Queen Elizabeth was not Nigeria's problem

The death last Thursday of Queen Elizabeth of the United Kingdom provided another opportunity to question Nigerians' perception of their own realities. Prior to his transition, arguments had arisen as to the monarch's exact place in history.

A Nigerian-born teacher stirred up the wasps' nest with a tweet recalling Britain's role in the Nigerian civil war. He came to a damning conclusion and decided that the queen was not worthy of consideration and empathy. Instead, this lady wished the Queen the worst likely outcome of the uncertainty doctors have expressed over the situation of a 96-year-old man.

An assortment of sentiments followed that tweet, which oozed bitterness, dictated, as usual, by the country's identity politics. At the end of all this, you would realize a few basic things that Nigerians do not understand or refuse to understand about their country.

First, in most of their arguments, Nigerians fail to realize that no part of the country is getting a fair deal. This is debatable when considering some tangible factors like office appointments and perhaps physical infrastructure.

However, the reality of the humanitarian crisis in Nigeria today must tell us that building social infrastructure trumps building bridges and roads. Nothing takes away from the importance of infrastructure for economic development, but a nation that does not build its people digs its own grave. Only a quality population knows the value and can maintain a good infrastructure. This discrepancy explains the volume of vandalism of public facilities in Nigeria today. But I digress.

So Northern Nigeria, which is favored in the estimation by many, including the natives of the region (as suggested by a misguided young man in a tweet last week), is, in fact, the poorest of all. When you consider the level of poverty, lack of education, access to health, population growth and any other index of development, perceiving the North as the most favored part of Nigeria will fade. Every part of Nigeria is captive to its ruthless power elite if we were all to accept the truth.

Secondly, most Nigerians do not understand that no group is better than another. Nigerians should have equal rights with no group feeling they can dominate another. It is only in such an environment of mutual respect that a country can make lasting progress.

The third thing, which is a corollary of the other two, is that Nigerians do not realize that they are their own problem. And when people wallow in the mental seat of being victimized by other people or circumstances, they risk perpetual underdevelopment. Redemption for people and societies begins with honest self-assessment and the resolve to take on challenges and do things differently, with development as the goal.

When Queen Elizabeth died aged 96 last week, many Nigerians and Africans remembered her family's role in the transatlantic slave trade, the colonization of countries across the continent and, with Nigeria, the civil war.

It is impossible to deny the devastating effects of these harrowing periods in world history on the countries and peoples of the world. It is also perhaps insufficient to suggest that Elizabeth was born 59 years after the abolition of the slave trade in 1867 and 41 years after the Berlin Conference, where the partition of Africa took place in 1885.< /p>

Remind Nigerians that the merger, which gave birth to Nigeria (to the undying disgust of many compatriots), happened 12 years before the late Queen was born or that Elizabeth was a monarch who ruled but did not rule and was, in fact, noted for promoting racial justice, including supporting an end to apartheid in South Africa, can also be inconsequential appeasement. The plunder, physical dislocation, dehumanization and destitution of African civilization that accompanied colonization is unforgivable.

But is Britain or one of those countries that took territories in Africa the only ones guilty of slavery and colonialism? The need to dominate and oppress the weak is a natural tendency in all human societies. In the history of African societies, there are many examples of the desire to expand territories and take control of the weakest communities.

In pre-colonial Africa, various social, economic and political factors, including the personal ambitions of warlords, inspired hostilities. These led to wars, slave raids and many confrontations in which some communities fought, conquered and made colonies of other communities.

So pre-colonial Africa had various forms of indigenous slavery precipitated by indebtedness, military incursions, criminal justice and, sometimes, to satisfy someone's sexual cravings - much like you had motivational expansionist tendencies...