2019 Election and national values (1)

Next week, Nigerians will head to polling stations to declare their preferences in the choice of a president and national legislators for four years. The president’s election is a national affair because the entire nation is the president’s constituency. By the same token, then, choosing a national president is, ultimately, an expression of the values of the nation. And a president that is elected by the free will of the people reflects their values.

While some preferences reflect nothing more than taste, electoral preferences reflect deep-rooted moral values. Your choice of chocolate over vanilla cake is simply a matter of what tantalizes your taste bud. However, if you prefer, say, a child molester as your governor or president, that says a lot more about your morals. For governors and presidents have responsibilities over the lives of millions of people, and not caring about their moral standing puts you in an indefensible position.

Furthermore, as birds of a feather flock together, so humans with the same preferences and values stick together. Your preference for a child molester will naturally place you in the same party as other child molesters. If you have pleasure in racist rants, you are most likely going to end up in a political party that empowers racists. And corrupt exploiters, who feed fat on the common patrimony of the collective, will always find a home in the company of other exploiters. Even if they wonder afar for a while, they will have no rest until they find their way back to where they belong.

Some clarification is in order. Despite the picture of fixed groups with people belonging to one or the other as painted above, we also know that there are nuances worth understanding. Some are die-hard members of specific parties because what the parties stand for jell with their preferences, whether morally debased or morally sound. But there are other groups of individuals.

First, there are those individuals who choose to sell their birthright for a pot of porridge. They fall prey to misplaced priorities, selling their votes for a pittance that they expend within a day or two. But they end up in a lifetime of poverty because those who buy their votes have no sense of responsibility to them.

Second, there are decent value-voting citizens who choose to stay out of political parties as independents. In close competitions, these could sway the outcome of an election. They are also the most likely to examine seriously the character of candidates, their position on issues, their background and experiences in politics and society, and the prospect of their candidacy for the masses.

Finally, there are non-partisans who are nonetheless greatly invested in elections. I have in mind ethnic voters whose preference is dictated by the ethnic nationality to which they belong. Interestingly, this presidential election is different from recent ones. It is the second one since 1999, when the two frontrunners come from the same ethnic nationality. In recent elections, we have had one candidate from the north, another from the south. This year replicates 1999 when the two major candidates came from the southwest and 2007 when Yar’ Adua, Buhari and Atiku were the frontrunners.

One would expect, therefore, that ethnicity will not be on the ballot and ethnic champions will have no serious platform. But, of course, such a thinking reflects an underestimation of the place of ethnicity in our national space. We have heard reports of even one of the candidates questioning the ethnic authenticity of the other. Buhari doesn’t speak Fulfulde well; therefore, he is not a true Fulani, according to Atiku.

There are also surrogates in other nationalities routing for one candidate or the other based on their assessment of his positions relative to their interest. And though the heads of the ticket are from the same nationality group, their running mates are from two of the most competitive groups, Yoruba and Igbo. To think, therefore, that ethnicity will play no role in this election is to be a dreamer. The reality is that it will, at least, to some extent.

If we cannot wish away the role of ethnic calculations, what can we truly and realistically expect to be on top of the reasonings that everyone with a thinking cap brings to bear on their decision to vote one candidate or the other?

Let me make another assumption. There are probably good reasons why some may not be enthusiastic about voting. Beside the IPOB loyalists harkening to the voice of Kanu to stay home or participate in his referendum, there are those who are disgusted about the choice presented to them and would rather not venture to the polls. This is, of course, a weak excuse and a dangerous position to take. Many who took similar position in the 2016 US elections are living to regret it.

For those who would not shirk their civic responsibility, the question remains, what are their priorities? On what basis are they thumb-printing their ballot papers? What reasoning process have they been through? I assume that they have been inundated with campaign slogans and promises of all the candidates, especially the leading ones. What messages have stuck with them as worth their consideration?

It is fair to suggest that the priorities of the electorates, from security, economy and jobs, to anti-corruption, restructuring and infrastructure, are as diverse as the nation’s demographics. The candidates naturally take their cue from this. Thus, President Muhammadu Buhari and Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, the two leading candidates, have in varying degrees focused on infrastructure, security, economy, anti-corruption and restructuring. How do we assess their claims and promises?

Restructuring is high on Atiku’s agenda. It’s the reason for the support he receives from some southwest, southeast, and south-south leaders. How does he plan to do this? How seriously is he to be taken? It is instructive to note that among his powerful endorsers is former President Obasanjo who has been contemptuous of restructuring. Will Atiku dare his former boss again? Can Atiku single-handedly restructure the country without national and state legislatures?  How about his NEF supporters? While presidential leadership is important, it is hardly enough.

APC promised devolution of power in 2015. A party committee submitted a report; but intra-party politics surfaced. The promise is back in its 2019 manifesto. Is there reason for us to keep hope alive?

The war against corruption has been President Buhari’s forte and his political party has made much of it. He has dared anyone with a knowledge of corruption about him or his family to come forward. Even with powerful enemies along the way, he has vowed not to shy away from the fight.

Atiku has made a similar pledge. However, he continues to be under a cloud of suspicion. His chief endorser and campaigner, President Obasanjo, has been unapologetic about his allegation that Atiku is a corrupt politician. It’s in black and white. Atiku is still under investigation in the U.S. for corruption. In a moment of unintended frankness, he declared on national television that he would use the presidency to enrich his friends.

Beside the candidates, it is also important for neutral electorates to consider the stand and background of political parties on whose platform they are running. PDP ruled the country for 16 years. What was its record? Both Atiku and Obi, his running mate, are on record publicly accusing their party of mismanagement of the country’s resources from 1999 to 2015.

PDP Chairman Secondus publicly apologized to the nation for his party’s performance. That was only a couple of years ago. The same leaders who led its failure are still in the leadership role. Obasanjo who left the party and tore his membership card publicly is also back routing for its presidential candidate. But no one has told the nation how the party has changed in the last four years. What evidence of change when it has not been in power since that apology? As to Obasanjo’s vouching for a changed Atiku, what evidence is there since Atiku has not held any elective or appointive position since 2007?

To be continued.