Democracy Not Democrazy
By
Anie Udoh
"No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which by far the
greatest number are poor and miserable."
- Adam Smith, 1776
The late Afro-beat maestrop Fela Anikulapo-Kuti is rightly credited with the
coinage democrazy. In his unique style Fela had described in song in a
rather pervert version of what was supposed to be democracy as practiced in Nigeria. His subject of joke was the Second republic government led by
Alhaji Shehu Shagari who took over from the military government of general
Olusegun Obasanjo. Fela and Obasanjo though kinsmen from Abeokuta were not
known to be the best of friends. If the musician were alive today and cared
to react to Obasanjo's performance as a civilian president, he would in his
weird manner have led a protest march to deliver 'democracy' in a mock
coffin to the president with a laconic song for effect.
The hype for democracy in Nigeria appears to have induced high hopes of
grand ambitions. Typical of a casino phenomenon that many have come to
equate democracy with a vending machine. They expect it to dispense the
goodies of life once the people have cast their votes. Nigeria's nascent
(this word again!) democracy that was activated on May 29, 1999 appears not
to have delivered on its promise of the people's EL Dorado.
Democracy, for good or ill has become a popular political phenomenon. It
lays much emphasis on essential principles such as regular election,
majority rule and cooperation among competing parties and interest groups to
attain consensus. The basic tenets of democracy often espoused include
equality, sovereignty of the people, respect for human life, the rule of
law, freedom of individuals and demand of accountability from public office
holders to the people. These expectations unfortunately run counter to the
true character of a politician defined by The Longman Dictionary as "a
person concerned with party politics for his own personal selfish purpose or
gain." This seems to tally with the sad reality that has become of
politicians in Nigeria so far. Fela's pervert version, democrazy, appears a
more suitable description of Nigeria's special brand of government.
People's yearning for freedom and the good life has often fanned the glamour
for democracy. Nigeria's situation could not have been more demanding after
a suffocating era of military dictatorship and misrule. The citizens had
become desperate for democracy with all its benefits. In the hurried swerve
of transition the electorates turned out en mass to cast their votes as a
welcome relief from military repression to a democratic rendezvous.
The exercise produced a team, as it were, who lacking in the requisite
experience needed some orientation on how to operate the democratic
machinery. Hence the much vaunted sermon on the learning process for the
elected political practitioners. Since they seem to have an open-ended
syllabus it has been difficult to decide with certainty when to interrupt
their "lessons" for some "tests." The result of such tests
should expectedly
provide bearings geared towards facilitating the delivery of the much
desired democracy dividend for the generality of the people who elected
them.
There is a growing mass disenchantment with the performance of the fledging
democracy and many are wondering whether we have not adopted the wrong
brand. This apparent dilemma has become a source of great concern and indeed
frustration to majority of the people. So far the Nigerian people appear to
have been short-changed. Not with the torrents of media reports of official
misdemeanour and alleged corruption and primitive acquisition by public
officers. Against this background, the drab mood and frustration of the
populace is understandable.
It has become clear that the mere facts of election and the rule of the
majority are not sufficient to guarantee the ideals of democracy. Both are
no doubt central principles to the democratic process. Elections avail the
electorates the freedom to choose between the alternatives offered by
political parties. Majority rule presumes a decision-making process
generally swayed in favour of a simple majority of those eligible and
present in a body. These supposed simple models of attaining consensus can
and indeed get strained by the existence of factions and varied interest
groups. Such generates intense competition and rivalry. The inevitable
existence of diverse units of social identity and interest demands
cooperation as a mark of civic responsibility in order to attain consensus
for the common good.
The expectations from a democracy can be rather tempting. It amounts to
wishful thinking for instance to imagine that by adopting democracy, Nigeria
would have acquired a magic elixir to resolve all of her political, social,
economic, administrative, and cultural problems. If only it were so.
First, "democracies are not necessarily efficient economically than are
other forms of government. especially. during the transition from a
non-democratic to a democratic form of government." Immediate
fallouts can
be seen in the reaction of elites to real or imagined threats to the rights
and privileges they enjoyed under previous regimes. They may initiate
misinformation of the populace and sometime outright sabotage of the system.
This is very much evident in Nigeria. However, the government can help make
democracy survive and blossom by educating and encouraging the citizens to
understand and appreciate the fact of seeing themselves as stakeholders in a
stable polity. Democracy cannot exist let alone flourish without the active
participation of the people. After all democracy, in the immortal words of
Abraham Lincoln, is "the government of the people by the people and for the
people."
Second, "democracies are not necessarily more efficient
administratively."
The demand of consensus management inhibits speed and efficiency because of
the sheer number of people to be consulted. The costs of getting things done
could be quite high because of multiple stations of "settlements". We
are
witnesses to the ridiculous levels public officers have demonstrated this
aspect in Nigeria. This include the high turn-over of heads of legislative
Houses at the national and state levels in some cases producing classic
shows that will make comic best seller list. The elevation of blackmail,
thuggery, assassination, indiscriminate threat of impeachment, and the all
conquering "GMG" (cash trafficking in huge polyester sack) as tools
and arts
of governance. Politicians have displayed acts that seem to suggest what
Fela described as the "demonstration of craze", where supposed sane
persons
behave as if driven by unseen demonic forces with faculty imbalance and a
distorted view of life.
Third, "democracies are not likely to appear more orderly, consensual,
stable, or governable than the autocracies they replace". Again popular
satisfaction with the new democratic governments performance may not even be
higher than the regimes they replace. This in part is a by-product of
democratic freedom of expression and a reflection of continuing disagreement
over new rules and institutions. The necessary impositions of a democratic
process may be sometimes ambiguous in nature and uncertain, in effect,
requiring a learning process for the participants to become acquainted with
its operation. The struggles and intense rivalries by competing groups are
inevitable in a democracy as new rules and institutions are tested and new
bargains sought. These tumults and seemingly anti-system tendencies brought
about by the democratic change should be expected and must not be seen as an
attack on persons, tribes, religion or a failure of the democratic
consolidation. Rather it should be accepted as a wake-up call and challenge
to make progress and move the nation forward. What is important is the
willingness of the parties, groups and persons to play by the general rules
of bounded improbability contingent consent.
It is perhaps pertinent at this point to comment on the near paranoid search
for economic salvation the government is appallingly pursuing abroad. This
foreign pursuit that is heavily skewed to the western capitalist world
deviously assumes an automatic correlation between democracy and capitalism,
an unrestrained wealth creation through the supposed freestyle swing of
market forces with least government intervention. If anything, such liaison
is not sacrosanct. Hardly can we find a country that practices an unguided
reign of free enterprise as postulated by Adam Smith. Indeed the assumptions
of a wholly free market driven economy happen not to be those of the real
society inhabited by humans. Not even in the U.S.A.!
We may recall the often-near frenzy reactions of the American authorities to
rising oil prices. The open and televised intimidation of OPEC members by
the US authorities to make adjustments in oil production to suit the latter
with little regard to the wishes, desires and interest of the former should
serve as eye opener to our policy makers here. Such glaring example from the
supposed champion of democracy which patent we tend to imitate clearly
demonstrates the wisdom in putting the citizens interest first and above
foreign interests and unguided market forces. It does follow that the
frivolous globe trotting, the unbridled experimentation and sheepish
adoption of foreign prescriptions of the free enterprise doctrine may not
necessarily further the consolidation of our democracy. If anything it may
even scuttle or derail it. A cautionary note has been sounded elsewhere that
our, "Government should not be bemused by the seductive arguments of
pro-market forces which ultimately reinforces inequality, injustice and
dismantle the capacity for social solidarity." Government is thereby
"disempowered and become unwilling debt collectors for international
capital
while millions of people are condemned to misery without end."
In summary, democracy may not necessarily bring about instant economic
growth, social peace, administrative efficiency, political harmony,
unbridled freedom, or guarantee a strong, virile and united Nigeria. At best
we can hope for the emergence of political institutions that can peacefully
compete to form alliances and influence public policy. A system that can
channel social and economic conflicts through regular and predictable
procedures with sufficient linkages for appropriate harmonization for the
common good. And where elected public officers as representatives of diverse
constituencies commit themselves to collective course of action for the
people and the nation.
Democracy is not a system of immediate actions and effects. It will not
yield the desired dividends overnight like yeast in flour. If we expect to
benefit from democracy we must be prepared to bear the fatigue of the
gestation period. We must all take the long view of a democratic process
that holds great prospect of eventually delivering on the promise of freedom
and the good life for the people. And this can happen gradually and
certainly in the long run, if we are not all dead!