LOOKING AT SOME CHALLENGES OF GLOBALIZATION AND THE POST-CORONAVIRUS WORLD ECONOMY

LOOKING AT SOME CHALLENGES OF GLOBALIZATION AND THE POST-CORONAVIRUS WORLD ECONOMY

By Kay Aderibigbe

By the time we are able to conceptualize terms such as deterritorialization, interconnectedness and social acceleration we shall then appreciate why "the processes of change which underpin a transformation in the organization of human affairs by linking together and expanding human activities across regions and continents" was referred to as globalization (Held, McGrew, Goldblatt and perraton 1999,15).

Human activities, with it concomitant resultant effects, have remained the subject of inquiry in almost every field of study at one time or the other from the time immemorial. This brought us into better thinking, which invariably invigorated globalization (an enhanced borderless and cross-cultural relationships in all facets of human endeavour). In the same vein, human activities became relatively better as a result global relationships. 

Whatever happens in a particular metropolis for instance, could directly or indirectly affect the people of another remote area within a short period of time. Moreso, since both the intended and uncalculated activities of nation-states are not unconnected spartially in the modern time; we can therefore say that man is not only globally homo-politicus but also, homo-economicus, homo-socialis, homo-spiritualis and homo-scientificus.

Undeniably, botherless-world - economically, socially, and in terms of foreign political policies is characterized with complexities in such a simultaneity with domestic irreconcilable realities in the face of compulsory or indispensable interrelationships among nations.

Originally, supra-national institutions (IMF, IBRD, World Bank and etc.) that came into being after 1945 signified the commencement of an era where world actors (in any material manner) could coexist peaceably and flourish, but the merits of such intermeshing via domestic and international ideals are the offshoots of a 'global world' whose rule of play is characterized with acute inequality, secrecy and beclouded by unwritten lawlessness.

Consequent upon this, the world gradually tilts from the post-Cold War unipolar to multi-polarity, which is good in a way, because of the economic influence of Asians - Indian, Koreans, Japan, Iran and China; and also detrimental, if considered from the angles​ of rules of engagement and interest articulations. World leaders could not claim to be nescient of the uniqueness of the kind of problem that would ensue when the platform with which differences​ in propositions could be sorted is somehow fragmented and could also be described to be systematically becoming inertia. The above explanation is what was termed "the gridlock of globalization" by David Held (July 3rd, 2018). 

Recent events in the areas of climate, energy and poverty for instance, have pointed to the ambivalence of major actors in critical times when they tend to legitimize the norm instead of bringing about a 'new normal'. The underlying factor in some of the cases is the immediate material interest which is likely at loggerheads with the thinking faculties of the decision makers.

The connection between the unequal relationship that is identical of the present day world order and the continuous acceptance of the deleterious effects of the lopsided globalized world is the bourgeoning material urge of the major actors and also, the need to protect the position of those ''known polars'', which could mean "time buying" or "time saving" depending on what is at stake.

Trying to understand the challenges of globalization from this perspective will reveal that, even, the extension of domestic liberal democratic tenets to the international economic system as espoused by some scholars cannot do much because of three reason: one, sovereignty is pure in relation to states, two, power is relative and states are relatively possessive of the idea of power, and lastly, globalization is not an end in itself but rather, a means to an end.

Since sovereignty, power and globalization are interwoven to the extent that one or two of the three must be jealousy guided in order to attain another one, it then becomes self-evident that actors in the international milieu simply adopt method(s) that must have been internally considered appropriate for their respective states before they venture into any agreement. This is the main reason there will always exist challenges of all sorts irrespective of the style the international economic system adopts under the present arrangement, whether in relation to trades or services.

Globalization is not only restricted to trade in commodities as many have put it. We also have services, ideas and virtual information, all these are reliant on people as the determinant factor. Even the trade in focus is amazingly too voluminous, as such, making supply chains indispensable, which is one of the risks staring us in the face. Tourism as a type of service for instance, has the risk of paralysing the institution of arts in times such as "the great lockdown" as this when tourists cannot leave their home countries or go about. Information as a brand of product from any supplier could also be useless when the consumers are incapacitated because of a pandemic like coronavirus. These are some of the reason Ian Golding, a professor of globalization at Oxford University, said "risks have been allowed to fester, they are the underbelly of globalization" (The butterfly Defects, How Globalization Creates Systematic Risks And What To Do About It, 2014).

How then does globalization affects the present world economy and what should we expect after coronavirus must have subsided??

The type of globalization that is in vogue is heavily reliant on unrestricted and unmeasured interconnectedness. For me, what actually makes globalization dangerous to the various domestic economies of the world is the volume, extent, rate, speed, dependency and the ease with which so many life-involving activities are carried out at profit-making intentions. 

It is axiomatic that the world is far more expanded and connected ideologically, in terms of trade, than what we can see physically on the maps. One thing that such issue has brought to bear is the fact that those who supply more of what is needed around the world simply become more relevant and at the same time more dangerous whether we accord such status to them or not. According to Prof. Beata Javorcik, the chief economist at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, for instance, he said, "when we look back at 2003, at the SARS epidemic, China accounted for 4% of the global outputs, now China accounts for four times as much, 16%. So that means that whatever is happening to China affects the world to a much larger extent". (BBC Business Report, "Will Coronavirus Reverse Globalization? April 2, 2020).

The world has come to a point where inflation, unemployment, scarcity, diseases, fashion, cultures, riots and all sorts of physical and virtual elements could be imported or exported from one country to another in the name of globalization. This explains why Covid-19 is more rapacious than Covid-2 of 2003. In fact, if actors in the international environment do not identify and treat with utmost seriousness​, the menace of uncontrolled dependency that we have sunk into as a global village, the next disaster that will happen to one or more of the major players in the international economic system is likely going to have a more devastating effect on us all than the credit crunch of 2008 and that of Covid-19 put together.

As it stands now, economies have started nose-diving into recession. The U.S, Japan, South-Korea, India, Germany and France to mention a few have already started coming up with bailouts that could be deployed to cushion the effects of drops in their expected economic growths. Last year, IMF forecasted 3.3% growth of the world economy but a total reversal is what has happened just in the first quarter of the year. CNN even puts it as 180° upturn of the world economic forecast. 'The Fund' is preparing for a 5.9% decline of the world economy, while the EU economy is expected to shrink by 7.5% at the end if the year.

In the same vein, unemployment in the USA is expected to jump to 10.4% while economic growth may shrink by 5.3%, 6.2%, 6.5%, 7.2%, 8% and 9.1% in Japan, Canada, U.K, Germany, Spain and Italy respectively (IMF Quarterly Economic Report, March, 2020). 

The implications of the percentage shrink to the British economy for instance is that, the bank of England will be selling bonds worth £200b to the state. Tax relief of about £30b will be granted. There will be an interest-free loans for a period of 12 months for medium scale businesses and the state shall step in to settle almost 6 million workers up to 90 days, in wages and salaries after a subsidy of £100b must have been injected into the economy. (British Treasury Quarterly Reports, 2020).

How many countries could boast of the economic capacity to draw up $6 trillion economic bailout fund like the USA? The response by the British government or the EU's €500 billion economic package is unattainable for the less-developed areas such Africa, Pacific and the Latin America. What this connotes is that the unequal economic features of the world system that was normalized by the old order is being made worse by the current pandemic and will definitely remain pronounced during the post-covid-19 era.

Another important problem is the fact that those developed economies that served as the sub-structure or originator of the major world supplies are even 'systematically stratified' among themselves or should we say they consciously or unconsciously divided the bulk of world production within themselves by apportioning who produced what, when, how and in what quantity?

The above assertion remains sacrosanct to the understanding of the acute shortage of medical supplies for instance, during the peak period of the pandemic. This is because it looked as if certain items could not be sufficiently sourced from some places unless the order comes from China.

Due to the adverse effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on various economies around the world, we have come to realize that there is a great imbalance in the current bases of world production, e.g., China alone supplied almost 70% of medical materials and intermediate health equipment. That is in fact, something to worry about. We can also, vividly point out new positive trends in the sourcing of local raw materials, the idea of work from home, tasking of the local financial markets, and as well as the adjustments of nation-state budgetary allocations to be in tandem with the obtainable realities. The lessons learnt from the above is that major players in international trade should rely less on what is happening elsewhere in order to determine what happens to them domestically.

The applicability of those new values or lessons for instance, can be useful, in that, economies who are mostly reliant on loans could actually plan (if they are indeed sincere and serious with development and their people) without buying those economy-wrecking loans. Apparently, it is bitter to digest, but China as a major supplier of essential produce for example, made a lot of profit during the pandemic while the rest of the world is still languishing in the trauma of Covid-19. The same China is a major creditor country while those indebted to her will still have to repay the loans with interests despite the great loss they all suffered as a result of certain catastrophe caused by the same China.

Another lesson is that the developed nations such USA, Germany, UK and etc, who have reached the high age of mass consumption according to W.W Rostow's stages of development, should formulate policies that can help promote their economies without moving their production bases from their domestic terrain. If we like we can it re-shoring or international capital plough-back. What actually matters is the need to strategize, by reducing to the barest minimum, the risk of globalization when orchestrating how to maximize returns/profits alongside reducing the cost of production.

The reality is that, one of the smoothest routes to the current imbalance in the structure of global production as it played out in the first quarter of 2020 was caused by the profiteering mentality of some capitalists, who in their own capacity, failed to assiduously gaze through the socio-economic whirpool or ambitions of the host communities that presented them with the guarantee of profit by not considering the warranty of unforeseen circumstances e.g natural disaster, war, plague and pandemic such as Covid-19.

As a matter of fact, many issues need to be raised and addressed in order that the world might not toe the path of the pre-second World War in the name of globalization. The salient issues revolve around five cardinal points: One, the type and mannerism of leadership that is needed at the global scene; two, the idea of regulation and moderation of activities; three, the question of inequality and poverty of the third world; four, the issue of ambition and power tussle which is capable of throwing the whole world into chaos such as the case of Covid-19 and what to do if such arises, and lastly, the review of some major pre-Covid-19 economic agreements, which if left alone could undermine whatever is being aimed at after working assiduously on the first four issues I highlighted above.

In conclusion, whether the pandemic remains with us longer than expected or not, many jobs will still be lost and some people will go on furloughs because many companies are already affected. Governments will draw up contractionary budgetary arrangements. Investors, will as a matter of national security or necessity, re-shore and put larger parts of their money within reach domestically. Individuals will change some of their consumption patterns. In all, the same global system that brought about enormous profits, development and pandemic will be indirectly re-shaped; but it is better such review comes into conceptualization via a global platform that is devoid of lawlessness and chaos.

THE VEROCIOUSNESS OF CORONAVIRUS: EXPOSING THE DEFICIENCIES OF CAPITALISM AND THE INEVITABILITY OF DIALECTIC MATERIALISM

THE VEROCIOUSNESS OF CORONAVIRUS: EXPOSING THE DEFICIENCIES OF CAPITALISM AND THE INEVITABILITY OF DIALECTIC MATERIALISM. 

(By Kay Aderibigbe)

Various socio-economic challenges have confronted different epochs in history; e.g, the First World War 1914 - 1918, the Spanish flu 1918, the great depression of 1930s, the Second World War 1939 - 1945, the recent Financial crisis of 2008 to mention a few. Some happened to invigorate the era while some took place to debilitate and invariably transform the order of the day to something else entirely. That is why we cannot discuss history without materialism or recoursing to economic order. In the same way, we cannot talk about pandemics without juxtaposing it with the economic values of the system that is in vogue at the time.

Coronavirus is both socioeconomically and politically adhesive in the sense that one cannot isolate the virus without highlighting the economic pros and cons of the international order of the day (globalization). It is apparent that​ the battle against Covid-19 in the last two months is unfavourable to many nations; and it is likely to continue to be so, at least, for the time being, according to experts.

The virus (Chinese virus), which emanated in Wuhan, China, has infiltrated over 190 countries and the most badly hit are the capitalist societies of the global North. Why did the virus spread uncontrollably in the western world like wild fire? Why so many deaths? What happened to WHO? The big pharmas? What of the secret bio medicines of America and Europe? Where are the higher institutions of leanings of this world, the great laboratories and the Doctors without borders?

Questions as seen above may not be lent to straight-jacket answers because Coronavirus, in some quarters has been tagged to be a function of trade war. The effervescence of Coronavirus resonates across the  globe while majority of the capitalist societies had gone asleep in their comfort zones due to the positive terms of trade and favourable balance of payment they enjoyed over time. Locally, these capitalist countries of the West had liberalized virtually all facets of life to the extent that the state cannot unilaterally act in defense of the populace unless via bail outs, and it could only happen in a case of emergency as this. (Andre Gunder Frank, 1992, p.64)

For instance, the big pharmaceutical companies do not deem some health situations so exigent unless it can serve their own profiteering urge. In order to disguise from being profit-driven, many of these research undertakings do more of body edifications and artificial medicology for ambition sake. In most cases, they plough back some of their profits into promotional activities such as pageantry and sports while they neglect the real life-threatening issues. (Noam Chumsky, 2020).

I will blame capitalism for the mess brought upon humanity by Coronavirus because China told WHO precisely, on the 31st of December 2019, that an untraceable disease with features of pneumonia was in town. A week later, it was said to be Coronavirus by the Chinese scientists. These same people made us understood SARS in 2005. If these people (Chinese), are ahead because they knew something that the rest of the world do not know, how come the capitalist nations of the West cannot boast of a near-remedy to the 'supposed modification of the already-know disease (SARS), which can be likened to Covid 19'?, After all, Coronavirus in its original form is not new to humans?

Why is the WHO in a state of higgledy-piggledy over the issue of ordinary face masks? The mannerism of WHO is symptomatic of an institution that is at variance with the realities of the day; unprepared for pandemic and incapable to nip in the bud a large scale health crisis of this nature. The body languages of WHO, US government, EU, UK and the rest of the West when Covid 19 broke out showed vividly that they have at their disposal, a relatively​ lesser information on how to deal with it head on if the need arises. Yet they slumbered in their follies, hoping that the Chinese government cannot operate on such a level in the name of whatever might be their reason(s) probably in retaliation against trade barriers or sanctions.

The resultant effects of the sheer neglect of predictive scientific preparedness on the path of the capitalist nations is what can now be seen in a long queue of national carriers waiting for China to load them up with PPE (personal protective equipment), as well as ventilators and technical tips on the genetic compositions of the novel Coronavirus. The crisis has even taken a new turn of late in that, nations that are badly hit with the virus are outsmarting one another through outbidding and strategically hijacking of cargoes. All these mess happen in the west while the originator of the deadly virus is on another fantastic step of building the 6G network. What a diversionary motive!

This is how worst it could get when a political ideology relaxes and becomes too comfortable with its own features and achievements while the world undergoes drastic changes. Life within the west will change after this pandemic, no doubt. Political shakes will erupt and the dialectism will be critical because the base of what is wrong internationally is simply the material existence of man in relation to its environments, and how to sustain such through a position, which must have been rationally chosen, to be tenaciously adhere to (Agbaje EBA, 2009).

Right in the midst of the survival battle against the Coronavirus comes the conspiracy theory of G5 and its effects being substituted for Covid 19. For the sake of clarity therefore, Coronavirus, (a distinct fabrication of biological nature) is a weapon of trade war between the Western capitalist nations and the Chinese communist state, likewise​ the controversies surrounding the concept of  G5. What is 5G? This means the fifth generation of wireless communication technologies supporting cellular data networks. Its essence is for the transmission of greater quantum of energy per time. The millimeter wave frequencies of 5G are above 24 GHz reaching up to 72 GHz. (Wikipedia). The radiation effects of this band could be injurious to human beings but cannot kill recklessly because our dear sunlight is far more powerful in terms of UV radiation and we are still alive and healthy.

There is no way the installation of 5G can kill as many people the same way Coronavirus has been killing people in the last three months. Any campaign against 5G is basically undertaken by the misinformed religious people mostly Christians, who doesn't want to be taken unaware by the biblical Antichrist. Secondly, the hue and cry could be sponsored by the capitalists, just to discredit China, who launched 5G through Huawei. This perspective could be slightly valid because the economic advantages of 5G is so sweet that any entity that is in charge of such wireless technology has an edge in terms of artificial intelligence, quantum computing, bio medicines, aerospace, satellite communications, autonomous vehicles and a host of other definitional developmental issues of the 21st century.

This very gap is what the neoliberal world must try to, and it is sure they will definitely try to bridge it. Whereas, some people had jumped the gun by assuming a religious interpretation of dialectic materialism in order to find a correlation between pure science and the revelation of a forecasted future. There is nothing bad for the end-time watchers to be vigilant, but the issue at hand will lead to more socioeconomic struggles between the West and the Chinese communist government in the nearest possible future because the Western capitalist bloc cannot afford to: (i) look up to China for technological facilitation/approval (ii) allow only China to control the capital flight accruable from 5G (iii) leave the security architecture of the world in the custody of China because it is dangerous.

In conclusion, various moves by the West to meet up with their communist counterpart after the battle against Coronavirus, which is in itself exhausting, will either make or mar the fate of capitalism; because the people upon whom the structure is being operated must have been traumatized to the extent that they will boldly ask some fundamental questions regarding the potency of neoliberal capitalism. Invariably, we await the transformation of noeliberal tenets to be more rigid, efficacious and daring; or become quite flexible that it will eventually be absorbed by a new political ideology.

STATEHOOD AND THE CRISIS OF SOCIAL CONTRACT IN NIGERIA: A CASE OF AMOTEKUN. By Kay Aderibigbe.

STATEHOOD AND THE CRISIS OF SOCIAL CONTRACT IN NIGERIA: A CASE OF AMOTEKUN.

By Kay Aderibigbe.

 

The Nigerian state, since inception in 1960, has been grappling with the contents, scope and definitions of certain do's and don'ts that revolve around who gets what, when and how. Consequently, different ideologies have continuously been infused into the federal paraphernalia agreed upon at the London constitutional conference of 1953. But the most problematic characterization of Nigeria's social contract idea is that the constitution keeps tilting towards centripetalism, instead of maintaining its initial centrifugal mannerisms that can help the federating units grow and blossom at their respective pace.

Due to numerous reasons, and obviously, the overloading of the exclusive legislative list (68 items), the federal government has failed considerably in discharging its primary duties of securing lives and property as enshrined in Sec 14 of the 1999 constitution. This very act of incapacitation on the path of federal government has become quite acute, most especially in the last ten years; thereby, prompting the six governors from Western Nigeria to come together, after months of deliberations, and launch what has been described as a supplementary effort to the conventional national security outfit with the code name 'Amotekun'.

Amotekun as a security ideology has been bitterly criticized and declared illegal by the federal government through the office of Attorney General of the Federation Mr Abubakar Malami. The reason for such condemnation according to the AGF stems from the fact that the outfit runs contrary to constitutional provisions in the second schedule, under items 17 and 45 of the 1999 constitution. Whereas, there is also a widely believed insinuation that a staid suspicion exists in the core North, whose indigenes dominate the present-day federal government, on the modus operandi of Amotekun.

The emerging reactions from different quarters concerning why the federal government made a move to outlaw Amotekun have polarized the country into there groups. One, the group of Western Nigerians who believe there is an urgent need to do more in terms of securing the West and their sympathizers who believe in restructuring. Two, the group of federal government who condemned Amotekun on the ground of illegality and those core Northerners who believe that Amotekun is embedded with sinister objectives. Three, the group of middle-range rational thinkers who are neither persuaded nor dissuaded by ethnic sentiments but by facts, fairness, realities and pragmatism.

All the groups have spoken as audibly as possible but I want to use this piece to echo the voice of the last group to the best of my ability. An empirical analysis of the concept of Amotekun will reveal some sound judgments about its making; the inherent advantages and its​ intrinsic flaws. Likewise we shall be able to juxtapose the essence of Amotekun with the functions of conventional security apparatus of the state and how it does not in the real sense undermine or amount to duplicity as espoused by some.

To start with, one should ask if Amotekun was a well-thought-out idea? We could say yes because the Western Nigeria is in dire need of an appropriate security after years of kidnappings, killings and robberies in daylights when people go about their normal businesses. We could as well say no because there is more to security than just the willingness to provide security. Economic factor, such as, funding (remunerations​ and maintenance), political factors such as communal relations, and psychological factors such as the scope of operations, training/orientation, and succession plan must be considered in setting up a security outfit of such large scale.

In the case of Amotekun, we are talking about a security outfit that consisted of a large number of uneducated and untrained personnel, but who are versatile in policing the terrain earmarked for its operations. It is not a bad idea to bring up such an arrangement in the face of necessity but how can we be so sure that this is not another OPC, or bandits in the making? We should be careful not to breed a Leviathan we may not be able to control. From the angle of viability therefore​, in one word, since the Nigerian state is broke and the federating units are also poor, the progenitors of this noble idea should work more on the convocation of investment plans that can: foot the bill of a training institute for Amotekun; take care of its welfare; monitor its operations; candidly checkmate its excesses and sanction any erring member(s). Unless this is done, the same Amotekun we are happy about today will likely metamorphose into the highly detested OPC, the Nigerian police and a host of other security agencies that have become public nuisance to the Nigerian society.

The question of legality raised by the federal government, and the insistence of the governors of Western Nigeria to forge ahead with Amotekun​ has transmogrified into a political pregnancy which is capable of bringing forth anything; but only time can tell. Can one say the establishment of Amotekun is unconstitutional? We can say yes because the creation of such an outfit is under the exclusive competence of the federal government according to the 1999 constitution. While we can also say no because there are other security outfits such as Hisbah police in the North West and Civilian-JTF in the North East, whose establishment cannot be traced to the constitution but are still performing security functions under this same all laws-knowing federal government.

Though the existence of other security outfits in the North does not legitimize Amotekun in the real sense while a critical and philosophical appraisal of the constitution will find loopholes in our conventions and as such, negates the claims of the federal government. Let's take for instance, Lagos State laws forbids anyone from erecting street gates. But the activities of hoodlums and miscreants made it necessary for people to clamour for street gates all over the places and it has become a norm. Another example is a case where the federal government through the Office of Inspector General of Police licensed private security outfits to carry arms and function as defenders of the state despite the fact that the constitution does not expressly permit such activities.

As far as the case of Amotekun is concerned the question of legality shouldn't be the bone of contention. After all, the country is under-policed while the business of crime strives effortlessly. Since Sec 11(2) of our constitution encourages the government to ensure the peace, orderliness and good governance of its people, I believe the federal government should ask questions about the viability, operational scope and the political dimensions of this outfit called Amotekun​. For instance, if a guarantee pact can be signed that the outfit will not be manipulated. This is because Amotekun is a supplementary program to the conventional policing system. Instead of rivaling or frustrating the endeavour, the federal government should support the outfit with a caveat or absolve Amotekun into the conventional police in order to provide succor to the people of the West. This way, the federal government will receive praise for restoring the strained relationship between the people and a government that has been described as dormant since 2015.

In conclusion, the very hue and cry about Amotekun should be politically managed because we do not want to witness a face-off between Western Nigeria and the federal government. The case of seizure of Lagos State allocations for 14 months by Obasanjo's government in 2014 for instance, though illegal, should remind one of how a dictator in a civilian garb could act irrespective of what a competent court says.

THE HATE SPEECHES BILL 2019: A Proposed Law from the stable of an unintelligent Senator. (By Kay Aderibigbe)

THE HATE SPEECH BILL 2019: A Proposed Law from the stable of an unintelligent Senator.
(By Kay Aderibigbe)

It does not surprise me when I heard that one senator Aliyu Sabi Abdulahi, representing Northern Niger District sponsored the "National Commission for the Prohibition of Hate Speeches Bill 2019". The same man did try to do the same thing during the 8th National Assembly, but he failed due to the philosophical and ideological differences between the Executive and the leadership of the Legislative arm between the years 2015 and 2019. This man, with the brigade of his APC majoritarianism, haven formed rubber-stamp parliamentarians, thought they could just fabricate any law without reading the pulse of the society the law is meant for.

This write-up is meant to extrapolate from three perspectives, the fundamental problems whose resultant effect is usually a type of socio-political anomaly like the Hate Speech Bill. One, from the viewpoint of display of lack of jurisprudential knowledge by the sponsor of the bill. Two, from the angle of irresponsible leadership in Nigeria. Three, from the dimension of disarticulated and faulty political culture.

Let us consider the first perspective. It is obvious that the senator who introduced the obnoxious bill is quite unintelligent when it comes to lawmaking. Here is a copy of part of what the Hate Speech Bill says ... "a person who uses, publishes, presents, produces, plays, provided, distributes, and/ or directs the performance of any material written and or visual which is threatening, abusive or insulting or involves the use of threatening , abusive or insulting words or behaviour commits an offense if such person intends thereby to stir up ethnic hatred, or having regard for all the circumstances, ethnic hatred is likely to be stirred up against any person or persons from such an ethnic group in Nigeria".

Section 4(2) of the bill provides that any person found to have committed this offense shall be liable to life imprisonment and where the act causes any loss of life, the person shall be punished through death by hanging.

Some important questions could be deduced from the above proposed law. (i) What wordings connote or constitute hate speech? (ii) How do we identify who has the intention to stir up ethnic hatred? (iii) How do we determine which scenario was meant to stir up ethnic hatred or the one that was hijacked by villains? (iv) For instance, what happens when an alleged hate speech offender claimed his/her social media account was hacked (v) How do we carry out a forensic analysis in order to differentiate an innocent citizen whose online account was hacked from the real offender?. Unless senator Sabi and his colleagues can convincingly answer the above questions they simply, respectfully, remain an unintelligent set of people and should cover their faces in shame.

The majority of the 9th Assembly lawmakers were among those that promulgated the Cyber Crime Law 2015. The law is so defective to the extent that law enforcement agencies could not resolve so many cybercrime cases due to the technological backwardness of Nigeria. As a result of this, many innocent Nigerians are behind the bars suffering in the name of haphazardly constructed legislative enactment, while our jaundiced judicial system could not help their lot either. The same fate awaits majority of Nigerians the moment the senate accepts to bundle in the Hate Speech Bill into Law.

The second perspective will reveal that the tragedy of leadership in Nigeria is such a dismal type. This is because majority of those in position of authority do not see power as a tool for the management of collective social trust, but rather, as a means to attaining personal goals. If life imprisonment or death sentence is deemed appropriate for those who voice out their frustrations against misgovernance or injustice, how come the same punishment cannot be applied in the case of politicians who cause ethnic hatred and get many Nigerians killed at every election?

The same senators that are caught in the web of political dance of macabre also failed to pronounce death penalty for the looters of state treasury. How do we explain the cancerous corruption that is flowing in the bloodstream of an average Nigerian politician? These senators are also bereft of ideas when we raise the issue of insecurity that has torn the socio-cultural fabrics of Nigeria into pieces. They failed to rejuvenate the economy. They failed in addressing the issue of poverty. The aforementioned dynamics of failure summarized the irresponsibility on the path of leadership in Nigeria.

Invariably, the same monumental failures highlighted above could be said to be the harbinger of the hate speeches these empty head senators are legislating about. If Nigerians are gainfully employed in their large numbers and politicians are not obsessed with stealing or neglecting their responsibilities we will definitely have less to talk about on the issue of hate speech. "It is only in the slavocratic era, with irresponsible leadership, that lawmakers are worried about what people will think or say. What the people will do, eat, use and become is the concern of the contemporary governments in modern time".

The last lens with which we want to look at the Hate Speech Bill is that of disarticulated political culture. What is political culture? This is the set of attitudes orientations and beliefs which give order and meaning to the process of politics and which provides the guidelines that govern behaviour in a political system. The type of culture of politics in Nigeria is incapable of definition. This is due to economic determinism of the people which is both religiously inclined and socially incongruent. In the same vein, many Nigerians are parochial and nation-based, as against the advance societal norm of being participatory and state-oriented.

The man who brought the Hate Speech Bill to the Senate is an example of a parochial citizen; a product of dysfunctional political culture. He is narrow-minded. He is more of a selfist than a nationalist. He is just a 'legislative contractor'; one who must have been motivated by the proceeds (monetary gains) of such a draconian piece of law. Why do we need a commission for Hate Speech? Why must there be offices for the commission across the nation? If the man is truly an apostle of ethnic unification in this country he wouldn't be pushing for a law that will victimize the common man, the press, opinion leaders and especially, the social media, which in the recent time, has become the voice of the voiceless in a country where rulers claimed not to hear what the people are saying.

It is only in a disarticulated political society where unintelligent and irresponsible rulers are in charge that you get to hear about something like hate speech bill in the 21 century.

BUHARI'S ECONOMIC POLICIES: A clear pointer to lack of perspicacity in the areas of fiscal and monetary policies on the path of his handlers. (By Kay Aderibigbe)

Nigerians, with exaggerated hopes, listened and absorbed inadvertently, to all the lies and blames dished out by APC government on why the economy has failed and the consequent recession that dehydrated almost everyone and their businesses. The blame games was followed by Buhari's second stint at the helm of affairs with the attendant series of incongruent, disarticulated and haphazardly thought-out economic ideas, which could, on its own, crumble the already damaged economy left behind by his predecessors. Some of those ill-conceived ideas include the continuation of multiple exchange rate system, continuous borrowings, increment of VAT and the idea of budget financing through new and obnoxious taxes.

In the first place, it was Mr Buhari's idea of 'float-managing' the Naira (controlling the currency value through​ CBN intervention) that crashed the Naira against dollars. Had it been the Naira was completely floated by adopting a flexible exchange rate system, Naira would have gained value by now with the help of market forces, i.e. what we export and import.

On the issue of borrowings, one thing still remains a mystery ever since president Buhari decided to increase our debt from N4.96trillion in 2015 to N25.95trillion. We could not point to any tangible percentage ​of infrastructural development despite the fact that IMF and other creditor agencies actually allowed us to take these loans for the purpose of social and economic infrastructural investment. Another $3billion has just been approved by IMF in September for the sake of electricity; we shall wait and see what becomes of power supply.

The new VAT will be in operation by 2020 at the rate of 7.5%. This means that the policy makers did not see anything wrong in the 11.24% inflation rate. The implication of the new VAT is that the personal income tax which stood at 24% will suffer invisible or indirect increase because VAT and other forms of taxation are directly proportional to the velocity of money (the rate at which money is exchanged in an economy) and the purchasing power of money.

The other issue is that of financing the N1.859 trillion budget deficits of 2019 with tax and concessions. Since the government realized that the Fiscal Responsibility Act 2007 provided a shield where they can hide, as such, they decided to introduce new tax systems in order to cover up for their inability to boost common GDP with sound and business-friendly economic policies. Ordinarily, a good fiscal policy is meant to condition aggregate demand (consumptions, investments, government spendings and imports) with the main purpose of attaining price stability, full employment and economic growth. On the contrary, the Nigerian government uses contractionary fiscal policy instead of expansionary; they borrow money for looting instead of infrastructural investment; and also, legislated that future budgets could better be financed through the introduction of new taxes.

The minister of finance, Zainab Hamed, defended government's action by stating that oil revenue is dwindling at $57 per barrel even, when we supply 2.18million barrel per day. If that is the case, must the budget be financed by the masses hard earned money? What type of budget are we even talking about? A type of "budget that is characteristically deficit and synchronized with the pulse of the rich". If Nigeria intends to be a tax-collector state we should have a commensurate service for the people also. Not when N160billion is budgeted for the Universal Basic Education and other Educational Spendings, while the health system gets a paltry sum of N46billion. Even, the Inspector General of Police told the National Assembly that the N9.2billion approved in the 2019 budget for the police overhead cost cannot fuel police vehicles for six months.

There is no harm in taking from the rich oil companies in order to boost the economy. If the National Assembly could negotiate effectively on the Deep Offshore and Inland Basin Production Sharing Contract (Amendment) Bill 2018 that is awaiting a final touch, there is still a way forward. But not to be extorting those that: are underemployed or unemployed in large numbers, source their own water, ply bad roads daily, pay for electricity but get darkness, and above all, labour tirelessly for a currency that has little value.

The good move by Mr Buhari's government in the recent time is the partial closure of land borders for the purpose of filtering contents; and the idea of compelling commercial banks to grant loans to businesses. Though, the border issue wasn't critically defined because our production capacity is quite low. While the loan policy is suppose to capture certain critical sector(s) of the economy holistically. Altogether, he did well despite the overall shortcomings of his government. But invariably, the gains of all these ideas are going to be defeated in the long run because of the multiplier effects of the numerous unreasonable taxes he introduced.


It will be wise for Mr Buhari and his team of economic advisers to have a rethink and jettison the idea of milking the society for the purpose of budgets that does not have positive impact on the people. We must make good use of our population advantage and transform to a producer state. It is important to engage in industrialization as against our absolute dependency on fossil fuel. All those that have one thing or the other to do with Nigeria's fiscal and monetary policies should know that, "for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle". (Sir Winston Churchill, in his Town Hall address to his party men in Malmesbury on December 18 1904).

XENOPHOBIA AND SOUTH AFRICA: A PRODUCT OF AFRICA'S INABILITY TO OPERATIONALIZE DEVELOPMENT By Kay Aderibigbe

XENOPHOBIA AND SOUTH AFRICA: A PRODUCT OF AFRICA'S INABILITY TO OPERATIONALIZE DEVELOPMENT
By Kay Aderibigbe



This issue requires that I deplore a didactic tone (teaching) and also, be a bit pedantic (concerned with minor details). I may have to dwell on the contemporary, ecological and fundamental factors that aided the outburst and continuous recurrence of attacks on black foreigners in South Africa simply because, "every thinker, even the most abstract, is deeply influenced by the circumstance of his day" (J. Petrov Plamenatz,1966 p.9)
To start with, the incidence of the killing of blacks in South Africa does not fit into the definition of xenophobia, rather, it is known as blackophobia; with acute Nigeriaphobia. This is because those that are being targeted and killed from the year 2000 to date are blacks with special concentration on Nigerians. The situation has been condemned, justified and evaluated through various literature from different quarters in the last few days. But to my utmost amazement, despite the razzmatazz by diplomats, academics, politicians, and analysts none of these analyses has produced or suggested a laudable solution to the matter. Instead, various commentators speak from ethnocentric perspectives, talk about history, apportioned blames, proffer partial/temporary or no solution then draw the curtain on the matter.

For the sake of everyone and the intended future victims of this type of attack, I am going to break the issue into themes (thematic approach), narrow down the scope into topical units and draw conclusions on what I thought would be the best possible solution.
Quoting Mrs. Neledi Pandor, South Africa's foreign affairs minister, "my countrymen believe Nigerians are harming our youths". This very statement encompasses those issues espoused as the basis for the deep-seated hatred which resulted in the attacks. Let us assume the allegations of drug crime and human trafficking have been substantiated, does that justify the savagery and barbaric attacks on anyone in a country where the law exists? What happened to the police as an institution? Is the head of the police also conniving with Nigerians? What is the function of their judiciary? If rape cases, homicide and HIV/AIDS remain at its peak in South Africa without the local populace bating their eyelids in shame, then the attacks on Nigerians and other blacks, in my opinion, is nothing but pure hatred and intolerance.

If drug crime is the yardstick for killing Nigerians in South Africa then, we could as well say that some South Americans in the USA ought to have been killed for masterminding the importation of drugs into the USA. One good case study that will reveal how South Africa has failed to manage development in the 21st century is the recent arrest of 80 Nigerian fraudsters by the FBI. Why didn't Americans lynch them? Why were they not mobbed or burnt alive by victims of scams? That is the difference between a nation that has fine-tuned​ development and a society that is still grappling with the rudiments of social mobilization.

Talking about Nigeria and why we have numerous people moving out of the country in search of greener pastures, and in most cases, found of not properly conducting themselves in foreign lands is basically due to long years of economic decay and social disarticulation caused by leadership failure. This is why we are at the receiving end of so many maltreatments and abuses across the globe. The same leadership failure was at play when Nigeria's government spent billions of dollars in helping South Africa out of apartheid rule but failed to negotiate what Nigeria should get in return like the way Libya and Cuba did before April 27, 1994.

Now that our anti-apartheid $61bn efforts have been declared a waste, can Nigeria sever diplomatic ties with the 'rainbow nation'?. The answer is no. At least for now, it is affirmatively no. Why can't we? "The available statistics from the Nigerian high commission in Pretoria showed that over 800,000 Nigerians are legally living in South Africa" - Geoffrey Onyema, Nigeria's foreign affairs minister, (Punch, Friday 6, 2019). Another reason is that there are over twenty (20) South African businesses in Nigeria; ranging from banking, telecoms, distilling to merchandising. You should know what that means in terms of employment. Also, a yearly estimate of about $3.83bn foreign exchange earnings comes into Nigeria from South Africa (World Trade Report, 2018 p.16). Considering the insignificant less than 1% revenue of $514m Nigeria contributes​ to South Africa's wealth in terms of import, I think they would not feel the heat if we boycott their products.

According to South Africa's defense minister, Novisiwe Mapisa, "nothing can be done about the nature of the attack because it is based on anger". It is glaring from the above assertion that more blacks will still be attacked and killed in the nearest future. What can we do to at least reduce the effect of this crisis and eventually put a permanent stop to it?.

Since the failures of different economies in Africa was the reason for the influx of the black population into South Africa, then, it is sacrosanct we organize enabling economies around Africa in order to encourage Africans to stay in their countries of origin and harness local resources to cater for themselves. It may not seem easy but the best possible way to go about it is to adopt the European Union method.
Firstly, common currency with strong purchasing power will discourage the majority from migrating out of their native countries. For instance, if any unit of African currency can command the same value anywhere within the continent there will be less scramble for scarce resources​ that are concentrated in one single country while the type of socio-psychological erosion of lives that is happening in South Africa could be avoided. Secondly, a zero-tariff system on inter-African commodities will help develop the mass market, create employment and break the vicious cycle of poverty that is typical of the majority of African nations. Thirdly, easy and affordable movement of people, goods and services within Africa through a web of rail links will hasten the socio-economic decongestion of a place like South Africa where other blacks fellows are not welcomed.

The icing on the cake for this type of remodeled African union will be the adoption of a policy that looks like the Maastricht Treaty of 1992 by the European Union. With such a treaty, Africans can regulate immigration, labour, weight, security, domestic cum foreign affairs and judicial system on a parallel line without misplacing indigenous cultures and value systems.
It is a pity that Nigeria that needs African union of this type the most is the same country dragging everyone behind from enacting the necessary policies. The irony of the matter is that the same Nigeria and South Africa that are at loggerheads now are also the nations in the best position to push the rest of Africa into adopting​ a remodeled​ African Union that can save us from future economic doom and social unrest.
It is the economic success of the majority of African nations through supra-national political arrangements, economic Integration and social cohesion that can arrest the menace of xenophobia, blackophobia, the exportation of organized crime, chronic unemployment, and social tension. As long as South Africa remains relatively economically stable, and the rest of Africa are somewhat poor or static, people will continue to migrate into South Africa and there will always be reasons/excuses for the indigenous population that have been 'apartheidly' recreated to rise against foreigners in that country.

FAILED FISCAL SYSTEM AND POLITICAL BEGGARY

FAILED FISCAL SYSTEM AND POLITICAL BEGGARY 

The Nexus between the state and economy in Nigeria is such an inertia type, which is why both institutions are systematically​ antithetical. This is because there is rarely a meeting point between the government's prioritized​ endeavours (political decisions) and the needs of our people (economy).

Over the years, Nigeria has solely depended on fossil fuel and eschewed all other meaningful commercial alternative avenues that could provide as much as we earn from oil today. The resultant effect being that all the 36 states of the federation plan their yearly budgets based on allocations from the Federation Account. Invariably, ancillary palliative measures to foreign exchange such as: internal/external loans; bi-lateral grants from donor country or multilateral/international organizations​ and economic bail outs of any sort are no longer seen as occasional or second plan ideas, but rather, these debt procurement method is now the most fashionable means of planning budgetary provisions in Nigeria. 

A flash back into the era of regionalism will show how unashamed, unscrupulous and unintelligent political administrators​ have become. Before the proliferation of states regions​ are specialists in agricultural products which served as veritable sources of income. "Regional governments are the landlords that contributed​ quota/taxes to the federation's pocket" (Leo Dare, 1978). "This actually weakened any sort of intending or imaginary central monopoly of power" (Adeoye Akinsanya, 1985). "Our balance of trade and payment was enhanced in favour of naira as a currency" (Claude Ake, 1970).

The fiscal system during the days of regionalism​ did not allow parliamentarians or politicians the uncountable retinue of aids they parade today. There were lesser or non-performing ministries. Agriculture simply made government the largest employer of labour, not the fraudulent or opaque NNPC. The civil service consisted those ingenuous and industrious people with job roles, unlike now when we have ghost workers who do nothing and earn tax payers money.

Since 1976, state creation did not allow vestigial states the kind of regional economic platforms that could enable those states exist in commensalism with the federal government. Moreover, many state governors are thieves, foolish and greedy to the extent that they loot through any imaginary means they could fathom. These state governors lacked creative mentalities; they are so comfortable with the whole administrative rot/decadence that they took after the federal method of politics by creating avalanche of ministries with uncountable appointments.

The collapse of oil price mete out an attendant effect to Nigeria and the country slumped into financial crises. Both the Federal and State governments are owing in Nigeria. As of today, the country is owing #24.95 trillion. The amount owed to external governments and agencies is $25.61 billion. We keep borrowing to the extent that we now borrow to pay salaries. The Chinese government for instance will continue to lend us money because their leaders have foresight and they know that Nigeria will at one time or the other become a vassal state to China. 

I once put forward a 'theory of federal dislocation' that could help us evade paying these huge debts by dissolving the country and allow splinter states take formations. It is a pity the theory cannot apply to Nigeria because even, individual state borrow uncontrollably and they do not have any meaningful development to show for it. Imagine Lagos is owing #542 billion; Rivers #225 billion; Delta #223 billion and so on. If you check at the office of Debt Management they will tell you that the ratio of our debt to GDP is 19.03%, this is a shame. Politicians will tell you that recession warranted the borrowing. Is that why we must borrow to pay salaries? The wage bill of these states is almost 75% of their monthly allocations; little wonder many of our states in Nigeria look as if they are still in the 19th century!

The important questions are: (i) for how long will this unnecessary political/financial babihanla (beggary) continue? (ii) when will state governments in Nigeria develop their own internal capacities to generating wealth? (iii) for how long will oil crisis continue to degenerate into financial crises for Nigeria? (iv) what is the plan of the current political regime on economic diversification? (v) why did we continue to borrow and neglect our GDP? (vi) must government  appoint/employ so many people who contribute nothing to the economic development of the state but receive salaries in the name of carrying files? 

My own submission is that fiscal federalism​ will go a long way to put to rest the case of shortage/dearth of financial resources; it will tame the menace of financial impropriety; it will abate the precarious situation of the economy; it is going to weed out the non-performing section(s) of the civil service; it will promote internal competitions; our mass market shall be enhanced; the economy will be diversified; the ubiquity of federal character principle shall be relatively reduced or silenced while a state-centred as against centripetal federalism will be promoted.

In a simple language, different states have mineral resources, they should be constitutionally empowered to put those materials into industrialization while they will only remit taxes to the federal government. States with little or no natural resources can resort to pure agriculture or energy-based productions. Against this backdrop, federal politics will become less chaotic if there is no much goodies to suck, as such, the centre will be administrative-driven, purposeful and rule-oriented. The reliance on oil will reduce drastically. Moreover, financial problems will no longer warrant political babihanla (borrowings) that has continued to encourage ineptness, dormancy and over reliance on federal government by all and sundry.

Unless the government of this or future era look critically into the aforementioned problems and the outlined solutions, failure of public policies will no longer be seen as a setback but rather, as a propellant for government officials to always arise and stereotype Nigerians as refugees in their own country. This, they will do and continue to do despite the volume of illegitimate largesse they enjoy in the midst of fiscal imbalance that pervaded the country.