As students of history we have come across many books on Nigerian history and have listened to many lectures delivered on different aspects of Nigerian history by scholars and have of course heard and watched debates and programmes on radio and television concerning this subject.
From all that we have learned about Nigeria, many us are made to believe in the works of colonial and post colonial historians on certain aspects of our history, especially when they try to argue that Nigeria is a creation of the British, a position that is still lingering on the minds of many of us and has thus created doubts as to the viability of the Nigerian project. It is indeed a position that has created a negative attitude in our people and is generally derailing our progress as a people.
Many of us will agree that Nigeria was officially created by the British in 1914, but our history has also shown that there had been interaction between the various peoples of Nigeria even before the advent of colonial rule. Indeed, history has shown that there was continuous movement of economic goods from the north to southern Nigeria and vice versa. But this is not to say that Nigeria existed as an entity at that time, but is rather a pointer and indication to the flexibility and familiarity that existed between us even before colonial conquest.
And it is a known fact that no single country on earth existed as an entity right from time, we are all historical witnesses to the founding and discovery of America by Christopher Columbus. Was there any United States at that time? Paraguay, Argentina or Bolivia? Even if there were people there, they must have been living in very tiny communities if not even wandering in the bushes, without any elaborate administrative machinery. And even in places like Nigeria where the great empires of Kanem Borno and Oyo are to be found, it is clear that they grew and expanded over time. The Oyo kingdom extended up to Dahomey in Benin republic and as such could not have consisted of only Yoruba people. In Kanem there were many different groups such as the Kanuri, Koyan, Kaburi, Ngalaga, and Tubu etc and of course these people had different ways of lives and beliefs but yet they all lived together. And again take a look at the composition of the United States, now including blacks; at what point did they start to have something in common with the white people?
And so it doesn’t make sense, and it is in no way intellectualism when scholars play on our intelligence by writing and saying that Nigeria is the creation of the British or the mistake of 1914 as they often refer to it in books, articles and journals. What these scholars are trying to tell us unintelligently is that every ethnic and religious group should have its own country if we understand them correctly, since their claim is that we share nothing in common and remember we have more than 300 different ethnic groups, meaning about 300 countries out of this landmass. They argue that no single group is identical in Nigeria, and even those that seem to have some similarity tended to disagree most, either within the north or south. All the same if we are to look at things objectively without sentiment, even if we grant that the British have a hand in our creation we must not call it a mistake, for it is now a reality, and it is we Nigerians that will work it out because our differences have been exaggerated by agents of imperialism disguising as scholars in a deliberate attempt to manipulate and exploit us.
From what we have learned from the history of Nigeria since independence, our inability to develop or grow as a nation may be attributed to two major factors: the first is lack of focused and patriotic leadership which gave birth to corruption and nepotism and the second is what we were made to know as petrotiasis (over dependence on oil resources); but even this can be linked to the problem of leadership. It is indeed unfortunate that the nation never had the opportunity of having the right leadership that will take the nation out of the woods. The path to growth and development has never been an easy one but we have been privileged to have models to copy from.
Throughout Nigeria’s history no government ever showed the determination, vision and ability to chart the right course to growth and development except probably for the Murtala and Buhari military regimes that showed some determination in that direction. But we Nigerians are such a luxurious people and would not want to go through hardship which is the price for development. And so it is up to us Nigerians to either embrace our country or allow it to collapse. Even the militants in the Niger Delta would not have been fighting if our leadership was right and just; it is not resource control, and it is certainly not Biafra, but the right leadership that will chart the right course, and I argue that it is also not democracy either.
Gamawa writes from
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
As students of history we have come across many books on Nigerian history and have listened to many lectures delivered on different aspects of Nigerian history by scholars and have of course heard and watched debates and programmes on radio and television concerning this subject.
From all that we have learned about Nigeria, many us are made to believe in the works of colonial and post colonial historians on certain aspects of our history, especially when they try to argue that Nigeria is a creation of the British, a position that is still lingering on the minds of many of us and has thus created doubts as to the viability of the Nigerian project. It is indeed a position that has created a negative attitude in our people and is generally derailing our progress as a people.
Many of us will agree that Nigeria was officially created by the British in 1914, but our history has also shown that there had been interaction between the various peoples of Nigeria even before the advent of colonial rule. Indeed, history has shown that there was continuous movement of economic goods from the north to southern Nigeria and vice versa. But this is not to say that Nigeria existed as an entity at that time, but is rather a pointer and indication to the flexibility and familiarity that existed between us even before colonial conquest.
And it is a known fact that no single country on earth existed as an entity right from time, we are all historical witnesses to the founding and discovery of America by Christopher Columbus. Was there any United States at that time? Paraguay, Argentina or Bolivia? Even if there were people there, they must have been living in very tiny communities if not even wandering in the bushes, without any elaborate administrative machinery. And even in places like Nigeria where the great empires of Kanem Borno and Oyo are to be found, it is clear that they grew and expanded over time. The Oyo kingdom extended up to Dahomey in Benin republic and as such could not have consisted of only Yoruba people. In Kanem there were many different groups such as the Kanuri, Koyan, Kaburi, Ngalaga, and Tubu etc and of course these people had different ways of lives and beliefs but yet they all lived together. And again take a look at the composition of the United States, now including blacks; at what point did they start to have something in common with the white people?
And so it doesn’t make sense, and it is in no way intellectualism when scholars play on our intelligence by writing and saying that Nigeria is the creation of the British or the mistake of 1914 as they often refer to it in books, articles and journals. What these scholars are trying to tell us unintelligently is that every ethnic and religious group should have its own country if we understand them correctly, since their claim is that we share nothing in common and remember we have more than 300 different ethnic groups, meaning about 300 countries out of this landmass. They argue that no single group is identical in Nigeria, and even those that seem to have some similarity tended to disagree most, either within the north or south. All the same if we are to look at things objectively without sentiment, even if we grant that the British have a hand in our creation we must not call it a mistake, for it is now a reality, and it is we Nigerians that will work it out because our differences have been exaggerated by agents of imperialism disguising as scholars in a deliberate attempt to manipulate and exploit us.
From what we have learned from the history of Nigeria since independence, our inability to develop or grow as a nation may be attributed to two major factors: the first is lack of focused and patriotic leadership which gave birth to corruption and nepotism and the second is what we were made to know as petrotiasis (over dependence on oil resources); but even this can be linked to the problem of leadership. It is indeed unfortunate that the nation never had the opportunity of having the right leadership that will take the nation out of the woods. The path to growth and development has never been an easy one but we have been privileged to have models to copy from.
Throughout Nigeria’s history no government ever showed the determination, vision and ability to chart the right course to growth and development except probably for the Murtala and Buhari military regimes that showed some determination in that direction. But we Nigerians are such a luxurious people and would not want to go through hardship which is the price for development. And so it is up to us Nigerians to either embrace our country or allow it to collapse. Even the militants in the Niger Delta would not have been fighting if our leadership was right and just; it is not resource control, and it is certainly not Biafra, but the right leadership that will chart the right course, and I argue that it is also not democracy either.
Gamawa writes from
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
