The impact of democracy on the lives of Nigerians
WHEN I received the invitation to make this presentation, I was rather uncomfortable for two reasons. First, I considered the notice of two weeks to be grossly inadequate and second, I felt that the subject matter was outside my area of expertise. But, in fairness, Professor Olutayo Adesina, the Chairman of NAL Seminars and Workshops Committee, asked, persistently, if I wanted to modify or change the topic.
I declined, also persistently, even though I was not sure I would be able to deliver a lecture on democracy to the satisfaction of an intimidating audience, comprising Professors of the highest echelon of the humanities, including our Academic Fathers and Mentors at the University of Ibadan, Professors Emeriti Ayo Bamgbose, Ayo Banjo and Dan Izevbaye. Yet, I had to accept the challenge, knowing that in today’s world of increasing interdisciplinarity, a philosopher should be able to handle any issue in a closely related field of academic endeavour.
Besides, I did not want to lend credence to those critics of philosophy who think that we do nothing but play with words and meaningless abstraction, at the neglect of substance. That impression is definitely wrong! Of the various traditions of philosophy, there are those that deal with substantive issues of practical life, human values, social and political institutions, etc. So, philosophy is capable of analysing the ‘ impact of democracy on the lives’ of a people, without losing touch with the practical essence of the system.
From a philosophical perspective
Distinguished Fellows and Members of the Academy, the special advantage of addressing an issue from a philosophical perspective is that it helps to clarify and cleanse the issue of muddles, inconsistencies and misunderstandings. The task before us in this discussion is to conduct an inquiry into the “impact of democracy on the lives of Nigerians”. The topic involves two basic assumptions, that Nigeria has been operating a democracy and that the system being practised has had some ‘ impact on the lives”‘ of the people.
If this same topic were taken up by a political scientist, for instance, the procedure would have been to conduct a survey on chosen samples, using questionnaires, interviews and other empirical methods, to assemble results which are then used in drawing generalised conclusions about the situation in the entire Nigerian society.
In philosophy, any such conclusions, so inductively inferred, are unacceptable as a true reflection of the Nigerian situation. Thus, by interrogating what the other disciplines do, philosophy deploys the tools of logic, argument, and conceptual analysis in the search for clarification of their methods, claims and assertions.
I believe that discussing an issue from a philosophical perspective is always more revealing and intellectually rewarding than from any other approach. But, then, the Academy is not a philosophy classroom. What I am trying to say is that anybody who has done some philosophy should be able to handle, with ease, the topic of this discussion.
I must confess, at this point, that there are extreme traditions of philosophy – the analytic or related traditions, for instance - which thrive on an extremely high level of abstraction, devoid of empirical content. If a philosopher of such a tradition were to conduct an investigation into the ‘ impact of democracy on Nigerians’, he would embark on a series of imagination or mental creation of a compossible or imagined world that would have existed, had democracy not been introduced to Nigeria.
To ask for the relevance of such an imagined world would provide the analytic philosopher with yet another round of intellectual gymnastics, ad infinitum, without moving an inch close to practical reality. This same endless process would follow if, for instance, we were to address the question of whether Nigeria would have been better- off or worse- off, without colonial conquest in the mid- 19th century.
This is what makes some traditions of philosophy vacuous and almost totally unproductive, as an instrument of social change. It is sometime called, knowledge for the sake of knowledge. The danger of going into such an empty conceptual analysis is that we are thrown into an endless field of imagination, out of which we may never emerge.
No doubt, this kind of intellectual exercise has its own value, and it is not peculiar to philosophy. Indeed, it is a feature of other disciplines in the humanities. Yet, I do not believe that we can afford this luxury, given the reality of the harsh conditions under which Nigerians currently live. Nor should the Nigerian Academy of Letters encourage such an academic quibbling that almost totally ignores the material content of the subject.
The question you might ask is: so, what do we do? And, my answer is that we set philosophy aside – at any rate, for the purpose of this discussion – move forward and go the way of other disciplines! Maybe, that was what Professor Adesina had in mind when he invited me to come and discuss the practical experience of the ‘ impact of democracy on Nigerians’, and not some abstract philosophical ideas!
Elements of Democracy
Historically, democracy was first introduced as a system of governance by the Ancient Greeks in the 5th Century BC. But, while the Greeks continue to take credit for inventing the basic forms and principles of democracy, their invention has been substantially refined over the years, and in different cultural contexts, such that the practice of democracy has grown and multiplied in so many forms and variations. Today, there is no one definition or practice of democracy that cuts across all human societies. Indeed, diametrically conflicting systems – such as the one practised in Western Europe ( including the former countries of the communist bloc), North America and parts of Asia, especially Japan, as well as the system practised by communist China and her followers - all lay claim to being variants of democracy.
For clarity and ease of analysis in this discussion, the term ‘ democracy’, shall mean Western democracy, using the United State of America as a typical example. And by way of a working definition, democracy refers to “a system of government in which supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through representation, usually, involving periodically held free elections”. Among the defining features of democracy are freedoms – freedom of speech, of movement, association, religious worship, etc; respect for human rights – right to life, minority right; a multi- party political system, political tolerance; a voting system; respect for the rule of law, and citizen participation through representation, directly or indirectly. Representation
In a democracy, there are representatives who have considerable latitude of choice. Although they are expected to behave like trustees, who should carry out the interest of their trustors, representatives deal with trustors whose interests are not always compatible or unified. This gives room for the representative with a superior technical knowledge of government, to manoeuvre, and, even pursue interests that may not be compatible with those of his electors.
The representative can hardly be removed from his position on the basis of perceived incompatibility between the interests which he pursues and those of his electors, except during elections. In the U. S., some States have, in their statute books, what is called ‘ system of recall’. This is a provision for voters to mobilise themselves and revoke, through a referendum, the mandate of a deviant representative. In practice, this system is cumbersome, and it has never been widely adopted. Nigeria also has this provision in her laws, but it has never been successfully applied for the recall of a representative.
Intrinsic obstacles to democracy
Among the obstacles against the actualisation of the ideals of democracy are:
Inequality – generated by education, knowledge, ignorance, differentials in material endowment ( poverty and wealth), indifference, etc.
Oligarchic tendencies – especially the tendency for small, but powerful groups to take over from larger groups, as well as, Self- interests of representatives as against those of the electors and
Manipulation of political parties as cults and oligarchies
To be continued tomorrow