Want to live forever?
Some people cannot die. Even when they expire and are interred, their names take on another, fonder, life. They are celebrated from generation to generation. The ultimate aspiration of humanity used to be joining the pantheon of the gods. Not any more! Today, in these climes more than any other, the goal of human happiness […]
Some people cannot die. Even when they expire and are interred, their names take on another, fonder, life. They are celebrated from generation to generation. The ultimate aspiration of humanity used to be joining the pantheon of the gods. Not any more!
Today, in these climes more than any other, the goal of human happiness seems to be material acquisition by whatever means, fair or foul but mostly foul. Living modestly or aspiring to greater heights in any field of human endeavour has become old fashioned. When you advocate for excellence in any area of endeavour, you’re confronted with the cynical retort, “Na excellence I go chop?”
It seems we have reduced the raison d’être of our existence to filling the belly and loading our bank accounts. No thoughts about tomorrow. Coming generations are entitled to their own vices too. Let posterity clear the mess. It is hard enough gathering riches in this one life, why bother about future relevance? That is the way we now think — like beings without a finer purpose.
Citizen Ayo Akinfe recently gave a damning verdict on our quest for primitive acquisition while the rest of the world is irrevocably committed to making their future more glorious than the present. “Are there any Nigerians out there in both the private and public sector who actually want to go down in history as men and women who made a difference to humanity?” He asked.
“When I look at the statue of Horatio Nelson in Trafalgar Square, I see a national icon who died penniless but who created history by making Britain the world’s foremost maritime superpower. It appears we are simply incapable of having such aspirations and are not interested in anything that does not bring immediate material rewards. Frederick Luggard sussed us out well in 1926!”
That assessment sounds harsh, but it is impossible to miss its logic, especially when one considers his point about not caring how posterity judges us.
“I, for one, am not sure which we are better at — Is it corruption or incompetence, because I do not understand how you can be entrusted with a feat or such magnitude (building a power dam or railway) and not want to leave a lasting legacy that will etch your name in gold forever. How can you be asked to build a first-of-its-kind railway line and not want to enter the history books? Maybe it is just me but I do not understand how making a lot of money can be deemed a greater achievement than entering the history books” argues Akinfe.
We ought to be bothered that our most glorious years are in or past, the same past that the military toppled for corruption only to gift us with their own mega-corruption. During the First Republic, there was order. People aspired for lofty ideals. It was dishonourable to be a thief. Now, we have degenerated to an era where people loot the public till and name monuments after themselves, knowing that posterity will consign them to the rubbish heap of history.
Who cares about tomorrow? Who cares about leaving a good name? Is it still fashionable to aspire to those ‘old school’ standards?
In our various cultures, we have and should urgently dredge up the equivalent of Howard Dean’s philosophical observation on the purpose of life: “If a man can bridge the gap between life and death, if he can live after he’s died, then maybe he was a great man. Immortality is the only true success.”
How many of us today are interested in that kind of success?
RE: 50 YEARS AFTER BIAFRA
A reader, M T Usman, reacts to my last piece titled, “50 years after Biafra”.
Dear Sir,
You make light of the effect of the assassination of Northern political leaders and senior military officers. It’s wrong; even those from the South who were also eliminated it was because of their association with Northern leaders. Any discussion that doesn’t recognise January 15 as the original sin is bound to fail.
The trajectory of the first coup couldn’t have been otherwise. The Prime Minister and other leaders being alive would ipso facto defeat the coup. Just call out local forces to crush the rebellion/mutiny. Pan-Nigerian “killings”? It was the Northern leaders that were deemed “obstacles” to a great Nigeria.”
If General Ironsi had tried and punished the coup leaders, up to execution – remember his government called their actions “a mutiny” – it would have dissipated the anger of those who saw it as deep conspiracy against them.
Ironsi punishing the coupists would have been “the transcendental voice”, but why require “a voice of reason” from the North? The Sardauna was a fatalist, he wouldn’t run away from battle and thereby shame his progeny. Obasanjo couldn’t have persuaded Nzeogwu to drop his life-project.
Nzeogwu and Onwuatuegwu both had murder in their minds and hearts. So pity would never cross their minds at those defining moments – after all that was it was ALL about. General Gowon’s declaration was genuine. Evidence is in the fact that nine years after the end of the Civil War, an Igbo man was Vice President. We should examine what unravelled between then and now. Who deserves reparations?
Nigeria is in this state of simmering political and armed conflicts because the pre-1966 contestations carried over the post-War years. A remedy for this is for all to give up on claims of victimhood and recognise one another’s hopes and fears.