sad day for our democracy

When I read earlier today that a member of the UK parliament had been attacked, I probably did not read the detail of the story thinking the dust will settle and everything will be fine soon.

I got home and was shocked to learn that Jo Cox MP for Batley and Spen in Yorkshire had died of injuries sustained from being shot and stabbed just in front of her surgery. This was a mother of two young children who would have turned 42 in just 6 days’ time. [BBC News]

The tributes that have poured out in sympathy and recognition of this amazing young woman who has had a lifetime career of fighting causes for the poor, the needy, the enslaved, the refugee and many other powerless and exploited makes her in the one year of her parliamentary representation a glowing example of our democracy and her appreciation of the privilege and responsibility her constituency placed on her to fight their cause.

She died in the line of duty, doing the fundamentals of constituency representation, meeting people, tackling issues and putting forward her embracing worldview when she was attacked.

A better world

Now, it is suggested her attacker who presumably is a loner who kept himself to himself but loved gardening said some words as he assailed her and wounded a couple of other bystanders, we may never fully understand why he chose to harm and kill this woman regardless of whatever strength of feeling and animus he had towards her.

In her maiden speech in the House of Commons made on the 3^rd of June 2015, as she spoke of the diversity of the constituency she represented, she made a very profound statement, “We are far more united and have far more in common with each other than things that divide us.”

[]

Her widowed husband, Brendan Cox released a statement that included, “Jo believed in a better world and she fought for it every day of her life with an energy, and a zest for life that would exhaust most people.” [BBC News]

Tone it down

Now, MPs do face aggression and some have suffered physical attacks though it’s been about 25 years since an MP died as a result of such an attack.

We must reflect on what is becoming of our democracy, the disagreements leading to disagreeableness and egged on by rhetoric that would inspire some to violence. The use of otherness, separateness, division to accentuate difference and pitch our common humanity against each other for political gain.

The demonization of allies, partners, friends, neighbours, communities, religions, beliefs, of Brussels, of Europe, of foreigners, of immigrants, of countries and so on as we have seen in the recent London mayoral elections and the current #BREXIT debates. All this exacerbates the tendency to harm others in word and in deed. When we denigrate anyone of us, we create a negative atmosphere that registers with our basest instincts and it encourages the less disciplined amongst us to atrocious and heinous acts.

Leveraging fear and loathing towards professing a kind of exceptionalism and an incipient superiority complex in relation to equal participants in a wider regional bloc that always requires persuasion, debate, compromise and consensus to achieve common goals and ends to the benefit of all of us.

Her enduring legacy

Jo Cox in her short life saw a bigger picture, a shared humanity and the passion to speak up for the voiceless, it took her to places of conflict and suffering in the quest to make lives better, she had a big heart and open arms to people regardless of who they were and in the vigil kept for her earlier this evening, we saw how she had earned the respect of all who ever had the opportunity to have an encounter with her.

I did not know Jo Cox until today, but I will never forget her after today, the spirit of what she espoused is what we should all embrace, she was a Europhile, she believed in the European project, she said as much in her maiden speech and it is very possible that this contributed to the attack on her person.

We should when we have a platform understand the responsibility that comes with the ability to make people think or agitate them to mob violence. I would hope each and everyone approaches that responsibility with deep reflection that strengthens the togetherness of our diverse humanity. That is the legacy of Jo Cox, may her gentle soul rest in peace and may her loved ones find strength and fortitude in this unfortunate and deeply sad time of loss.

Thought Picnic: The Questions That Challenge My Writing

Must I?

The urge to write but the absence of drive to type in the words that occupy my thoughts in waves of angst and debate sometimes haunts me.

As if there is an agenda and a deadline to meet, I find myself counting the days since I last put something on my blog realising it is not really the absence of things to write about but some involuntary decision to leave some issues to incubate to hatch into something more engrossing or when the whole idea seems incomplete, it is not ready for sharing.

It does?

Meanwhile, when I do get to post a tweet or two on Twitter, some of those thoughts attaching themselves to some personality, event or idea finds expression which could well trigger some debate and in that one does get some fulfilment.

However, the blog still remains in my view the compendium of thought, allowing acuity, application and purpose, ensuring the complete train of thought is properly given the rigour it deserves.

He was?

Having attended a book launch on Saturday or better still a launch of books that featured Nkem Ivara’s Closer Than A Brother [On Kindle] and Victor Ehikhamenor’s Excuse Me! [In Paperback and On Kindle] along with recitals by poets I only just learnt of at the meeting, Inua Ellams & Afam Akeh, I almost fancied myself a writer until I realised I am probably not as cut out for that level of genius that gives words the ability to excite spontaneous laughter and deep thought – blogs will suffice.

Interestingly, amongst the writers was a man whose mellifluously caustic and acerbic wit in his review of many books is worthy of a Pulitzer and much else – he says he is a reader, but there are many who want to read his opinions of many issues so whilst he reads, he must by all means write too. We know him as Pa Ikhide on Twitter and this is where he blogs.

And them?

By the time I knew what was going on, I was meeting @chemelumadu, @ChikaUnigwe, @RGAMeyer, @ChiomaChuka, @IkeAnya who was the compère, my cousin, then some names that had to get away for another event were in the audience apart from some Nigerian High Commission bigwigs who later joined us to make a table of 16 at a Thai restaurant afterwards.

As the life form of blogs go, I have gone from the lethargy of writing to name-dropping and thoughts of other blogs I could write about so many things that happened from the week past until today, but we’ll end here – the keyboard has a way of tapping into my subconscious and that’s me back in flow.

Thought Picnic: In Support of Activism

Causes without course

Recently, I have found myself attending meetings where the ideas discussed are far from mainstream.

From a pragmatic perspective, there is no reason for those ideas not be part of the package of the good life of humanity but for all sorts of reasons due to history, culture, traditions, creeds, tenets, laws, religion, beliefs or politics people suffer unmitigated and unnecessarily bad consequences.

The voices are many

In such cases, the cause might well be lost for the individual but it does not have to be lost for society.

What keeps that cause alive is the voices, the many voices of those in favour, those against and those somewhat indifferent but available to be persuaded of the arguments of all sides.

Now, I know that certain voices are extreme, strident, aggressive and uncomfortable but that is the nature of activism and the drive for change.

The method is insignificant

There are times I have not agreed with the methods used but I very well appreciate the broader intentions, which are to achieve a goal that would do humanity a lot of good.

We have seen this in the rights movements to enfranchise the masses, women and then minorities, the activism to extend rights to the underprivileged and much more.

The battles are diverse and unceasing, but the victory for humanity even after great setbacks is only in a matter of time.

Channelling the inconceivable

This brings me to an interesting case of historical literature published in 1868, in the novel Phineas Finn, there is a recorded conversation as to how public policy is formulated and it is interesting that in the political arena, this seems to fetch true all the time.

Attributed to Anthony Trollope, this how the conversation went and I highlight the words that show the progression from inconceivable to essential.

"Many who before regarded legislation on the subject as chimerical, will now fancy that it is only dangerous, or perhaps not more than difficult. And so in time it will come to be looked on as among the things possible, then among the things probable; – and so at last it will be ranged in the list of those few measures which the country requires as being absolutely needed. That is the way in which public opinion is made.”

“It is no loss of time,” said Phineas, “to have taken the first great step in making it.”

“The first great step was taken long ago,” said Mr. Monk, – ”taken by men who were looked upon as revolutionary demagogues, almost as traitors, because they took it. But it is a great thing to take any step that leads us onwards.”

The initiators were not popular

The previous two paragraphs indicate that the discourse about a cause must never die and apparently the first step leading to the adoption of such policies would normally have been planted as a seed by those at the time of conception society might have castigated, excoriated, persecuted, prosecuted and even martyred but that is for history to discover and eventually document.

It is why I am never discouraged when a greater cause hits the buffers because of the political discourse of the day, it will never be the end and much will change over time to bring the good to bear of what is currently unacceptable but tolerated.

The Overton Window

Joseph P. Overton then came up with an aspect of political theory that illustrated the narrow window within which an idea might gain acceptance and consequently evolve into policy. This became known as the Overton Window.

The degrees of acceptance in increasing order of acceptance was listed as follows:

• 1.    Unthinkable
• 2.    Radical
• 3.    Acceptable
• 4.    Sensible
• 5.    Popular
• 6.    Policy

Someone will always have to think the unthinkable which with time after convincing others might be seen radical but over the course of time the argument is persuasive enough to be acceptable and might well become sensible enough to be offered as a popular choice by which time there is enough support to make it policy.

Change is inevitable

There are positive and negative trajectories to this but I believe the momentum for change will be for the better if amongst the articulate and prominent voices we have, those who are able to convey with great conviction the reasonableness of an idea that the unreasonableness of the status quo will have to be abandoned.

That is why I am in support of all forms of activism, some could well be counter-productive but in that quagmire the ideas will eventually find refinement and any reasonable person engaging logic with critical thinking and objective discernment will become an ally in the cause for the advancement of humanity, in communities, in societies or in nations at large.

The two-state solution for Palestine and Israel is not inconceivable, having women ordained as bishops in the Church of England is not impossible and the notion that homosexuality is unafrican has a course to travel from unreasonableness to a fact of reality – it has always been part of humanity.

Nigeria: Disabusing the false premises in our discourse

Hecklers on Twitter, I presume

Hardly had my blog of yesterday been up 10 minutes before I got a Tweet suggesting I had offered no specific solutions. Obviously, I was not surprised that this had come out of Twitter’s woodwork, probably a heckler attempting to interrupt me in the flow of debate or an assassin poised to gun me down.

Basically, at least from my point of view, I had never engaged this person before and unfortunately I have not carried over the real life response to this type of activity which is, if a stranger accosts me on the street playing familiar that I have no connection with, they usually get ignored especially if the hour is the witching hour – it was well past midnight on my clock.

I have decided to address the matters as premises at the top of this blog and push the background to the latter part of the blog.

Premise: Article suggests no specific solutions.

The blog was written as an analysis of a speech given, which appeared to signal resignation and confusion as to why the principal was in the job he was doing. We are well beyond analysis paralysis of the problems that affect Nigeria; it is expected that those who assume leadership of the country are versed in those issues and are ready to tackle them effectively, not lament on the impossibility of their circumstances.

Fundamentally, I am not the President, he is the President – it is a job that has the micro-management of scrutiny from everyone affected by his decisions, he has had the executive fiat to select his ministers and advisors – surely, they cannot all be bereft of ideas and solutions to take the country forward that we end up with a President who appears to have thrown in the towel.

Premise: This is not the time to coach Goodluck Jonathan to be a good President.

Whilst I am slightly annoyed with the idea that this man is learning on the job, I am much more annoyed that it appears he is not learning anything at all. However, if we are to live through another 39 months of this presidency, it calls for an intervention.

The Occupy Nigeria movement started off something, the House of Representatives probe on the Fuel Subsidy scheme appeared to uncover what might be a massive fraud, and it should become the watershed for this Presidency.

I dared say that since the vocation of my assailant was motivational, it was time for him to pen something about arresting a failing goal.

Goodluck Jonathan has a number of options; to honourably resign for the fact that the responsibility he has is overwhelming and beyond him, he be asked to step down for more competent hands or he pull himself up and get into the job of being a fine President – all of which are possible.

For all the promise that 2015 presents, we are in the now, the present and these present times require radical and effective action – performance is required, trying his best just not good enough – over to the excellence merchants, bring forth your success potions and get him drunk on the brew.

Premise: People are not hungry enough for change

I think Nigerians have taken enough insults from “know-it-alls”. Pressed with the need to survive, most just go about their business and seek comfort through extreme religious devotion with the hope that things change.

Obviously, a good deal of change will have to be led by the people, and it will not be easy, but we do not have to be reminded that we are caught in the grip of an unconscionable kakistocracy.

Premise: Most people who criticise Goodluck Jonathan have never led anything in their lives

That might be true, but does one have to have once been a leader to know whether they are properly led or not? This is a false premise and a fallacy. It is like saying, because we are not pilots, we have no right to complain if the flight is in a manoeuvre that appears to endanger the passengers.

In fact, I consider this argumentum ad hominem; there are many vantage points and perspectives on issues, and there is much that can be seen by those external to the circumstances whose input can at times help. It is like having someone who cannot drive being the eyes of the driver backing into a parking space – well, that premise has fallen apart already.

The fact is, many of us have assumed some sort of leadership in various ways, and how we have commandeered situations has determined either the success or the unfortunate failure of those endeavours – there are expectations of leadership, and where that leadership appears to be falling short, the qualification to criticise should never be predicated on the critic having been in that position before.

Premise: We all have to be change agents

“Change agent” for me has become a worn cliché; it is the jargon of purveyors of snake oil remedies. The main ingredient for change is knowledge and information, the possession of facts and a good analysis of issues. Some of that will include praise, criticism, fawning, excoriation and indifference.

Honest and frank observation must be key to furthering the discussion and debate whilst engaging other minds in the common goal for progress.

I am convinced a majority of Nigerians want change for the better, but each has to hear a message that appeals to their drive to effect change, and because personalities differ, there is no “one size fits all” approach to achieving that.

I have never been a “glass half full” person because I enjoy the good things of life; it all depends on the content. If the glass has fine wine, I will expect it to be half-empty, having drunk a bit, and I will be waiting for the sommelier to top it up. My glass will probably be half-full if it were bad wine – Go figure.

The background continues from the end of the second paragraph

However, on Twitter, I am much more mellow, quite accommodating and usually responsive, probably too good-natured and too much of an English gentleman for my liking.

So, I responded, the purpose of my blog was not written from the premise of “If I were President” but to ask that he begin to act like the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Meanwhile, I was reviewing the Twitter profile of my assailant, glad to know that he was a bit travelled and schooled; the long and short of the profile was as I have found on many Twitter profiles – Snake Oil Merchant on the Bleeding Obvious.

Motives in motivation

Don’t get me wrong, motivational speakers have a market, each person has a modicum of an inferiority complex that needs addressing, and there is enough pulp fiction to teach success, leadership and how to make money out of thin air – I have bought a few and junked much more.

However, you can hardly get the thickness of a Chinese wall between confidence tricksters that portend to have all the tricks to make money, especially ritualistic and religious ones and the more refined success merchants of the Un-impossible.

I knew I had my work cut out, mostly in disabusing the premises that govern their God complex of knowing why and how, having found ‘sheeple’ to eat their grass.

What my blog said

In the context of my blog, I doubt he had read more than what I wrote yesterday evening, considering I had at least covered this topic for over two years, and it was evident from my writing yesterday that I was expressing disappointment in someone who, at the onset, appeared to have promise.

In my view, President Jonathan definitely has rotten speechwriters, but speechwriters need to be inspired by the speechmaker to craft messages to convey a mood, a purpose or a situation. Both the speechwriters and the President have failed to inspire, and Nigerians, as passengers on a cruise ship about to be shipwrecked, are left confused as the captain and crew seem to have abandoned the ship long before the rescue has commenced.

The incredulity of it all is captured in speeches he made in January and February, which I reviewed in opinions published as blogs; the President was not pulling his weight and announcing to the world that he could not.

In my exasperation, I asked him to stop his lamentations and start to preside, I have had my fill of Nigerian politics but surely there must be better brains and more capable Nigerian hands to run that great country if the system is not warped against them for the benefit of the few who have mercilessly run that amazing country of great potential into the ground and we have to endure the sophistry of “glass half full” snake-oil success merchants who think the President’s best is the best Nigeria can have and all is well.

I am neither a coach nor a footballer, but I do not need to be told when a goal is scored and which side appears to be winning. The false premises have been debunked.

Pompeii: When debates deserve rebates

Doing absurd with excellence

Shakespeare gave us A Comedy of Errors and it was bettered with the Absurdity of Farce yet to be scripted into a play today.

There is a place where when they do absurd they excel beyond compare and the incredulity of it all left us gobsmacked and the world found the laughing stock of the evening either to make the headlines or to be ignored as a non-event.

He followed each time someone who won the spoils and later stepped in twice the accidental leader of the pack never having faced the count himself for what he could do.

Endowed with absence

Regaled in the emperor’s robes, he sways and swaggers with pomp and pageantry bringing along the highest honours of the logic of the zoo, putting primates in their place in what someone inferred was a tome so thick and grandly titled Strategies for backing out of an silverback tussle.

For when the cages shook and they beat their chests in the jungle climbing to the highest branch and balancing on a twig without falling with a crash to earth he sat in a tub of faux-bananas so endowed each bite expelled air that showed the trick of balloons filled with helium.

The rumble continued and one, maybe two could not be counted in the colony, the bush giving covering to the timid of sorts. The juveniles came and made sounds to our amusement one needed a didgeridoo for the North of the reserve left him bereft of the calls of the common.

Empty plinths are three

The day came and I felt like I have visited a heritage site with 4 plinths and on one was placed the statue like a plan for a great park that floundered because the patron ran out of money.

The curator attempted to make the visitors pay to view 4 amazing works of art when only one was hung for all to see – absurd, they cried, livid with rage, this we will not debate on, we want a rebate.

We moved as if from plinth to plinth though everything was about the only mounted plinth, the guide attempted to talk about all whilst addressing only one.

The boredom of heard again

The work was nothing of the art we expected but the multitude of words flowed as each aspect of its production was explained and we never fully got the detail before another stage was talked about.

Interminable verbosity had bored the audience to death but an undistinguished work of art exhibited by someone who pretends to genius will attract fools masquerading as aficionados knowledgeable with all faults.

The matters that really mattered never became the matter as the obsequious tamed genuflecting deliveries of softballs – a monologue, one said; a soliloquy did another and if one competes against oneself the winner might just be the very hard choice of oneself.

With that came a prize and so the farce for the record became a page of history.

Nigeria: The What About Us Presidential Debate

This blog was first published at NigeriansTalk.Org with the title, Nigeria: The Youth and the What About Us Presidential Debate

Update (25/03/2011)

The Nigerian Youth “What About Us?” Presidential Debate will hold on the 25^th of March 2011 at 7:00 PM (GMT) at the Shehu Musa Yar'adua Centre, Abuja, Nigeria.

The following presidential contenders will attend Chief Dele Momodu (NCP), Mr. Nuhu Ribadu (ACN), Governor Ibrahim Shekarau (ANPP) and Professor Pat Utomi (SDMP). The incumbent president Goodluck Jonathan (PDP) and Gen. Muhammadu Buhari (CPC) have so far declined invitations.

Channels TV Nigeria and Youtube will collaborate to stream this debate online at http://www.youtube.com/channelsweb

Additional details about the event can be found here.

Setting the stage

Writing for the Guardian yesterday with the title A Nigerian revolution [1], the celebrated writer, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie said she will be a moderator of the Nigerian presidential debate arranged under the auspices of youth groups with the theme, “What About Us” on the 25^th of March, 2011.

She starts off is identifying the issues of eternal incumbency amongst certain African leaders who have been in power from long before we could read until now and that fact that the leadership structure was quite different from those of the North African countries now in flux because Nigeria had become a democracy since 1999.

The plurality of our democracy needs to have its potency from the generally accepted statistic that 70% of the Nigerian population is under the age of 35 and hence needs genuine representation with regards to their needs and their aspirations.

Pride in our nationhood

That list of things that encapsulates the outlook of the Nigerian youth can simply be defined in terms of what would make any Nigerian proud to be a Nigerian in the brotherhood and sisterhood of the many and diverse elements of our nationhood regardless of tribe, creed or religion whilst offering the equality of opportunity to all to rise to be all that they could be.

We have come to a time when the youth should and must have a voice that can be heard and responded to with consideration, responsibility and sense of duty – our leaders can no more reign as demigods whose ideas and lifestyles are completely removed from the realities of those they represent.

A constituency to listen to

The first rung in the need for accountability in our representation can only be achieved in a forum where those who seek electoral mandate are ready to listen to and answer questions regarding what they intend to do to make the promise of Nigeria a realisation that exudes pride and praise.

The hope is when the debates come all representatives of the parties vying for election would present themselves for scrutiny, for tough assessment and the healthy debate of ideas, vision, mission and realisable goals.

The write-up also offered the opportunity for commentary that ranged from the well-worn issues of poor leadership and corruption to the historical landmarks that very few of the youth can truly identify with.

Memories we have not experienced

Interestingly, one non-Nigerian could remember Biafra, what I remember of that was it ended in 1970 and I was hardly 5 years old then – it is unlikely that that informs the dreams and aspirations of the youth of today but it represents one of those possible wedge issues that could take our focus off the critical issues that our country faces.

We keep being reminded of the North-South divide and the religious divisions which pale in insignificance with many people who live in mixed environments of varied allegiances, it would be very unfortunate if the youth allow their views of Nigerianness to be defined in those terms when the entity is still Nigeria and the identity is Nigerian – we have something that is worth fighting for and we should not allow selfish interests to usurp the agenda and the so-called politicians and power-brokers are mostly responsible for this travesty.

Education is the foundation

One particular comment dwelt on the broader issue of education and the need for all to recognise the value of education in raising the quality of life and status of all Nigerians. The ignorance that allows for preventable diseases to contribute to high mortality rates is unforgivable, the need for our generally patriarchal society to accord women and females equality and the right to education and the need for a language that allows for our citizenry to engage in the political process making the right decisions for themselves and their communities.

Too often politicians have exploited the citizenry and the preponderance of a type of vassality to the political class with the ulterior and inadvertent aim of keeping the uneducated or powerless oblivious and ignorant of their rights and hence the force of agitation to bring change.

The youth are here

This time, the youth are coming to the fore and they would probably decide who takes the political spoils and the politicians better have a good few answers to the question, What About Us? The youth would not be ignored, let alone patronised and one is hopeful that they are making seriously informed decisions based on track record, ability, ideas and competence.

If the result of April’s elections rest in the hands of the youth, whoever gets to power without being properly tested and assessed would in terms be representatives of the youth and they would have assume a modicum of responsibility in deciding the future Nigeria faces.

The pledge of the youth must be to use their votes well and not commit to allegiances based on sentiment or subjective criteria; we need to be able to say that when the youth asked that question they did their part in bringing a democratic revolution to Nigeria for useful change.

Surely, that is not being too optimistic, is it?

Source

[1] A Nigerian revolution | Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie | Comment is free | The Guardian

Nigeria: Jonathan, step up to the lectern

They should show up

Sometimes all you just want is for people to show up and stop fobbing us off with platitudes, legalities and technicalities. With the recently conducted NN24 Vice-Presidential Debates [1] which had the incumbent Vice-President conspicuously absent, the ruling party gave up a rather unique opportunity to participate in a very vibrant exchange of ideas and views whilst appealing to the electorate.

One is quite saddened that the hubris of incumbency tends to overtake the better judgement of people who having been elected for office to serve the people suddenly think their political gains have placed then in the stratosphere of demigods only to be lauded at rallies but never questioned on their views, ideas and plans for the nation.

In an ideal setting one would expect that incumbents to take every opportunity to prove that they should be retained and show that their opposition might not be up to the job, the quality of the debate appears to have forced the incumbents to reconsider but not commit.

Nigerians deserve better

It is really not good enough for Nigerians, we will not allow our intelligence to be insulted with sops of rice and biscuit donations or allow our lives to be endangered by trigger-happy security personnel who are clueless about good crowd control in the quest to show that politicians can draw multitudes to their supine feasts of megalomania and unwarranted adulation of those who need their bellies filled.

Nigeria needs heads, it needs brains, it needs competence, and it needs articulation in the forum of ideas that should be tested by probing questions and answers that would pass a greater standard of ability than sound bite, rhetoric or carping.

Step up or get out

Each time the President and his running mate stalls on committing to the contemporary requirements of intelligent scrutiny they become less eligible for consideration at the polls nor are they people who should represent us for one more day after the elections.

We should insinuate all we must and definitely challenge them at any forum we can, the case is simple; if Goodluck Jonathan and Namadi Sambo would not appear at the next planned presidential debate that their opponents without the luxury of incumbency subscribe to but have the clout to be recognised as worthy contenders, the incumbents have no business campaigning for votes.

The time has come for people who aim to lead Nigeria to make themselves available to forums where they can be assessed for what they bring to the table considering the future of Nigeria.

Step up to the lectern or get out of the race.

Sources

[1] Watch the Nigerian Vice Presidential Debate hosted by NN24 [Videos] | Celebrating Progress Africa

» Jonathan, Sambo ready for debate – Aide - Vanguard (Nigeria)

234Next.com | Jonathan may shun presidential debate

Thought Picnic: Using a putdown as a bridal bouquet

Starting with the alphabet

It is usually amusing to have to try and break down into fundamental parts the writings on my blog for the comprehension of people who do not bother to read and understand the points I am trying to convey.

I would be the first to admit that my writing hardly caters for the lowest common denominator of language or expression but I do take my time to clearly state my views and when controversial find a sense of balance.

There is no doubt that there are people who feel that the withdrawal of the Nigerian football teams from international competitions by the President is wrong – what has been missing from their clamour are clear reasons why they think he was wrong.

Scavengers are vermin

My blog on Questioning the FIFA Hegemony yesterday was written to offer exceptions to the FIFA rule of no political interference in national football associations with clearly documented examples of Togo, France and Nigeria.

A good blogging friend decided to highlight my blog as an excellent piece on Facebook and before you knew it, vultures descended on it, dismissed it out of hand and offered no objective counterpoint to the views raised.

That is what I find most irksome, seemingly intelligent people who yap and bark rather than foster an atmosphere for discourse with constructive input.

Distracted by a lack of comprehension

So, it was only right for me to suggest that certain readers might have been distracted by a lack of comprehension so evident from their comments to which one responded without first wondering if he really had missed the context of my blog by suggesting what I had written was stupidity beyond words, he had earlier said I was talking trash.

That left me with no other option but to state that the blog could not be recomposed on Facebook to accommodate intellect below par all by reason of the fact that the exchanges did not address with any sense of understanding of the matters raised in my blog.

In some ways, my less than courteous statements were flung out like a bridal bouquet and the over-exuberant bridesmaid made a lunge for it tripping over her shoes.

As a matter of principle, I never set out to patronise anyone nor do I enjoy the prospect of belittling people either, but when such persons make a blatant show of common breeding unworthy of gentlemen, it simply sets the stage for a gentle English putdown; the sad end of the tale is what once looked like a man is really a boy – and boys rarely ever understand when men speak.

Nigeria: The false debates on same sex marriage

A bill to kill

This blog has been edited and parts of it have been rewritten to offer more clarity.

I have decided to tackle this issue head-on because I am fed up of our democratic representatives debating with fallacies and untruths fed by bigotry, ignorance, stupidity and religious fundamentalism.

It is just completely out of order to have seemingly educated and enlightened people engage in subjective discourse on serious matters that need most clear-mindedness and fair-mindedness to arrive at objective conclusions.

I wrote in my last blog [Blog-City] that the bill providing an outright ban on same sex marriage had passed in the Nigerian legislature [Sun News Online] when in fact it had just scaled though the 2nd reading in the House of Representatives unanimously [HRW].

The seriousness of the issue prompted the Human Rights Watch to write to the President about their concerns for basic human rights. [HRW]

Busybody representatives in full flow

Note: I would be quoting liberally from the Sun article [Sun News Online].

It is interesting to note that the bill was sponsored by the deputy chairman of the House Committee on Steel [Afrol News], at a time that Nigeria is vying to become leader in steel production in Africa after having lost the premier oil producer position in Africa to Angola [Reuters].

His bill was supported by the chairman of the House Committee on Diaspora [IGLHRC] which probably indicates that lady is completely oblivious of the many Nigerian homosexuals who live abroad away from this despicable persecution mob.

Then another chairman of the House Committee on Gas Resources [NPR] in the midst of the gas flaring environmental disasters and that of Steel added their views before deputy chairman of the House Committee on Human Rights [HRW] added her tuppence to the debate.

The links beside each House Committee would suggest to me that they should be very busy doing other productive things more aligned to their briefs rather than to engage in this idle banter promoting prejudice and religious fundamentalism.

The reality is this kind of topic does not require the exacting thoroughness of producing dossiers, interpreting hard facts as contained in statistical data or burning the midnight oil seeking to knock out policy documents for serious legislative debate and progressive politics.

Anyone can engage in this debate as an expert, drawing from their wealth of bigotry, their resources of prejudice having been schooled in unfounded generalisations and grounded in religious fundamentalism – you might well throw a rabid dog into the pack and get a vote of confidence.

This is easy work for legislators who get paid so much and produce so little as it offers the opportunity for people to say the most dastardly and repulsive things and still garner applause from the floor – we are being short-changed big time.

The debate or the prejudices

And so the debate with the context that, “all condemned such marriage, saying that it was immoral, against African tradition and God designs for human being.” It would make you wonder if you were in a debating chamber of democratic discourse or in a seminary.

But what is striking about this is that the House was about to legislate on an issue of morality, not criminality, policy nor point of law but some deep seated prejudice that has no particular basis in fact.

As one representative goes on to say, he “noted that the act depicts moral decadence in any given society and a digress from God’s purpose of creating marriage institution, stressing that such act as stated in both Islam and Christian religions remain ungodly act.”

The bad faith of the House

Whatever happened to other religions including indigenous home growth animist faiths where they might not be so particular about who is sleeping with whom?

Besides, would Christians who eat pork then be more unclean than Muslims? It just goes to show that we cannot have legislative debates so heavily tinged with religious sentiments not expressed by the clergy but by nominal adherents with a fanatical bent.

An elected representative then says, “It is against my faith to have same sex marriage. It is against our penal code to even engage in activities that are as quarrelsome as this between man and man, as well as women and women.”

I do sympathise that it is against his faith but is he there to represent his faith, the collective Nigerian faiths or ensure that there is a clear separation between the accepted religious systems and the State?

The issue might well be a matter of conscience but democratic representation does not confer the right to impose personal prejudices on a national debate; in matters like this the representative should abstain because expressing such a contextual prejudice at jury selection would definitely lead to disqualification.

As for the penal code, it is in need of repeal, it arrived in our statute books by reason of colonisation and those who colonised us have already repealed those intemperate laws in their home countries.

This gets my rag

Then the nuclear option; get emotive and do not let the truth get in the way of the sensational as one representative says, “It is time for us at this point in time to think back and look at the scourge of HIV/AIDS. The greatest means of transmitting this disease is through the act of ‘sodomy’. Young children are already victims of been lured into this cruel and unimaginable act. It is an act of perversion.”

The part about young children being lured into sexual acts be those homosexual or heterosexual needs to be in a children’s rights bill and should not be conflated with one that talks about marriage which would essentially be amongst adults.

The scourge of HIV/AIDS in Africa is very evident but its prevalence and demography in the West is completely different from that in Africa – the legislator here is incorrectly asserting circumstances in another location, it is both dishonest and unconscionable whilst falsely labelling victims in Africa who have inadvertently been infected by other means.

Especially, in the case of victim wives, mothers [Isiugo-Abanihe(PDF)], children and those infected through blood transfusion, [NIHGOV] the people deserve a better voice clamouring for good and affordable health services available in the cities and the rural areas.

As Nigeria accounts for 10% of the global HIV/AIDS burden coming to about 4 million inhabitants that are sero-positive with the possibility of that creating 3 million orphans by the end of the decade. [USAID]

We can safely conclude that orphans are not offspring of homosexual intercourse but are products of heterosexual consummation where as another reference suggests prevalent extra-marital relationships increase the risk profile [Isiugo-Abanihe(PDF)].

The numbers are a sad story

Sadly, it is women who carry the greater burden of HIV/AIDS in Nigeria accounting for more than 50% of those infected, with children accounting for 8% [HIV InSite] and it is quite unlikely that this is by reason of the immoral behaviour that so excites the legislators.

Basically, we have a health emergency in Nigeria because of HIV/AIDS [AVERT] [Wikipedia] and malaria [HIV InSite] but those are topics out of the reach of the humanity and compassion of our politicians to tackle; their religious myopia compels them to chase after shadows, giving the appearance of doing something positive for the country.

Dropping the word sodomy into the debate is the red-rag to the bull of completely dispensing with any objectivity, but the truth is that many studies have noted the increase in anal sex amongst heterosexuals [NATAP] [Wikipedia].

As contraception or something else

With reason, where Female Genital Mutilation [WHO] is prevalent, there is a tendency for more heterosexual anal sex than virginal sex [LibChrist].

It then makes interesting debate if the light of the Vatican’s aversion to family planning through the use of contraception [Time] [IPSNews], sexually active but considerate partners indulge in contraceptive anal sex which just happens to be against our penal code.

It does make one conclude that the legislators are just wasting time on useless laws that are legislated in the hypocritical denial of facts that depict a clear national emergency in need of serious attention.

Ditch the hypocritical God talk

The problems in Nigeria today are definitely not as a result of the activities of a handful of practising perverts, too many voices call on God in Nigeria that he dare not blink – to blame moral decadence on those few rather than on the lasciviousness of the majority is hypocritical and dishonest.

Nigeria is not a homogenous religious community like the Old Testament Jews under the leadership of a pseudo-theocracy; we are a democracy in the 21^st Century of 140 million people, for crying out loud.

Get doing the work that matters

This bill would now be referred to the Joint Committee on Human Rights, Justice and Women Affairs and I hope the human rights element of living in a global community gains ascendancy, that the sense of justice prevails over the idea of legislating on religious and supposedly moral issues and that they begin to concentrate on the plight of women by working to fully ratify the CEDAW protocol. [Blog-City]

If there is a need to ban same sex relationships, the argument has yet to be made objectively and not on moral and religious grounds – these matters should be able to stand the scrutiny of objective jurisprudence and legal challenge, the hysteria of mass prejudice to foment tyranny is not for democracies and that is what should be discouraged in Nigeria.