The history of the Africans had been in vivacity ever before Muammar Gaddafi of Libya was ever born. The so-called historical culture of unity in diversification has been a state of visceral identity in the black soil. From the just concluded annual summit of the African union, it was clearly noticed that the newly elected leader is has not learnt what it is really disserved to lead Africa. To success or to failure, he might have ‘ruled’ in Libya as a part of Africa however he must not be oblivious of the truism that the culture of the North African country cannot be in any form whatsoever be likened to the entire Africa multi-diversified cultures. He must not as well be mindless of the basic intellectual fact that the Libyans’ minds are infirm to the western civilization: it clearly signifies when a ‘ruler’ could rule so long in a country - such a rule is a mirage in west Africa where heads are not slippers. Therefore he should not expect such a rule in the entire Africa.
That Africa will evolve as united states, and one party system of government will be enshrined in the AU constitution, he is acting like a lad collecting rain water with basket, or a girl with a buxom physique daydreaming to win the so called miss world contest. He must at this period in time discern that opposition is natural. If at all he has not read so wide natural philosophy, he must have one day discovered that nature itself entertains opposition. Divine leadership does not subsist without opposition. We have all seen around the world where oppositional democracies triumph therefore he must not emerge as an African leader overnight and becloud our paces with the evil scarf of long staying in power which has characterized the northern governments. The Arabic leadership culture must not be admitted to permeate through the Sahara desert into the west, which has long due embraced welfarism of being and competitiveness of beings. (Watch out for The Apocalypse series)
Disbursing money to some parts of Africa in his orientation to establish a federal pan-regional government, has called such leaders beggars who are really trading their leadership status with a gamut of oblivion to muse upon its consequence. Abdoulaye wade must be conscious of his illusory policy towards the west; Senegal does not share any political maturities with other states in the west. The Senegalist leader must be informed: in Nigeria – as a part of the Africa in discourse – has been in suffering and perseverance in achieving economic and political viabilities since 1970 as a united nation after the civil war. Therefore a leader could not come from any part of Africa - just because Nigeria is an AU country – to distort what has been on ground to deracinate one party system and long staying in power syndrome - factors responsible for the so called African maladies.
A regional economic group like ECOWAS could not subsist by itself just because of this diversification in cultures; how then one imagines the entire Africa to subsist on this. It is high time we halted – in Africa – the course of daydreaming of united prosperities where there are diversified failures on ground. This as well acts upon other regional groups in the continent.
Therefore, it is illusive of Gaddafi, Wade, and Mwencha – the deputy chairman of the AU commission and other delegates who vouch for the fantasy, to daydream that the Libyan leader would fathom reality form the mirage which postulates – from foible of his mind – that the new AU deceptive formula would meet the challenges of globalization, poverty, and the western hegemony.
The three streaks of malady could only be diagnosed when there is effective opposition on ground in each state of the union, and freedom from human competitiveness. In achieving integral freedom from penury, oppression, and darkness making an African a man little lower than the angels, not crumbles of his own complexity.
This critique was sent to a national newspaper in Nigeria on February 6 2009 ere the crisis of crumbliness in Libya.
No comments:
Post a Comment