January coup and a professor’s indelicate submission (1)

The military coup of January 15, 1966, in Nigeria was a matter I had commented on in the past. I strongly believed it took the nation on a different trajectory, including that which led to the civil war. For me, civilian leaders would have resolved their differences rather than go to war in 1967. The debate about that episode in our history can never be exhausted. No debate in the social sciences ever is. Everyone’s view is only a contribution. That’s what those of us with a social science background believe. But as I stated in the past, there’re Nigerians, possibly from the core sciences and law, who believe their submission in any debate must be the ultimate. So when anyone expresses anything different, they insult them.

There’s one of such Nigerians online who identifies himself in so many ways that you wonder about his real identity. He identifies himself as Dr Great Oracle. Meanwhile, his Twitter handle reads Abdumahmudo1. He says he’s a Professor of Law. The first person who commented on the coup of 1966 mentioned the killings of political leaders. I added how that coup led to a situation whereby the fine federal arrangement of the First Republic was terminated and to date, it has become impossible to restore. When Abdu Mahmud, alias Great Oracle, the professor of law commented it was to insult people, dismissing others as mischievous, poor students of history, and that they must have been ghetto people for them to ‘ghetosise’ the 1966 military coup.

Why is this Professor of Law’s indelicate submission important? A few days ago, someone said she was in a town where she had cringed often because whenever inhabitants opened their mouths it was to insult others. I said it was because we have become a nation of angry people, unnecessarily aggressive due to some socio-economic reasons. It’s a different problem though when a law professor freely insults. You ask: What does he teach his students? This is of concern to me because, in the social media, I campaign against insulting others across tribes, religions, or in the course of a debate. For this Professor of Law, it seems insulting others is no problem. His behaviour is unbecoming of anyone in the ivory tower. This is even more so with some other street level comments Oracle has been making online; a reason I urge the institution where he lectures to pay closer attention to his online activity.

At this point, I urge the reader to come with me one step at a time. I do this because I shall string a few seemingly unrelated issues together. If I don’t, the entire point being made on the effects of the 1966 Coup on our nation would be missed, a phenomenon Oracle has demonstrated. I enjoy debating people; so here I debate Oracle who believes the only way to engage others is by insulting them. How to present one’s case suavely is what one needs to learn, not how to fight; this Yoruba saying informs my worldview. Although the military coup of 1966 is my focus, first I shall link it to how many with titles in our nation conduct themselves rather unseemly in the public space when they make comments.

Advertisement

I believe there’s no conversation anyone cannot contribute to – from the Archbishop to the traditional ruler, and to the professor in the university. You can express your view on an issue, and even use it to draw out other people’s views for the purpose of learning from them. For instance, I express views from high state matters as to why one carrot tastes sweet and the other is tasteless. That last part is one topic I’ve commented on jovially on Twitter, sharing what I grandly rate as my ‘award-deserving’ finding on that matter. The mixture is what makes a village square meeting interesting. Village square meeting is what I believe the social media is.

I also believe such a public platform is one of the places where we can set good examples. But many have turned the social media to where they insult others freely, and as I always assert, including “their parents’ and grandparents’ age mates.” For me, there’s nothing more reckless than this in a person’s character. It happens because many Nigerians don’t have the patience to digest what others say and intelligently respond as Oracle the law professor shows. They simply insult. Sometimes, I wonder if the years we spent under military dictatorship led to this. I also think many come from settings where they believe others are to be commanded, and that they themselves have nothing to learn from others.

Often, one may see it in their comments that they even missed the core point because they’re too angry to dissect what others say. Oracle’s response missed the point we made, and it’s one issue I would yet engage so that he would realise he might need to re-rate his mental capacity to comprehend others. This is important as I suspect he may have been failing his students because he misreads their scripts. Many like Oracle don’t develop listening ears. It’s only what is in their minds they hear, and I’m not surprised because Oracle read law which I imagine deceives him to believe his submission in any debate must be law.

Compared to him, I have a social science background. I grew up in an environment where I was trained to listen to others carefully, and to calmly state my point even when I disagree with them. In the secondary school I attended, for instance, the school management made us campaign in order to get elected as school prefects. All contestants stood before fellow students to present their case.  In the end, I emerged as the Senior Boy. Fellow students brought issues to my attention and at about 16 years of age I learnt to listen to them respectfully. Later, at Ibadan Grammar School, Ibadan, where I did my A-Level programme, I was the Director of Debate. I organised a weekly debate and I gave every debater ample opportunity to state their case.

Fellow students in those days would remember that I used to set rules before any debate session. “Everyone should speak with civility, there must be no insults, no use of unsavoury language,” I would state in my introductory remarks. I was also a debater, representing my school at events. That’s my background. As a Senior Boy, a Director of Debate, and a debater myself, I knew the importance of people expressing their views. These days, I enjoy hearing people out, acknowledging to myself also that people have the right to express their views; whether I agree or disagree with them is another thing. I don’t harbour the mentality that anyone is ‘stupid’ because of what they express as some do.

I take it that whatever people express gives me an opportunity to express mine, add to what they say or state my counter-reasons, as well as try to see if they could be otherwise persuaded. It’s a moment I enjoy enormously. As for those who insult rather than state their perspective in a debate, I always respond in the manner I do now to Oracle. I do only for one reason: They set bad examples for the younger generation of Nigerians.

Of interest here is the academic field that’s an incubator of ideas in every society. It’s where we should find the best of listening ears, the most patient set of people who imbibe the culture of debate. Oracle’s last outing reminds me of a few experiences. Some years ago, I served as the MC at a book launch at Sheraton, Abuja. The event advanced to a point where a few people on the high table had to go because they had other events. Left were three distinguished guests – a university lecturer, a large-scale farmer, and a religious leader. I said these three people had one thing in common – patience. I got a loud round of applause across the hall. Lecturers, especially, listen to their students and they patiently explain things in a way students would understand. So when a lecturer such as Oracle freely insults others for expressing their views rather than patiently submitting his own perspective, it’s deeply concerning.

To be continued