Nigerian Progressives and The National Question


Weep Not Nigerian Progressives. Let Us Explore Transformative Politics as We Attempt to Answer the National Question


Yakubu A. Ochefu, PhD, FHSN, MNAL

Eddie@75 Anniversary Lecture, May 15, 2021


When I was invited to deliver this important lecture, a sense of trepidation swarmed over me. The topic was not really the problem but the individual for whom we were gathering to honour. I have known Eddie Madunagu for 35 years. I have read a lot of his writings and participated in political movements that he led. His spouse Bene was one of my mentors and, together with Eskor Toyo, Hogan Akpan Ekpo and Bassey Ekpo Bassey introduced me to progressive politics and the role of the intellectual in society’s development. More importantly, they taught me how to cause a change in society, no matter how little. Under their tutelage, I developed a political consciousness that remains with me till today. As ASUU Unical Branch Treasurer with Bene as Chairperson, I also had the opportunity to meet with academic activists in other universities. The likes of Late Festus Iyayi, Attahiru Jega, Dipo Fasina, Francis Asobie, Toye Olorode, Ogban Iyam and Julius Ihonvbere were to positively impact my worldview and perspectives of many aspects of Nigeria’s social realities.


So what will I write or say on the occasion of the 75th birthday of one of the worlds finest political minds? Eddie, as a polymath, strides across several knowledge verticals. The people who have come together to celebrate him are equally some of Nigeria’s finest minds. My sense of trepidation heightened when a debate exploded on the social media platform created for this celebration. At one point in the debate, my mind went back to the polemics of the 1980s when members of the socialist family would engage in sometimes very bitter debates on how to engage the Nigerian State, the dichotomy between what is radical and what is progressive, and the nature and character of participation in party politics. It took the intervention of John Odah, Chido Onumah and Femi Aborisade, that I be left to decide the trajectory of my presentation, and during the questions and comments session, all other opinions could be expressed.


As I researched for the presentation, I revisited a paper I presented to the Nigeria Academy of Letters in 2017 titled; “Blind Patriots, Lame Nationalists, Deaf and Dumb Nihilists: Cogitations on the Nexus between Patriotism and Nation Building in Nigeria, the Historical Manifestations and Prognosticating near futures”1. My definition of patriots, nationalists and nihilists and my prognosis of the near future from the agenda set by the Buhari administration that was rounding up its first term struck me as an excellent pedestal to anchor the conversation. I will proceed by asking us to compare our vision of political progressivism from forty years ago to what it is now.  Following this, I will undertake a quick review of the political agenda that created the national structure we currently challenge. I then make a case for us to consider transformative politics and building a progressive alliance that will challenge the current political elite and bid for power. My conclusion will come via some prognosis of the near future.


Let us ask ourselves a few questions


For the 190 persons on the WhatsApp platform created for this celebration, I want to believe that the median age is 50 and 60. Some of Eddie contemporaries and persons I consider his first-generation cadres are on the platform. Also on the platform is his son Ikenna and I suspect Unoma, his daughter. They will probably be the youngest, albeit adults and parents in their own right. So for us all, what is our vision of a good society? A good community and a good country? In an age defined by globalisation, technology, climate change and grey and black swan events, what constitutes progress? What is the national question in an age when some people consider themselves netizens? In the post-industrial capitalist economy where social formations have been seriously disrupted, can we still use the template of the 1980s to design and construct a nation-state? If Karl Marx or Eskor Toyo, or our celebrant, were to be on Twitter, what will their followership be like? Will any of their tweets go viral?


Every generation has a special attachment to life during their heydays. We often refer to “those good old days” with nostalgia when we remember our youthful days, school days etc. Mirrored against the present, those days appear to be much better than the present. Quality of education was better (even though computers/Internet did not exist), travel was safe (even though it took a much longer time to get from point A to B), security was much better (few cases of armed robbery and certainly no terrorists), entertainment was better (no DSTV or 24-hour television and MP3 music). Governance was better; corruption stood at between 5 and 10%, and public institutions provided service to the citizens. So if the past was much better than the present, what then will be our goal? To attempt going back to those good old days, or fabricate a new society that will contain the best elements of the past and what is desired for the present?


For us, the generation that is celebrating Eddie today, the social and governance issues that confronted us and spurred our “progressive agenda” forty years ago pales into insignificance compared to where we are today as a people. We may be comforted with the fact that people like Eddie “saw the future” and predicted this would happen if our leadership did not do the needful then. Even at that, we most certainly, in our wildest imaginations, did not ever believe we would see suicide bombers in our communities, that the almighty Nigerian army would lose territory to bandits and insurgents, that kidnapping will become a “state business”; that unknown gunmen will overrun security formations and policemen would be afraid to wear uniforms as they patrol some communities.


Thirty-Six Years and Counting


For me, the trail to where we are today began in 1985 when General Babangida began the most comprehensive political recalibration of Nigeria after the civil war. I will not bore you with the details and will simply assume we all know what I am talking about. For a start, Babangida convoked a political bureau to seek the opinions of Nigerians to “Review Nigeria’s political history and identify the basic problems which have led to our failure in the past and suggest ways of resolving and coping with these problems. (emphasis mine). When the Bureau presented its report, the military authorities did not expect recommendations that supported “Democratisation of socio-economic power through political and economic participation in all structures and organisations of power, leading to a socialist state”. With the robust support of segments of Nigeria’s finest intelligentsia, Babangida embarked on a political and governance pif-paf-poof for eight years. His bag of tricks became empty when he again underestimated the capacity of Nigerians to determine what they wanted. The Democracy Day we now officially celebrate is a grim reminder of aspects of Babangida’s political engineering process.


By 1999 we got another opportunity to re-engineer our country. General Obasanjo, having been sprung out of prison, was handed over a deeply divided country. He seemed to make short work of the assignment but misunderstood and underestimated the new democrats that occupied government houses in the 36 states and those in the National Assembly. Like Babangida and Abacha before him, his political re-engineering programme, aka third term agenda, collapsed pitifully, and a hastily contracted succession agenda saw the emergence of two lame-duck actors occupying Aso Rock in 2007. From then on, we all know the story very well. Barely after 20 years, the failures of the 4th Republic has left us as a deeply divided nation housing patriotic elements that are blind, ethnic and civic nationalists who can barely walk and nihilists who want to dismember the current political structure and are stone deaf to any form of conversations.


Burgomasters, Warlords and a Hostage Political Economy


Social theorists like Lumis distinguish between authoritarian patriotism and democratic patriotism.2 While the former demands unquestioned loyalty to the State and is driven by official history, and the latter corresponds to various forms of civic or ethnic nationalism where loyalties can be to an ethnic nation rather than a nation-state.3 I had the privilege of gauging our nationalist ideals at the 2014 National Conference, where I participated as a delegate representing the Historical Society of Nigeria. I saw firsthand the complexities of the Nigerian State, the deep fault lines and the equally deep connections. I also saw the entrenched interests and the firm resolve to dismantle the existing State and construct a new one based on equity and justice. I heard the voices of minorities roaring like lions in the savanna. From Oron in Akwa Ibom to Kare-Kare in Yobe, Zuru in Kebbi and Oju in Benue, the bitter lamentations of marginalisation were voiced out. These were micro minorities who were taking centre stage at the National level for the first time. Afenifere came to the Conference with a regional agenda and a map that included Lagos. The delegates from Lagos told a stunned audience that they are not and have never been a part of the Western region and would rather be a country of their own if the nation was to split. Ebonyi rejected outright any talk of Eastern region with headquarters in Enugu, much to the chagrin of the rest of the Ndi Igbo delegates. The Northern minority delegates in sharp opposition to the “Arewa” delegates introduced the demand for new states from Southern Kaduna, Southern Bauchi, and Southern Borno, all Christian enclaves in predominantly Muslim existing states. The Kwararafa family showed their spread. Members in 24 states in five out of the six geo-political zones, arguably the most significant single body of peoples spread across the country. The Land Use Act, Resource Control State Police and Judicial and Fiscal Federalism pitched the north against the south. How consensus was to be achieved from these divergent and discordant tunes seemed an impossibility. After four months of talks, sharing of fears and grievances, and getting the statistics to tell the story, a seemingly impossible resolution was reached. Symbolically the members sang the old National Anthem: “Nigeria we hail thee. Our own dear native land”. For the first time in a long time, I truly believed that we had got it right.


But while Goodluck Jonathan was hoping to implement the Conference’s recommendations after the 2015 elections (which, as an incumbent he assumed he would win), elements in our polity were plotting to jettison his plan.   Within four years of taking power, the All Progressive Congress, rather than use the 2014 Conference Report as a starting point to tackle the challenges they met, began to implement an agenda that has created a Nigeria that many of us can hardly recognise. The current conversation regarding the future of Nigeria (for some people, we have barely six months to survive); the daily revelations that give credence to conspiracy theories surrounding ultra right wing ethnic supremacy ideas who have come to understand that only an obstreperous presentation of their case with some degree of violence, shocks the political leadership to reckon with them. Right-wing populists and ethnic nationalist began to use exclusionary nationalism as a weapon, tool or platform for all those who feel “not heard”, “not included”, and “not recognised” by the ruling class in general and the current political establishment in particular. The debate over restructuring has become the symbolic crystallisation point of deeper identity conflicts, distribution of resources and sovereignty. Thus Boko Haram, Masson, IPOB, Yoruba Liberation Command, Niger Delta Avengers, to mention a few, should be understood as reminders of what damage can be done when nihilist elements are allowed to weaponise anger for their own political agenda. The diffusion of this rage has become a matter of Nigeria’s democratic survival.


Restructuring and the National Question


As far as Professor ABC Nwosu is concerned, restructuring of the country is imperative. “…we have no choice in this matter.4 We will either restructure, or we cease to exist as Nigeria, it is an existential threat”. He notes correctly that restructuring is not new. Post-January 15, 1966, one of the study groups set up by General Ironsi was on the structure. When Gowon took over in July, remember we had a conference that broke down; one was about structure. Aburi was nothing except structure. When President Babangida came in, it was structure; when Abacha came in, it was structure. When Obasanjo set up his political reform, it was about structure.5 When Jonathan set up his own, it was still about structure. APC Government, in rejecting the 2014 National Conference Report, set up their own restructuring agenda.


In the current debate, I share Jeremiah Angie’s compartmentalisation of the argument into three. Nostalgics, Dissolutionists and Mentalists.6 The Nostalgics, according to him, lay the blame at the doorstep of the military, whose 1966 interruption altered the regional arrangement the nation had inherited from colonialists and replaced it with a system that can best be described as unitary federalism.7 Those who make that argument often advocate for a return to “true federalism” or “fiscal federalism”, whereby each region would have control of its resources. This group longs for a return to the pre-1966 era when each region of the country had its own parliament, coat of arms and substantial autonomy over its resources.


For the dissolutions, the Nigerian State is an inherently faulty union that is not working. They argue that the “house” that Lugard built united families that were incompatible. For them, there are three ways out of the union. Peaceful dissolution with each going their separate ways or the different elements can renegotiate their union’s terms. This could be accomplished either through a sovereign national gathering or referendum. Failure of either two would most probably end in violent separation.


The mentalists are those Nigerians who see the issue of the country as that of poor national leadership since Independence. They place that progressive governments, both military and civilian, have been bereft of personal qualities of integrity, honesty, commitment, and competence and the collective qualities of shared vision, focus, and desire for the nation’s development as a whole. Since its Independence, the nation has been confronting the test of building a solid platform for its nationhood. In the 1950s, the founding fathers combated this problem by adopting federalism as the platform on which our democracy would be built. But federalism has been confronted with major difficulties throughout the years from those needing a unitary type of government on the one hand, and from those needing a confederal type, on the other. Thus our leaders more often than not, worship on the church of federalism but pray on the altar of unitarism. Mentalists refer to nations like Singapore, India, Sri Lanka and Malaysia, who, notwithstanding their complex political, ethnic or religious difficulties, have possessed the capacity to accomplish some incredible levels of social and economic development and political stability. All the national leaders need to do is tweak the structure of power that enables sub-national interest to have a voice in the scheme of things. Straightforward as this is, the big question is how can it be achieved? The outcome of the attempts at a constitutional amendment by the National Assembly in 2018 reminds me of a Yoruba proverb that says when you want to roast a python. You do not make the fire as long as the snake. For an assembly that would not agree on one of the key issues i,e the devolution of powers between the Federal Government and the States, they seem not to believe in that proverb.


From Progressive to Transformative Politics


Transformative politics proposes an alternative value-based political science that studies phenomena and uses knowledge to promote democracy, sustainability, and social conscience. 8 As an eclectic social and political theory, it embeds numerous paradigms and theories in behavioural sciences, ecological studies, quantum physics and molecular biology to offer perspectives of human existence that are very different from mainstream political theory with its hierarchal power, authority, and rugged individualism nexus.9 Transformative politics calls for participatory power, progressive enterprise, gender and environmental consciousness as building blocks. We are fortunate to witness firsthand how humanity is re-inventing itself by using existing knowledge as building blocks for new knowledge and paradigms. In the last 20 years, the “on-demand”, “sharing”, and “crowding” services have demonstrated how “old ways” of doing things become disruptive through the application of information technology.


To invest in transformative politics, I propose we consider Neal Lawson panacea on how progressives can use the opportunities provided by an unstable political environment to activate a renewed agenda.10 He urges progressives to “abandon their chaos conservatism, in which the shapeshifting spectres of distraction, destruction and disorder are revisited again and again to disorientate and demoralise the rest of us”.10 While we relish in accusing mainstream politicians whose capacity for mismanaging the economy we all know too well, but who seem to have a hold on the electorate winning election after election, and progressives who keep losing to them, it becomes quite evidence that we need a change of tactics.11 Furthermore, while we believed that the “working class” were the major partners of progressives as change agents, the reality of the 4th industrial revolution suggests that the working class, even though it has increased in numbers, is deeply challenged by the frontiers of advanced technology the so-called “gig economy”. As we saw from the” End Sars” protests, change agents now include celebrities, green activities, and cyber actors.


Can we activate a Transformative change agenda that will promote the emergence of an ecosystem of political parties and movements in which the art of extreme collaboration is the essential practice?. What type of Progressive Alliance can we create to kick-starting the new political journey of our times. Can we foster a new societal operating system that will position participatory/networked power that is dispersed and democratised over and above hierarchal power that is centralised and controlled by an authoritarian centre?. To facilitate this, we must be conscious of the recent political history of the progressive movement itself. I agree with Kayode Komolafe when he writes that:

…the the thing that unites the people of Nigeria is their worsening poverty in which no part is exempted based on ethnicity. There is no ethnic solution the problems of hunger, ignorance and disease. The factions of the ruling class also belong to the various ethnic groups. No ethnic faction of the Nigerian ruling class has the historical capacity to execute a national democratic revolution. Therefore, the task of the transformation of the social order remains that of the working people organised for the purpose. 12

The two major parties in Nigeria are not mass parties. None of them can boast of registered card-carrying and subscription paying members numbering up to two million across the country.


A Call to Action


In 1990 Eddie Madunagu, at a meeting of Calabar Group of Communist/Democratic Action Committee asked if state power could be used to transform the lives of ordinary people in Nigeria?. When the meeting responded in the affirmative, he then organised with the late Bassey Ekpo Bassey to move across Nigeria and pose the same question to various groups in Benue, Plateau, Bauchi Kaduna, Kano and the southwest. The interest in which this movement generated saw the build-up of what became the Labour Party that eventually morphed into the Social Democratic Party. I recalled the long hours we spent in the parlour of Bassey Ekpo Bassey’s house debating how to proceed. In 1998 my schoolmate and friend at the University of Calabar, Terhemba Shija assembled ten of us as like-minded professionals and posed the same question. Over several meetings, we produced a development agenda that the PDP Government under George Akume adopted when he won the elections in 1999. From 1999 to 2015, several progressives like Gani Fawehinmi and Balarabe Musa ended up as promoters or leaders of fringe political parties that could not win a seat at any level of governance. A significant number of others ended up supporting the major political parties.


In the build-up to the 2019 general elections, several progressive groups attempted to construct an alternative political platform to the APC/PDP. Under names such as the 3rd Force, these groups collapsed under the weight of several forms of contradictions and ended not posing any challenge to the dominant parties. I joined the Action Democratic Party and at one point was Chairman in my state. The one year that I did “party”, as my people call it, was one of the best political education I ever had. I then understood what Julius Ihonvbere meant when he told the Nigeria Political Science Association that the one year he spent as an Advisor in Aso Rock gave him more political experience than the 30 years that he had been a teacher and activist.


As we build-up to the 2023 elections and with the dominant political parties in disarray, can a Progressive Alliance be constructed to pose a severe challenge to the ruling parties, both of which have not only failed woefully but have set the country on a dangerous path of self-implosion? What can we make of The People’s Alternative Political Summit (T-PAPS)? They are currently the only group openly canvassing for a Socialist alternative in Nigerian politics. For the rest of us, what are we doing? How many of us are card-carrying members of any political party? How many of us have attended political party meetings at the ward or local government level or held any party position since 1999. How many of us are willing to step out to challenge the established political status quo in our ward, LGA, or States? I have declared an interest to run for the governorship of my state in 2023. How many of us even dare to make such a declaration? The closest we got any mass action in the scale of “Ali Must Go” or “SAP protest” was “End Sars”. Here we saw for the first time our children successfully take on the State. We also saw them make some of the mistakes we made when we took on the State four decades earlier. It is time for genuine progressives to offer transformative politics in terms of ends and means, or we will continue to suffer and lament the failures of those who are currently involved.


My Prognosis for the Near Future?


My teachers taught me that a historian’s business effectively ends with a version of what happened in the past. A historian has no business with trying to prognosticate the future. Indeed, the Kanuri proverb, which states that; “No matter how the long the neck of a bird is, it cannot see into the future”, seems to have been tailor-made for historians. For a long time, I believed in that time tested injunction. Midway into my career, I stumbled into the world of Future studies. For historians in general and futurologists in particular, many aspects of our future are behind us. We sort of build our future from our past. In this context, the notable Nigerian historian Ade Ajayi mentions history as a “rearview mirror of society”.13 So a car is travelling forward (to the future), has a rearview mirror (that sees what is coming from the back/past). Future Studies (also called futurology) is the study of postulating possible, probable, and preferable futures and the worldviews and myths that underlie them. Some consider it as a branch of the social sciences and parallel to history. In the same way that history studies the past, futures studies considers the future. Thus, part of the discipline seeks a systematic and pattern-based understanding of past and present and to determine the likelihood of future events and trends. In his 1969 essay Discussion on Future Research, Ossip Flechtheim explained that it:

… was the attempt to discuss the evolution of man and his society in the hitherto forbidden future tense. I held that, by marshalling the ever-growing resources of science and scholarship, we could do more than employ retrospective analysis and hypothetical predictions; we could try to establish the degree of credibility and probability of forecasts.14


Three factors usually distinguish futures studies from the research conducted by other disciplines:

Futures studies often examine trends to compose possible, probable, and preferable futures along with the role “wild cards” can play on future scenarios.

Futures studies typically attempt to gain a holistic or systemic view based on insights from a range of different disciplines, generally focusing on the Social, Technological, Economic, Environmental and Political.

Futures studies challenge and unpack the assumptions behind dominant and contending views of the future.


The future thus is not empty but fraught with hidden assumptions. For example, many people expect the collapse of the Earth’s ecosystem in the near future, while others believe the current ecosystem will survive indefinitely. A foresight approach would seek to analyse and highlight the assumptions underpinning such views. The futures field also excludes those who make Nostradamian type predictions through professed supernatural means. Yuval Noah Harari, 2016 book titled Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow and David Stanley’s History and Future: Using Historical Thinking to Imagine the Future or The February 2011 study by the United States of America Airforce Colonels led by Christopher Kinnam titled “Failed State 2030: Nigeria a case study”, are relevant examples of future studies that make useful reading.


In a deeply divided country like ours, how do we or should we engage on the National Question? How do we digest the tons of garbage that is spewed out daily on the plethora of new media that we patronise on a daily basis? How do we re-orientate two generations of Nigerians that were not taught any aspect of our history in secondary school because the leadership, forty years ago, yanked history off the syllabus? These generations are more comfortable with referring to their country as Naija and tend to agree mainly on how badly the National Team, the Super Eagles or the leading European premier football clubs played their last match or who the leading local hip hop artist is?


To manage the time allotted to me, I will stick to only five prognoses from our exercise in future studies. My prognosis is based on weak signals, future signals and trend analysis, and forecasting our current political and economic realities. The first is the nature and character of our leadership. In the book “Inside Independent Nigeria: the Diary of Wolfgang Stopler, edited by Clive Gray, Stolper questions the leadership’s political will to implement the first national development plan.14 Sixty years on, the issue of the political will of our leadership still haunts us daily. Our prognosis of the near future is that the lack of political will to deal with fundamental problems that block our developmental efforts will remain. This will only change following a major social revolution that will happen on or before in the next ten years.


Second, and closely related to the first, the relationship between productive, unproductive and destructive political elite, entrepreneurs, and bureaucrats will determine how quickly and how well our near term development agenda is managed and implemented. In the past decade, the baton has been firmly in the hands of the unproductive and destructive. When one critically examines the Pension, Fuel subsidy, Capital Market scams, oil bunkering, looting of state and local government funds, and promoting boondoggle projects, we see how unproductive elements manipulate the economy for their private gains. A segment of the leadership is currently locked in a fierce battle against the corrupt and unproductive. While we have moved up in the ladder in the global corruption index, the fightback by corruption is ferocious. If I were a betting man, I would place my bet on the side of those who will predict that the anti-corruption forces will not win this battle. When you critically examine the character of persons in the National Assembly, you get a sense of why I say so.


The third is the Invincible hand of global capitalism. American, British, French, German, Indian, Chinese, Brazilian and South African actors are playing and will continue to play critical roles in dimensioning the trajectory of our economic and political pathways going forward for the next ten years.


Fourth, will Nigeria be restructured? Yes. What form or shape will this take? A blend of federalism that will encompass greater fiscal autonomy, geo-political zone structures and internal boundaries based on ethnic and sub-ethnic divisions. I foresee a decentralisation of power along identity lines similar to or a blend of what countries like Switzerland, Belgium and Canada have. This will most likely come after a bitter struggle.


Fifth, the outcome of the current economic crisis will be the key driver of the political imperatives. Economists often make references to the Iron law of unintended consequences. The current blind spots in standard economic theory that do not recognise qualitative differences between economic activities, diversity, innovation, synergies, and historical sequencing of processes ensure that our stated economic objectives continue to fall short in terms of outcomes and impact mass of the people. For example, how else can one explain that a gas-fired electricity plant would be built and the pipeline to feed it with gas will not? How do you tie your economic fortunes to a depleting resource whose importance as a core bastion of economic growth is reaching a terminal point? Standard economic theory without economic history is a recipe for failure. The hatred of many of our leaders for history and historians is one of their greatest undoings. They hardly understand that a nation without a history is akin to a man that has lost his memory. And as long as our economists fail to worship occasionally in the temple of Clio, the goddess of History, their economic seeds for development will not bear fruits.




Our calling as professional academics is a particularly difficult one. We are difficult to manage to please and to impress. Our range of standards is very wide. From very laughable mediocre individuals who have no business being in the profession in the first instance to supercharged thinkers who constantly innovate and add value to their discipline and societies. We also have some who can be likened to Ocol in the celebrated book by Okot p’Bitek that have “read many books among white men and those books has not helped them. Instead, they have lost their heads, “In the forest of books”. Their manhood was finished In the classrooms. Their testicles were smashed with large books!15


Eddie Madunagu stands out as a professional academic, a philosopher and a revolutionary thinker. A man for whom Karl Marx charge on extending the philosopher’s role from interpreting the world in various ways to changing it has been his conviction for the past 50 years. The National Question in Nigeria remains a work in progress. We will continue to engage it until we find a model that uses state power to transform the lives of all peoples in Nigeria.



Yakubu A. Ochefu, Blind Patriots, Lame Nationalists and Deaf and Dumb Nihilists. Cogitations on the Historical Manifestation of Nation Building in Nigeria and Prognosticating near futures. Nigeria Academy of Letters Lecture, August, 2017.

  1. D. Lummis, Radical Democracy, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1996, Daniel Bar-Tel, “Patriotism as Fundamental Beliefs of Group of Members’, Politics and the Individual, vol.3, number 2, 1993.
  2. D. Lummis, Radical Democracy.

ABC Nwosu, “What Restructuring means in Practical Terms”

ABC Nwosu, “What Restructuring means in Practical Terms”

Jeremiah Angai, “Restructuring Nigeria: the Power-Identity Conundrum”, Jul 4, 2017


Stephen Woolpert; Christa Daryl Slaton and Edward Schwerin (Editors); Transformational Politics: Theory, Study, and Practice, Suny Press, 1998

Yakubu Ochefu, “A Homo Economicus and a Homo Digitalis: A Curmudgeon Cliometrician’s Cogitations on Economic History, Genetics, Development and Institutional Legacies” 13th  Inaugural lecture, Benue State University, Makurdi, 2018

Neal Lawson, “Dry your tears, progressives. Do politics in a different way, and you can start to make the desirable feasible”,

Neal Lawson, “Dry your tears”

Kayode Komolafe, “Madunagu On the National Question”,

OssipK.Flechtheim,History and Futurology, Hain, 1966.

Clive S. Gray and Wolfgang F. Stolper,(eds), Inside independent Nigeria : diaries of Wolfgang Stolper, 1960-1962. Ashgate, 2003

Okot p’Bitek, Song of Lawino, reprint edition, East African Publishers, 1995 p.117.





For Edwin Madunagu at 75: A Tribute

Previous article

El-Rufai under fire for declaring Wabba wanted

Next article

You may also like


Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More in Perspective