Nigeria will be 64 in a few days’ time. It has not all been sixty-four years of pain. No, it has not. Much optimism greeted the birth of the nation. Much bloodshed went into a civil war that was ostensibly fought in order to keep it together for the good of all its constituent units. But the nation has not come this far without some broken promises and dashed hopes. There are still broken promises and dashed hopes, as I write.

Yet here we are: In thrall, as they battle painful policy decisions of the moment, which may yet deliver long-term benefits. In thrall, but unbowed, angry but determined not to be totally disruptive, full of angst and yet convinced that we are on the path to authenticity. Nigerians are facing their worst daymares (not nightmares anymore) yet.

Against the background of the foregoing, there is the prospect, or threat, of a national protest on the very day the nation is to celebrate the 64^th anniversary of its flag independence. And, lest we forget, there is nothing wrong with protests or petitions in themselves; as part of the global democratic enterprise. They may take the form of written correspondence, verbalized and non-violent submissions, or physical displays of discontent; including street matches and generous showing of placards, on which are blazoned the matters of disagreement at the moment.

Thus, protests are legitimate means of social expression, so long as they are designed and structured around the desire citizens to bring up, and bring about, useful and positive, interventions in the society. And that is what makes it radically different from a riot. In the latter case, aggravated misconduct is the norm. This may have no higher social purpose in view, beyond the desire to plunder the polity and carry off anything of value that lay in the way of the rioters.

Most riots are characterized by deeds of madness. There are usually no clear collective goals, beyond the general and specific acts of vandalism that could acquire lives of their own if unchecked. Even when they are checked, riots are what they are: riots. Unstructured, socially self-defeating and sometimes driven by what can best be described as motiveless malignity.

The national protests of two months ago, which, presumably, is about to precipitate another one that has been in gestation, were no riots in most places. Some poor, jobless and hungry people took advantage of the situation to go on a stealing and looting spree. The northern part of the country was the most affected in this regard. This was no surprise to many, because that part of the Federal Republic of Nigeria has been under the weather of ungovernability for far too long.

But we need not do ourselves in because of the allegedly planned October 1 protests. We saw more than enough protests in 1993, after the annulment of the presidential elections. We also know of the Aba Women’s Riot and several others, on the strength of which some have averred that our nation got its independence and everything about it today as a result of one type of protest or the other.

As was said here some two months ago: “It was the long-drawn protests of our founding fathers, in written addresses, in several constitutional conferences and some other means, that eventually birthed an allegedly independent Nigerian in 1960. Just as sceptics had their doubts about the sincerity of the colonialists when they promised us independence, many reasonable Nigerians also doubted the sincerity of the military whenever a ruling junta announced plans to return the nation to civil rule”. And that was after all manner of subtle pressures and open protests.

It was said, further: “Even more sceptics looked on with grave misgivings at the protracted military rule, unconvinced that it was serious when it “threatened” to birth a democratically elected government. Twenty-five years later, and despite the apparent shortcomings, we are making progress; willy nilly if you will. And that progress has more elements of suffering, misgovernment, lack of intraparty cohesion and the absence of a memorable ideological focus from the political class.

Our progress is coming through bitter, mind boggling, morally disorienting and psychologically devastating lessons. The lessons are apparently unscripted, and the teachers are teaching away without Lesson Notes and conventional teaching certificates. And they are exacting and merciless – these teachers.

The names of the teachers include the following: (1) Dishonest politicians, (2) Broken promises, (3) The consequences of citizen gullibility, (4) The results of supporting the wrong candidates, (5) The progressive denudation of the capacities of our national defense and security forces, and (6) The increasing inability of the ruling elite to protect itself from its own depredations”.

As was further observed here, “President Obasanjo, coming in as the first to hoist the flag of democratic rule after the military, was a quasi-military-civilian president. He did his best to craft good policies and establish institutions that would aid good governance. Presidents Goodluck Jonathan and Muhammadu Buhari were the circumstantial by-products of a system of elite myopia that had prevailed in the land for over 50 years. They were not entirely responsible for the problems they inherited. Their parties, the PDP the APC, were, again, not entirely responsible for everything that went wrong with Nigeria under their watch.

The Nigerian State was taken hostage long ago. For over 50 years now, many powerful individuals and groups have succeeded in pushing personal and limited group interests into the front row of national consciousness; such that, today, 25 years into a now-unsettling experience with a fledgling democracy, we are not sure where we really are as a nation. Those whose interests are at variance with wider and deeper national interests have become the real enemies of Nigeria. They may well have actually constituted themselves into a team of highway men and women who waylay everything that could rescue Nigeria and consolidate our current democratic experiment.

Protests are coming and going, because our “25 years old democracy is being bombarded from all sides by (1) A fundamentally distorted eldership recruitment process, (2) Skewed values, (3) A largely dysfunctional educational system, (4) A flawed national psyche and (5) A youth bulge that is increasingly becoming the biggest unaddressed national crisis. With every passing day, these problems morph into new, and self-replicating, societal challenges”.

The havoc wrought on the soul and psyche of this nation by the Nzeogwu coup d’état of January 1966 also came up for mention here two months ago. Part of the submission then was the counter coup that came some six months after Nzeogwu’s unfortunate intervention embodied the worst forms of thoughtless, state-sanctioned misconduct with impunity. We are living with its aftermath today. The initial coup, and the subsequent ‘retaliatory’ one, banished the nation’s true leaders from the political and leadership playing field”. They lived in silent protest for over a decade.

“The ‘replacement generation’ for the founding fathers and leaders of Nigeria, whom they were grooming along ideological lines for the propagation of specific ideological norms, stagnated for 12 years, until 1979. Zik, Awo and Aminu Kano would since have given way to the likes of Tafawa Balewa, Michael Okpara, Bola Ige and others before 1979.

The backlog of two generations of leaders, who were left unfulfilled by the military interventions, did not exercise and fulfil their calling. The petulant idealism and uninformed exuberance of the groups of coup makers trampled upon traditional rulers, traditional values, and almost every other thing that was generally respected as instruments for social control”. So, it has all been series of voiced and unvoiced and unclear protests at every turn.

The many institutional, sociopolitical and axiological problems plaguing the nation today, and which have plagued it for over 50 years now, got all the fillip they needed from the actions and inactions of the past. We got a deluge of prematurely retired military officers within a span of 20 years, precisely because of the negative dynamics of coup making in Nigeria. Many such retired military personnel became frustrated and unfulfilled professionals because of the new character of the Nigerian state after the 1966 military coups. Without intending it, many of them ended up being pushed into areas they would never have contemplated. And their new trajectories naturally elicited protests”.

The point was also made here that: “Our nascent 25 years old democracy has thrown up leaders with sudden stupendous wealth from questionable sources. Their wealth has mostly impacted their immediate and extended families, of less than 15 persons, and a few friends. Their local communities, members of their religious congregations, most of their friends and even members of their extended families know how poor or rich they were a few years before they went into politics. The priests, traditional rulers and other supposed custodians of public conscience ask no questions”.

Before the next protest, let the aspiring protesters be clear about what they want, what lines of action they wish to take and what specific positive outcomes they hope to achieve thereby. The protests will not be accompanied by riots if they are well structured. The government should have made some mileage for itself in discussions and negotiations after the last protests. But, but has it? The issues raised back them seem to still be on the front burner.

Many protesters are driven by poverty and lack of survival skills. That is why the Federal Government should look hard at the hunger in the land, revisit the impact of the measures it has so far taken to address the problems and make some preemptive interventions while it can still do that before October 1.

The efforts of the government need to be better contextualized for wider citizens buy-in and understanding. Protesters must be aware that their protests can only be meaningful if, in protesting, they remain fully conscious of the fact that the nation must exist before they can continue to carry out any protest in it. The president’s cabinet has not performed in such a way that it can be said to have impressed anyone, including itself. some ministries have done a lot, but the ministers themselves are dumb about it.

Quote

The efforts of the government need to be better contextualized for better understanding. Protesters must be aware that their protests can only be meaningful if, in protesting, they do not forget that the nation must remain in existence for them to carry out their protests successfully live to enjoy its “dividends”. The president’s cabinet has not performed in such a way that it can be said to have impressed anyone, including itself. Some ministries have done a lot, but the ministers are dumb about it. Mr. President, Biko, think more of capacity as you shoo out the non-performing ministers in your cabinet.

Several faithful readers of this column who have followed it from the mid-2000s in the Weekly Trust have asked me to spice up my columns with occasional commentaries on American politics and culture, which was the column’s dominant thematic preoccupation in its earliest incarnation.

This year’s presidential election offers an opportunity to do that. This week I want to explore a phenomenon called the “October Surprise” in American presidential elections about which I had written 16 years ago when Barack Obama and John McCain squared off.

An “October Surprise” is any dramatic last-minute event, typically in October but occasionally a little later than October, that swings the election to the disadvantage of a leading candidate. Such dramatic events are believed to have the potential to influence the outcome of the election by swaying public opinion or shifting the narrative around the candidates.

October surprises symbolize the unpredictable nature of the final stretch of the presidential campaign and the high stakes involved in influencing the electorate. 

Before talking about what this presidential election year’s October Surprise will be, I want to reference previous notable “October Surprises” and how they influenced the outcome of past elections.

The term “October Surprise" was coined during the 1980 presidential election between Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter (the only president my state of Georgia has produced). A year before Election Day, radical Iranian students had invaded the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, Iran, and held the Americans they found there hostage.

President Carter worked throughout the campaign to secure the release of the American hostages during which eight American servicemen were killed.

According to the Associated Press, “Critics say the Reagan team was so concerned that Carter would gain a boost by winning their release just before the election, that his campaign manager and others negotiated privately with the Iranians to ensure that did not happen.” This cost Carter the 1980 election.

But before October Surprise became entrenched in America’s political lexicon beginning in 1980, it happened eight years earlier. In 1972, according to American presidential historians, President Richard Nixon’s administration announced a potential breakthrough in the Vietnam peace talks, which bolstered Nixon’s re-election prospects. The war was a sticking point in the country.

During the 2000 presidential election, the October Surprise was a damning revelation that George W. Bush had been arrested for driving while he was drunk. It’s called DUI (i.e., driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs) here. It negatively impacted his image among voters, which probably caused him to lose the popular vote—and only narrowly win the Electoral College vote.

Bush became president only because of America’s strange, archaic, and convoluted system of electing presidents, which deprives voters of the opportunity to directly elect their presidents. He was declared president because he won the then battleground state of Florida by 537 votes out of nearly six million cast, which gave him the state’s Electoral College votes.

 In the final weeks of the 2004 election, all the major polls predicted that John Kerry would defeat Bush. He was a bumbling, incompetent president who was very unpopular. 

Then Osama bin Laden allegedly issued a videotape that criticized Bush and warned U.S. voters that "your security is in your own hands" in the election.

"It changed the entire dynamic of the last five days," Kerry told newsmen in 2008. "We saw it in the polling. There was no other intervening event. We saw the polls freeze and then we saw them drop a point, because all the security moms, it agitated people over 9/11."

There was also an October Surprise in the 2008 presidential election that nearly torpedoed Obama’s lead and punctured his campaign’s overweening confidence. On October 30, 2008, conservative British newspaper TimesOnline broke the news of Obama’s late father’s half-sister, identified as Zeituni Oyango, living in the United States illegally and that she first came to the U.S. on the invitation of Obama.

The woman was mentioned in Obama’s best-selling autobiography Dreams From My Father.

She was invited by Obama to the United States to witness his swearing-in as a U.S. senator. She returned to Kenya after Obama’s inauguration and came back again on her own. She applied for asylum, but her application was rejected and was ordered to be deported back to Kenya.

But she somehow escaped and had been living in the slums of Boston. The TimesOnline story initially did not gain traction in the United States until the Associated Press pounced on it and added a fresh dimension: that Obama’s aunt was not only here illegally but had contributed money to the Obama campaign, which violates America’s campaign laws, which stipulate that only U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents can contribute to political campaigns.

The news dramatized Obama’s “otherness” in more concrete ways than the McCain camp had tried vainly to do. Because AP’s reporting showed that the woman contributed up to $265 to the Obama campaign even though she was neither a U.S. citizen nor a lawful permanent resident, she helped to feed the Republican Party-inspired allegations that Obama’s unprecedented financial buoyancy was consequent on his receiving illegal donations from non-Americans.

What saved Obama was that Sarah Palin, McCain’s running mate, fell for a cheap prank by two well-known Canadian comedians by the names of Marc-Antoine Audette and Sebastien Trudel who go by the stage name “the Masked Avengers.”

They put a call through to Sarah Palin, which she picked. One of the comedians pretended to be then French president Nicholas Sarkosky. Palin believed him. And she went on for over 5 minutes discussing inane issues with the “ French president.” The conversation further betrayed her shallowness and ignorance of foreign policy issues.

This dominated the news cycle days before the election.  Sarah Palin’s inability to detect that she was being tricked even in the face of so many red flags during the conversation had the effect of canceling out the scandal of Obama’s aunt living illegally in the US and making illegal donations to Obama’s campaign. (Obama’s aunt later became a legal permanent resident in 2010 but died  four years later).

Finally, in the 2016 presidential election, FBI Director James Comey announced that a renewed investigation had been launched into Hillary Clinton’s email practices. This became a major talking point just 11 days before the election, which some argued influenced the final vote. Although she defeated Donald Trump by three million votes, America’s Electoral College system caused her to lose the presidency.

So what might be the October Surprise in this year’s presidential election? It’s hard to tell, particularly because Donald Trump is not a conventional candidate. He is the most morally flawed, most openly racist, and most explicitly psychologically damaged presidential candidate America has had in recent memory. Yet nothing seems to stick to him.

He once boasted that he could murder someone in broad daylight in the streets of New York and nothing would happen to him. He is what Americans call a “Teflon candidate.” Teflon is a substance used to cover the surface of cooking utensils, etc. in order to prevent extraneous substances from sticking to them).   

If any candidate should be fearful of an October Surprise, it should be Vice President Kamala Harris, whom polls favor to win both the popular vote and the Electoral College vote and make history as the first woman to be president of the United States. 

Had the attempt on Trump’s life taken place in October, that would have been the October Surprise that would hand him the presidency. Some people think it may happen again next month. 

The Edo State Government has responded to recent criticisms by affirming that Governor Godwin Obaseki‘s administration is the most transparent and accountable in the state’s history.

Naija News earlier reported that former Governor Adams Oshiomhole, in a statement on Thursday, called for an investigation into Governor Obaseki’s administration as it nears its conclusion in the coming months.

This followed the recent electoral victory of Senator Monday Okpebholo, who, along with his running mate, Dennis Idahosa, received their Certificate of Return from the Independent National Electoral Commission.

Oshiomhole raised concerns about Obaseki’s handling of a $75 million World Bank fund meant for the Edo Basic Education Sector Transformation (EdoBEST) programme, suggesting that the money may not have been used appropriately.

He questioned how the fund was spent, claiming the programme had not improved the education system in the state as promised.

“All the fraud that Obaseki was doing with so-called World Bank money, and I think the World Bank will want even to investigate what he did with that money when you have schools without teachers and you are doing EdoBEST. He left Edo worse,” Oshiomhole said.

In response, the Commissioner for Communication and Orientation, Chris Nehikhare, issued a statement defending the governor’s record.

Nehikhare emphasized that Obaseki’s government has consistently adhered to due process in awarding contracts, gaining national and international recognition for its transparency.

He said, “I would like to emphasize that Governor Obaseki’s administration has been the most transparent and accountable in Edo State ever.

“The government has adhered to due process in the award and execution of contracts, while the pricing and procurement processes have received numerous accolades both nationally and internationally.”

Nehikhare also highlighted that a staff member from Edo State is currently in Liberia to share the state’s best practices in procurement.

He further stressed that Obaseki welcomes accountability, contrasting his leadership style with Oshiomhole’s, whom he implied had avoided scrutiny during his time in office.

“One of our staff members is currently in Liberia to help replicate Edo State’s exemplary procurement processes. Various agencies, including the World Bank under the SFTAS programme, gave our government, Public Expenditure Efficiency Award, (The only state in the Federation) and Fiscal Transparency And Accountability Award (first among 5 States)as well as ICAN, have recognized Governor Obaseki with awards for his commitment to transparency and accountability.

“Edo State has experienced unprecedented levels of resource utilization, ensuring value for money. Our data and documentation regarding government activities are accessible at our data centre located in the Government House.

“Every action taken has been in the best interest of the Edo people, and we have the authority as their elected government to do so.

“Unlike former Governor Oshiomhole, who was shielded from scrutiny, Governor Obaseki welcomes accountability and does not hide behind others,” he added.

[NaijaNews]

A former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Yakubu Dogara, says contrary to popular belief among the members of the public, many politicians in Nigeria are not in government for money.

Dogara, who was a guest on Channels Television’s Sunrise Daily programme on Friday, said many government officials are ready to work for free if people’s expectations on them are lowered to an extent.

“If we can cut the demands on some of these our government officials by 90 per cent I assure you that there are so many people there who are willing to work free of charge,” Dogara said on the programme.

“But the situation is that you cannot put a lot of burden on my head, and you knock on my leg which I am supposed to stand in order to carry the burden.”

On the current hardship and hunger in the country, Dogara said that President Bola Tinubu acknowledged the situation in their discussion during a recent visit of former national assembly leaders to him in Aso Rock.

According to the former Reps Speaker, President Tinubu promised that he is doing something about the hunger and hardship in the country.

‘Tinubu Didn’t remove petrol subsidy’

The President has been blamed by many for the removal of petrol subsidy which contributed to the galloping inflation that has seen prices of commodities skyrocket, but Dogara insisted that Tinubu isn’t to blame as the subsidy was not captured in the budget before his election.

“We must accept whether we like it or not, except we are disingenuous to say that the removal of subsidy itself, whether the president said that subsidy was gone or that he was removing subsidy, we all know that subsidy had been removed before he was elected.

“It wasn’t in the budget, so if there is no provision in the budget, how do you pay? It is illegal for the executive to appropriate money.

“They can only appropriate money in consequence of an express legislative authorisation which is the budget. And in this case, there was no provision in the budget,” he said.

He said the most important thing is that the president has admitted the challenges he is faced with, adding that accepting responsibility for a problem is the beginning of finding a solution for it.

[Channels Tv]

Nigeria and Mastercard have announced a partnership aimed at supporting one million African farmers to improve yield and agricultural productivity.

The project plan includes support for one million agricultural workers across Nigeria, Kenya and Tanzania, with a focus on enhancing financial inclusion and digital access to critical services, as well as support from the African Development Bank (AfDB).

The partnership deal was sealed during a meeting between Vice President Kashim Shettima and executives of Mastercard Corporation on the sidelines of the ongoing 79th Session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA) in New York

Speaking during a meeting, the Vice President who is representing President Bola Ahmed Tinubu at the annual global event in a statement by his spokesman, Stanley Nkwocha noted that the initiative has transformative potential for Africa’s food security drive.

He said, “This partnership is an important milestone in our quest for comprehensive financial inclusion and agricultural empowerment.

“By leveraging Mastercard’s global expertise, we’re set to create unprecedented opportunities for farmers across Nigeria, Kenya, and Tanzania.”

Earlier, the Minister of Communications, Innovation & Digital Economy, Dr. ‘Bosun Tijani, explained that the partnership will provide digital access to critical financial services for agricultural workers, which he said is expected to significantly boost productivity and economic growth in the sector.

“We’re not just introducing new technologies; we’re reimagining the entire agricultural value chain. Our goal is to ensure that every farmer, regardless of their location, has access to modern financial tools”.

He disclosed that the initiative also addresses existing challenges in Nigeria’s digital payment ecosystem.

“We’re aware of the trust deficits that have hindered the full activation of contactless payments by some acquirers and banks. This partnership includes specific measures to bridge these gaps and ensure widespread adoption,” Tijani added.

Also, the Country Manager for West Africa at Mastercard, Dr. Folasade Femi-Lawal, said a key component of the partnership is the rollout of contactless payment systems.

“We’re planning 160 contactless payment seminars starting next February. These seminars are crucial in educating stakeholders and preparing the market for this technological leap,” he stated.

[Leadership]

Former Minister of Communication and Digital Economy, Professor Isa Ali Pantami, has addressed concerns about Artificial Intelligence (AI) displacing millions of jobs.

Pantami expressed his views while receiving participants in the PRNigeria Young Communication Fellowship at his office.

He said mentorship programs focused on skill development enhances career growth, improves problem-solving abilities and expands professional network.

“In the coming years, millions may face job loss as AI assumes various roles,” he noted.

“However, it’s crucial to understand that it will not be AI itself causing job loss, but the individuals adept at utilizing AI technologies. AI is ultimately a product of human ingenuity; it does not operate or evolve independently.”

Speaking on the fear of technology often described as Technophobia, Pantami said one of the characteristics of the Fourth Industrial Revolution is that expertise in technology does not necessitate formal education in computer science.

“Similarly, you don’t need a degree in Mass Communication to become an award-winning journalist or an accomplished public relations professional. This revolution is centred around personal development and continuous learning,” he asserted.

The former minister stressed that mentorship can transform lives, even through brief interactions, and encouraged young citizens to seek guidance from older persons who are professionals in their respective field.

“Mentorship bridges the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical skills. Education lays the groundwork, but applying theoretical knowledge requires hands-on experience,” Pantami noted.

The scholar further pointed out that while tertiary/university education provides the essential theoretical frameworks, practical skills are cultivated in the private sector in most cases.

“I have consistently emphasized that practical skills—not just degrees—drive success. There is a need for personal development, constant learning and retraining to stay competitive in the job market in today’s fast-paced environment.

“You need essential skills, including social abilities rooted in empathy, emotional intelligence, communication, as well as digital skills such as AI, programming and critical thinking. Staying updated with industry trends and technologies is imperative.

“I commend all of you for pursuing the PRNigeria Young Communication Mentorship Programme following your university graduation. While degrees are valuable, skills are equally important. Pursue formal education, but prioritize practical experience and continuous learning for success.”

Mr. Yushau Shuaib, Chief Executive Officer of Image Merchants Promotion Limited (IMPR), praised Pantami for accommodating the fellows on short notice and for providing copies of his latest book, “Skills Rather Than Just Degrees,” to them.

Shuaib said the PRNigeria Young Communication Fellowship was designed to broaden cohort members’ knowledge across various aspects, focusing on modern communication methods, emerging technologies, and multimedia sessions.

“The fellowship explores strategic communication and social media engagement while incorporating AI and machine learning to enhance communication. Additionally, we include multimedia sessions to address the transition from print to audiovisual.”

Shuaib added that the fellowship, hosted at PRNigeria Centres in Abuja, Ilorin and Kano, provides a platform for participants to connect with industry professionals through sessions at media houses and PR departments for practical learning opportunities.

[DailyTrust]

The Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, candidate in the just concluded Edo State governorship election, Asue Ighodalo, has registered his dissatisfaction with the election results, stressing that he intends to seek redress in court.

Speaking during an interview on Channels Television’s Politics Today, Ighodalo claimed his mandate was stolen by the All Progressives Congress, APC, with the help of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.

DAILY POST had reported that Ighodalo finished second in the election with 247,274 votes, while the APC’s Monday Okpebholo was declared the winner with 291,667 votes. Labour Party candidate, Olumide Akpata, secured 22,763 votes.

Ighodalo cited several issues, including the failure to use the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System, BVAS, in over 160 polling units, the skipping of proper collation procedures from ward to state level, and alleged collusion between INEC, the police, and the APC to suppress the will of Edo voters.

He stated that his party refrained from engaging in vote-buying, unlike the APC, which he accused of offering cash incentives to voters ranging from N25,000 to N50,000.

Speaking on his next steps, Ighodalo declared his intention to take the matter to the tribunal, where he believes the evidence will prove that the PDP was the rightful winner of the election.

He dismissed Okpebholo’s offer of friendship, stating that accepting such overtures would be impossible while the mandate remains contested.

“Because the mandate is stolen, there is no way you can accept these hands of fellowship or friendship.

“I will stay with the people of Edo State who fully gave me the mandate of their free will, and I will go into the courts and the tribunal to reclaim our mandate and then form the government,” he said.

[DailyPost]

Afrobeat sensation Davido has warned netizens against trying to calculate his net worth because they’ll never get it right.

His post on X sparked a flurry of reactions, particularly from his rival, some mocked him, saying his wealth comes from his family, while others doubted his financial stability.

“Stop watching my pockets, you won’t ever understand,” he said.

Fans and followers responded. 

@DanielRegha stated: “Watching ur pockets, & rendering financial advice are two different things; It never hurts to put oneself on a budget, especially since no-one knows tomorrow. Life happens.”

@reallest_gee said: “Na if you don broke you go drop coin wey go rug or beg 1x bet for gigs then drop game wey go spoil.”

@lifeofolaa wrote:: “Them wan count your money, them don forget say money na water.”

@RespiratoryDafe asked: “OBO, how Yankee stadium go be on Saturday?”

@wizkidfc_stated: “Your matter just dey make me laugh.”

@dammiedammie35 wrote: “Who dey watch your pocket OBO ?”

@honest30bgfan_ said: “You don later broke?”

@Philips_Teq wrote: “David, you don’t really have a pocket, na adeleke pocket you de use guide.”

Are Nigerians hungry because they’ve been drinking too much free beer and now the brewery is bankrupt? I ask because President Bola Ahmed Tinubu waxed rhetorical Thursday last week as he dissected the very bad hunger wracking his country and its more than 200 million people. “I understand we are hungry, but no free beer parlour anymore,” he said. Except the president is suggesting that we are a nation of drunkards, I am tempted to wonder what shred of meaning connects “hunger” and “beer” here.

What the president said was a rhetorical gaffe that deserves a rebuke. When a person says what he said and in the context he said it, the Yoruba would look at him and wonder why he is talking ìrù (tail) when we are talking irú (locust beans). What are we saying, what are they saying? We are begging for bread; they are belching beer. The old man saw liquid when his people cried solid. The president’s ‘learned’ supporters will insist that ‘beer’ is the president’s metaphorical substitute for ‘food’. That will be interesting. We’ve always suspected that metaphor serves as a ready refuge for the flawed – especially in the very slippery terrain of politics. But the Emilokan rationalists should remember to tell the president that a successful metaphor is one that is apt. When the vehicle and the topic cohere in semantic peace, we congratulate the metaphor birther for a successful delivery.

His preference for “beer parlour” where ‘food bank’ should be was a tragic subversion of aptness in metaphorical deployment. A mandatory credit pass in Literature is recommended for whoever would be president after this one. ‘Beer’ does not collocate with ‘hunger’.

The beer-parlour talk of the president may be one of his lasting contributions to language and the field of political rhetoric. You never can tell. He already, during the 2023 campaigns, dropped ‘balablu’ as one of his hit singles. Sometimes, what the enemy thinks is blemish ends up embellishing one’s memory. We call it èébú d’olá in Yoruba. William Archibald Spooner lived between July 1844 and August 1930. Between those years, he served as a clergyman, author and professor of ancient history, divinity and philosophy at the University of Oxford. He was described as “a well-liked, respected, genial, kindly, hospitable man” but blessed with “a head too large for his body.” Spooner was brilliant but was equally very absent-minded, and he got famous for it. He, in 1879, from the pulpit, famously gave out the first line of a popular hymn as “Kinkering Kongs their titles take” (instead of ‘Conquering Kings Their Titles Take’). And he did it, not intentionally.

When Spooner died, his obituary in the 1 September, 1930 edition of Manchester Guardian contains this passage: “All sorts of stories, probable and improbable, were invented… Of the well-worn ones, the best are those which made Spooner declare that he was leaving Oxford by ‘the town drain,’ that some unauthorised person was ‘occupewing his pie,’ that at a marriage it was ‘kistomary to cuss the bride,’ and that he was tired of addressing ‘beery wenches.’ Much better authenticated and not even a Spoonerism is his famous reply to a young lady who asked him if he liked bananas. He is said to have retorted, ‘I’m afraid I always wear the old-fashioned nightshirt.’”

That Guardian obituary was not only how Spooner was remembered. Because he said all he said, before he died, the English Language got enriched with one more permanent word – spoonerism. The word proceeded to get a barge of honour as a rhetorical device in literature – and a mention in neuro science.

Who knows, courtesy of our president, ‘beer’ may enter the English Dictionary as a synonym for ‘food’ just as the president’s social media enemies, irreverent children of anger, use ‘agbadoan’ as a collective name for his long-suffering fans. Agbado is the Yoruba name for corn. The president, before his election, recommended it as a solution to the hunger on the streets.

Now, more seriously, let us ask the president and his defenders: Can beer replace dinner? Or could it be that we are hungry because our leaders have been taking too much freebies from our liquor bank? Or could it be that our president has been too far removed from the caked reality of the scorched earth for him to know that the world is about to end courtesy of his apocalyptic policies? When the president said what he said and ended it with a demand for patience from the hungry, I heard a loud applause from his fawning followers. The president enjoyed that applause. How I wish he would read Shakespeare in ‘Pericles: Prince of Tyre’. The playwright says: “They do abuse the king that flatter him.” He says again that “kings should let their ears hear their faults.” Clapping when the leader spoke beer when food was needed was distressing; it numbs the soul. But you would ask who made up that adulating audience? Former principal officers of the National Assembly. They are plaintive ex-eagles desirous of new feathers for fresh flights and feasts. They are men who are ready to kneel lower than their knees. A high-five for what the president said shames all – especially the eight million plus who elected him last year.

The president also spoke about “free bowl” which he said hungry Nigerians “cannot just take”. Then he spoke about the closure of Nigeria’s “free beer parlour”. The tone, texture and context of Tinubu’s beer-and-bowl statement trivialized the people’s travails. Who will help Nigerians tell their president that their hunger is not for beer and the inebriation it offers? That the starvation cries in town are not a craving for free meal. That Nigerians do not seek, and are not demanding indebtedness to charity. All they seek are policies with a human face, a government that cares.

The town writhes in agony because government has lost its meaning. Every citizen has a personal reason for voting in elections. One of those reasons is what English philosopher, Bernard Bosanquet (1848-1923) explains as the hope by the citizen that the government would help him to become “what he has in him to be.” Not all who voted for Tinubu last year did so for party, tribe or money. Some genuinely thought he would make a positive difference in their lives. Now, everyone is stranded because the government crashed the car.

The country is in deep trouble. What is broken in our economy is brittle beer bottle, not calabash. It cannot be mended. It doesn’t look like the government is worried as we are about the present darkness. Where leaders do not care, we would be right to inquire what they have where a heart ought to be. If there is a heart there, then it must be made of something very hard. William Bascom wrote of the Yoruba concepts of the wicked and the hard-hearted: “A hard-hearted person is bad-tempered, easily offended, willful and stubborn, doing what he likes and paying no attention to what others say. When an ordinary person in anger would throw a small lump of dirt, a hard hearted person throws a large stone. Worse than the hard-hearted person is one who is ‘wicked’ (ìkà). A wicked person loves no one but himself; he advises others to sell things for less than he knows they are worth; he injures others and destroys their property without cause…” I agree. The wicked counts the number of stars he shoots down.

Last week, US vice president, Kamala Harris, told talk show host, Oprah Winfrey, that a leader’s real strength lies in “who he lifts up, not who he brings down.” She said the same, and much more, in another interview in April this year, long before she became the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate:

“We need a protector”, the interviewer told Kamala Harris.

And she replies:

“Yes. Sadly, over the last many years, there has been this kind of perverse approach to what strength looks like, which is to suggest that the measure of one’s strength is based on who you beat down instead of what we know that the true measure of your strength is based on who you lift up. You know, and if you ever want to measure, if you ever want some objective indication of your individual power, see what you can do to help other people, people in need. It could be some simple act, like just listening to how people are feeling and to sincerely, sincerely have some interest and concern about their well-being or their suffering. That’s what we want from leaders…That’s really what strength looks like and that’s the kind of strength that we want.”

That is the kind of strength Nigerians demand to see in their president. They do not desire a leader who sits somewhere far in the sky and speaks in tongues about hunger and patience; about beer, bowls and booze. A leader should not preen like a god while his people reel in pain.

We also read the president declaring last Friday that he was in government to work and not to make money. I read him and said great! A leader should take less and give more. “The less a man needs, the nearer he is to God who needs nothing,” said Socrates. But we read of our leaders’ stories of grasping and taking that leave us to wonder if some people’s needs have a limit.

About 50 years ago, Sakara music legend, Yusuf Olatunji, had cause to sing: “You said there is no food but your own children feed to satiation (E ní kò sí, kò sí, omo yín ńyó…).” Between the 1970s when the song was sung and now, what has changed is that things have grown worse. Our presidency is famed as the most powerful in the history of presidential democracy. It is also sadly, the most unfeeling. Ghanaian writer, Ayi Kwei Armah, asks: “Is it always true that it is impossible to have things strong and at the same time beautiful?” Our Federal Government is strong and powerful but so are wolves and lions in the jungle. We think our president should be king – or god – and we have him so invested. That should explain why a president says the wrong things and all palms turn zombie, clapping.

In a careless republic as ours, a president can easily become a virtual monarch, or even a god. We will soon be there – if we are not there already. It is possible some people have a shrine where they make offerings of kola and liquor to the Nigerian president. If they do, they would have several pages of history to guide them. One of them is in the West Africa magazine of March 3, 1945 which published a piece in celebration of the memory of an Alaafin who had just joined his ancestors. “The highest oath that an Oyo man could take was to swear by the head of the Alaafin,” the magazine wrote, and added that the people believed the late oba was divine. The oba himself thought himself so and he said so and acted so. How?

Eshugbayi Eleko was deposed as the Oba of Lagos in 1925 by the British. He was subsequently banished to Oyo town but he didn’t go quietly into the night; he went to court. During the ensuing celebrated case, evidence on some historical issues was needed in support of the deposed oba. It was to the Alaafin of Oyo that counsel to Oba Eshugbayi went.

The Alaafin was asked to swear before his evidence was taken.

Alaafin queried in anger:

“By whose name?”

“God’s name or by the name of your idol,” the lawyer told him.

“I myself am God!” the oba replied.

By calling himself god or God, the Alaafin of 1925 had not said what no one had ever said.  About 300 years earlier, King James I of England uttered something weighty about the king occupying a throne almost as powerful as God’s. King James told the English parliament on Wednesday, 21 March, 1609 that “kings sit upon God’s throne, but even by God himself they are called gods.” A king, he said, could make anyone “beggars or rich at his pleasure; restrain, or banish out of his presence…” And he used that power, and faced resistance – from the Catholic Church and from other churches. He fought and won. He enjoyed exercising that divine right, quashing opposition, bringing people up, casting people down. But his son, Charles I, who succeeded him didn’t have the grace he had. History says Charles was fought, defeated, arrested, tried by a parliamentary court and found guilty of charges which included devising “a wicked design to erect and uphold in himself an unlimited and tyrannical power to rule according to his will, and to overthrow the rights and liberties of the people”. At his execution at about 2 p.m. on Tuesday, 30 January, 1649, Charles insisted that he did no wrong, that the people were his subjects who should really have no “share in the government.” He stressed that “a subject and a sovereign are clean different things.” May God give Nigerians the sense to continue to have a share in their government.