When a country chooses to disregard history…

It was George Santayana, the Spanish-American philosopher, essayist and poet, who said that those who disregard history are doomed to repeat it. He, in turn, only slightly modified the statement by the British philosophical founder of modern political conservatism, Edmund Burke, that “Those who don’t know history are destined to repeat it.” But even much more chilling is the summation by the German philosopher, Hegel, that the only lesson history teaches is that we do not learn anything from history.

 

It is sad to agree that all these perfectly describe my country Nigeria. We just not only never learn from history or even always repeat the mistakes of the past, but also deliberately disregard history, re-write it to suit our whimsical immediate cravings or even ban the learning of history altogether from our schools so that the younger generation are incapacitated and denied the tools with which to change and reorder our decadent society. And this is not just a government or institutional problem alone. Even those who should know – professors of history, politics and institutions – are either unable to understand the historical connections of current problems or disregard history in favour of the fetish belief that Nigeria could somehow repeat mistakes of the past and obtain favourable outcome(s).

 

In the run-up to the 2015 general elections, I’d watched with shock and horror how we all repudiated our history – of events that happened between 1984 and 1985 – and proclaimed Buhari to be the answer to all our national woes and the best person to fix our ailing economy. Being a keen student of Nigerian government and politics, I’d read virtually every available historical account of the Buhari military regime – and there was almost a universal consensus that the regime was a major economic disaster. Unable to convince multilateral agencies to advance lines of credit to Nigeria following the regime’s stubborn refusal to countenance even a partial devaluation of the country’s currency and due to the drying up of the country’s foreign reserves in the face of declining oil prices, the regime chose rather to engage in counter-trading (or more appropriately trade by barter) where it bartered our oil cheaply for spare parts and other raw materials to escape from its economic immobilism.

 

Expectedly, the measure only worsened the country’s dire economic situations. Wages still went unpaid and there were general shortages of basic commodities like rice, milk, sugar, etc and the helpless masses had to queue endlessly to get these items. Industries had to close shop and those that managed to remain open operated at very low capacity.

Confronted by the apparent failure of its policies to revamp the economy, the regime became even more oppressive and intolerant of criticism. Decree 4 – that prohibited even true and just criticisms of the regime – was promulgated and the government started a new wave of clampdown and violations of the human rights of citizens. It was no wonder then that Nigerians trooped out to celebrate the ouster of the insufferable regime.

 

Thirty years down the line, however, Buhari’s history has been rewritten and he has been reconstructed into the Nigerian messiah whose messianic mission was truncated by IBB in 1985. Just like we sang and proclaimed to high heavens Jonathan’s ‘fresh air’ and ‘transformation agenda’ in 2011, disregarding historical antecedents that accidental or unprepared leaders in Nigeria hardly have what it takes to govern effectively, we eulogised Buhari’s supposed messianic qualities and projected him as the only Nigerian that can salvage the country from the inevitable ruin that awaited it if he’s not elected into office.

 

Quite surprisingly, I watched as even renowned academics that authored very critical pieces and books on Buhari’s military regime quickly retracted and joined in the eulogy bandwagon. Even our own Wole Soyinka – who authored the timeless piece “The Crimes of Buhari” in 2007, in which he detailed the atrocities of the regime, concluding then that “to invite back into power a man who did so much to destroy a people’s self-esteem, dignity, and faith in law and justice, is a sign of self-abasement, lack of self-esteem, a slave mentality that dooms, not only the present, but succeeding generations” – also found himself jumping into the Buhari bandwagon.

 

It appears to me that at the time even self-confident, valiant and fearless Nigerians were transformed into cowards when confronted by the power of popular opinion and sentiment. No one could confront Buhari with his past and ask him tough questions about his disastrous economic management, statist inclinations, gross human rights violations and irrational actions of 1984/85. We were all content with his platitudes of being “a converted democrat”. Even the business community that should have been very worried about Buhari’s outdated economic knowledge and outlook was soothed into a false sense of security by Buhari’s campaign handlers who ensured he never spoke ex tempore and read them only filtered speeches they wanted to hear.

 

Ten months into Buhari’s presidency, however, the history we all rejected and repudiated is coming back to haunt us. With eyes aghast, we now watch as we are being transported back to 1984/85. Like the unrepentant dictator and statist that he was back then, Buhari just picked up from where he left off in 1985 and has continued with his old-fashioned and expired economic management practices. Perhaps the reality will dawn more forcefully when we begin to queue and fight for ‘essential commodities’ like our parents did in 1985. Even the infamous “Decree 4” is being surreptitiously brought back in form of the “Anti Social Media Bill” currently before the National Assembly.

 

But like the renowned historian, J.F.A. Ajayi, stated years back, “The nation suffers which has no sense of history. Its values remain superficial and ephemeral unless imbued with a deep sense of continuity and perception of success and achievement that transcends acquisition of temporary power or transient wealth. Such nation cannot achieve a sense of purpose or direction or stability and without them the future is bleak.”

 

Christopher Akor