Strictly Personal

2023 General Election: Lie Telling By Politicians by Afe Babalola

Published

2 years ago

May 22, 2022

The Nigerian political space is gradually getting saturated with the gradual dawning of the 2023 General Elections. Unsurprisingly, the news media have be filled with the political campaigns and interviews of Presidential, Governorship and Legislative Houses hopefuls who have tried to curry the support of the electorate. These efforts are, of course, backed by party delegates, political godfathers, and influential people. Ahead of the elections, politicians will have no qualms promising absurdities and outright impossibilities to a populace that, while tired of politicians’ poor performance, has yet to demonstrate a genuine willingness to hold them accountable for failing to deliver on previous electoral promises. It is expected that these campaign promises will be centred around the yet-to-be-resolved issue of security, infrastructural development, health, employment, electricity generation, agriculture, and education. Politicians will promise millions of jobs, the construction of schools, the rehabilitation of roads, the revitalisation of the educational sector, and the revamping of the medical sector, all of which appear to be doable and indeed expedient on the surface except for the lack of any intention to carry them out.

Regarding education, promises will be made to build new schools, free schools, and provide free food while current schools continue to be deprived of funding for salary payments and facility repairs. Many roads in Nigeria are now in appalling condition. Nonetheless, cases have been documented in the past in which a road that is completely inaccessible to any type of motorised vehicle is reported in the government’s archives as having been restored or reconstructed time and time again. Many politicians will forge paperwork pertaining to their eligibility to run in the elections even before winning their party’s primary. To be certain, the phenomenon of lie telling by Politician is not peculiar to Nigeria alone. It pervades the whole planet so much so that academic studies have been dedicated to study just why Politicians lie.

In his article entitled “Six Reasons why Politicians lie”, Jim Taylor Ph.D. stated as follows: “I’m constantly amazed by how often politicians lie and then, of course, their unwillingness to admit that they lied. The euphemisms that politicians use for what is, in many cases, bold-faced lies are legend. Politicians misspoke. The biased media misinterpreted what they meant. Politicians’ words were distorted, misrepresented, twisted, exaggerated, or taken out of context. They overstated, understated, or misstated. But, of course, politicians never lie, at least that’s what they say. Yet, the unvarnished truth is that politicians do lie about things substantive…The $64,000 question that is constantly asked is: Why do politicians believe they can lie and not get caught?”

He then identified the six reasons why Politicians lie as:

Many Politicians are narcissists.

Narcissists are arrogant, self-important, see themselves as special, require excessive admiration, have a sense of entitlement, and are exploitative. 2. Politicians know their followers will believe them, even in the face of irrefutable evidence to the contrary. 3. People don’t want to hear the truth. 4. The Internet never forgets. 5. Cognitive biases. 6. If a lie is told enough times, people will assume it is true. Another school of thought contends that politicians must lie in order to maneuver within the political and leadership environments in which they find themselves. Arguing this view in his article titled “Why Politicians lie”, Dr. Ichak Adizes stated that: “The theme of lying politicians is not exclusive to the USA. In the fifty-two countries in which I have worked, I hear the same complaint: “We cannot trust our leaders. They are evasive. They hold back from telling us the truth, etc.” So why is it a global phenomenon that politicians lie? Because they have to.

I got this insight from working with prime ministers and presidents of various countries, while at the same time working with CEOs of very large companies. Leaders of major conglomerates and of countries exhibit very similar leadership styles: They are evasive, play their cards very close to the vest and do not share information if they can help it. They use big words to obscure their real intentions. They often “lie,” skirt the truth, too

Why? The higher you ascend up the hierarchy, the more political the environment becomes. Those you are interrelating with have their own interests—be they personal, or of the unit they manage—and there is a struggle between all these interests. As a leader you have to manoeuvre between all these pressure groups and powerful individuals and survive the manoeuvring. If you are truthful about your intentions and make them known, you are giving information to those who want to unseat you, who want you to lose so they can gain. You lose the capability to manoeuvre politically. It would be like a military leader making his battle plans known to the enemy during a war. And folks, up there in the organizational hierarchy, whether of a country or a corporation, it is a war.”

There are times when lying is not a crime and when it is essential. However, the reality is that in this region of the globe, politicians’ lying has grown so common that care is required. When a falsehood is repeated, people come to believe it is true, according to Dr. Taylor. Furthermore, as he pointed out, it is quite simple for a falsehood to persist on the internet in this day and age, to the point where many people would regard its existence on the internet as conclusive confirmation of its validity.

Links between lies and lack of trust

The argument must also be underscored that deceiving the electorate into voting based solely on lies is fundamentally immoral. Such actions invariably result in a loss of trust between the government and the people it governs. It explains why many Nigerians have always believed, even before independence, that the government cannot be trusted and that everyone in government is entitled to a piece of the “national cake.”

Explaining this, Martin Meredith in his book, “The State of Africa”, stated as follows: “The misuse of public funds in Nigeria had deep roots. During the colonial era, many Nigerians regarded government institutions as olu oyibo – whiteman’s business, an alien system that could be plundered when necessary. Government’s business is no man’s business, ran a popular Nigerian saying.” Explaining the practice, Eghosa Osaghe, a Nigerian academic commented: ‘there was thus nothing seriously wrong with stealing state funds, especially if they are used to benefit not only individual but also members of his community.

THE Nigerian political space is gradually getting saturated with the gradual dawning of the 2023 General Elections. Unsurprisingly, the news media have be filled with the political campaigns and interviews of Presidential, Governorship and Legislative Houses hopefuls who have tried to curry the support of the electorate. These efforts are, of course, backed by party delegates, political godfathers, and influential people. Ahead of the elections, politicians will have no qualms promising absurdities and outright impossibilities to a populace that, while tired of politicians’ poor performance, has yet to demonstrate a genuine willingness to hold them accountable for failing to deliver on previous electoral promises. It is expected that these campaign promises will be centred around the yet-to-be-resolved issue of security, infrastructural development, health, employment, electricity generation, agriculture, and education. Politicians will promise millions of jobs, the construction of schools, the rehabilitation of roads, the revitalisation of the educational sector, and the revamping of the medical sector, all of which appear to be doable and indeed expedient on the surface except for the lack of any intention to carry them out.

False assurances

Links between lies and lack of trust

Those who had the opportunity to be in government were expected to use the power and resources at their disposal to advance private and communal interests.’ The attitude prevailed with the coming of independence. The state was regarded as a foreign institution that could be used for personal and community gain without any sense of shame or need for accountability. Plunderers of the government treasury were often excused on the grounds that they had only ‘taken their share.’ What added to the problem was the notion that the government was in effect, a reservoir of ‘free money.”

As elections approach, I encourage politicians to examine the consequences of their deception. While it may earn them political office, it will cause them to lose the faith and trust of people they rule, and the country will suffer as a result. I can only hope that the country’s fortunes and the urgency to protect it will one day completely resonate with our policymakers.

Related Topics:opinion strictly personal

1 Comment

Strictly Personal

African Union must ensure Sudan civilians are protected, By Joyce Banda

Published

3 weeks ago

October 25, 2024

Ifeoluwa Dada

The war in Sudan presents the world – and Africa – with a test. This far, we have scored miserably. The international community has failed the people of Sudan. Collectively, we have chosen to systematically ignore and sacrifice the Sudanese people’s suffering in preference of our interests.

For 18 months, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) have fought a pitiless conflict that has killed thousands, displaced millions, and triggered the world’s largest hunger crisis.

Crimes against humanity and war crimes have been committed by both parties to the conflict. Sexual and gender-based violence are at epidemic levels. The RSF has perpetrated a wave of ethnically motivated violence in Darfur. Starvation has been used as a weapon of war: The SAF has carried out airstrikes that deliberately target civilians and civilian infrastructure.

The plight of children is of deep concern to me. They have been killed, maimed, and forced to serve as soldiers. More than 14 million have been displaced, the world’s largest displacement of children. Millions more haven’t gone to school since the fighting broke out. Girls are at the highest risk of child marriage and gender-based violence. We are looking at a child protection crisis of frightful proportions.

In many of my international engagements, the women of Sudan have raised their concerns about the world’s non-commitment to bring about peace in Sudan.

I write with a simple message. We cannot delay any longer. The suffering cannot be allowed to continue or to become a secondary concern to the frustrating search for a political solution between the belligerents. The international community must come together and adopt urgent measures to protect Sudanese civilians.

Last month, the UN’s Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for Sudan released a report that described a horrific range of crimes committed by the RSF and SAF. The report makes for chilling reading. The UN investigators concluded that the gravity of its findings required a concerted plan to safeguard the lives of Sudanese people in the line of fire.

“Given the failure of the warring parties to spare civilians, an independent and impartial force with a mandate to safeguard civilians must be deployed without delay,” said Mohamed Chande Othman, chair of the Fact-Finding Mission and former Chief Justice of Tanzania.

We must respond to this call with urgency.

A special responsibility resides with the African Union, in particular the AU Commission, which received a request on June 21 from the AU Peace and Security Council (PSC) “to investigate and make recommendations to the PSC on practical measures to be undertaken for the protection of civilians.”

So far, we have heard nothing.

The time is now for the AU to act boldly and swiftly, even in the absence of a ceasefire, to advance robust civilian protection measures.

A physical protective presence, even one with a limited mandate, must be proposed, in line with the recommendation of the UN Fact-Finding Mission. The AU should press the parties to the conflict, particularly the Sudanese government, to invite the protective mission to enter Sudan to do its work free from interference.

The AU can recommend that the protection mission adopt targeted strategies operations, demarcated safe zones, and humanitarian corridors – to protect civilians and ensure safe, unhindered, and adequate access to humanitarian aid.

The protection mission mandate can include data gathering, monitoring, and early warning systems. It can play a role in ending the telecom blackout that has been a troubling feature of the war. The mission can support community-led efforts for self-protection, working closely with Sudan’s inspiring mutual-aid network of Emergency Response Rooms. It can engage and support localised peace efforts, contributing to community-level ceasefire and peacebuilding work.

I do not pretend that establishing a protection mission in Sudan will be easy. But the scale of Sudan’s crisis, the intransigence of the warring parties, and the clear and consistent demands from Sudanese civilians and civil society demand that we take action.

Many will be dismissive. It is true that numerous bureaucratic, institutional, and political obstacles stand in our way. But we must not be deterred.

Will we stand by as Sudan suffers mass atrocities, disease, famine, rape, mass displacement, and societal disintegration? Will we watch as the crisis in Africa’s third largest country spills outside of its borders and sets back the entire region?

Africa and the world have been given a test. I pray that we pass it.

Dr Joyce Banda is a former president of the Republic of Malawi.

Strictly Personal

Economic policies must be local, By Lekan Sote

Published

3 weeks ago

October 24, 2024

Ifeoluwa Dada

With 32.70 per cent headline inflation, 40.20 per cent food inflation, and bread inflation of 45 per cent, all caused by the removal of subsidies from petrol and electricity, and the government’s policy of allowing market forces to determine the value of the Naira, Nigerians are reeling under high cost of living.

The observation by Obi Alfred Achebe of Onitsha, that “The wellbeing of the people has declined more steeply in the last months,” leads to doubts about the “Renewed Hope” slogan of President Bola Tinubu’s government that is perceived as extravagant, whilst asking Nigerians to be patient and wait for its unfolding economic policies to mature.

It doesn’t look as if it will abate soon, Adebayo Adelabu, Minister of Power, who seems ready to hike electricity tariffs again, recently argued that the N225 per kilowatt hour of electricity that Discos charge Band A premium customers is lower than the N750 and N950 respective costs of running privately-owned petrol or diesel generators.

While noting that 129 million, or 56 per cent of Nigerians are trapped below poverty line, the World Bank revealed that real per capita Gross Domestic Product, which disregards the service industry component, is yet to recover from the pre-2016 economic depression under the government of Muhammadu Buhari.

This has led many to begin to doubt the government’s World Bank and International Monetary Fund-inspired neo-liberal economic policies that seem to have further impoverished poor Nigerians, practically eliminated the middle class, and is making the rich also cry.

Yet the World Bank, which is not letting up, recently pontificated that “previous domestic policy missteps (based mainly on its own advice) are compounding the shocks of rising inflation (that is) eroding the purchasing power of the people… and this policy is pushing many (citizens) into poverty.”

It zeroes in by asking Nigeria to stay the gruelling course, which Ibukun Omole thinks “is nothing more than a manifesto for exploitation… a blatant attempt to continue the cycle of exploitation… a tool of imperialism, promoting the same policies that have kept Nigeria under the thumb of… neocolonial agenda for decades.”

When Indermilt Gill, Senior Vice President of the World Bank, told the 30th Summit of Nigeria’s Economic Summit Group, in Abuja, Federal Capital Territory, that Nigerians may have to endure the harrowing economic conditions for another 10 to 15 years, attendees murmured but didn’t walk out on him because of Nigerian’s tradition of politeness to guests.

Governor Bala Muhammed of Bauchi State, who agrees with the World Bank that “purchasing power has dwindled,” also thinks that “these (World Bank-inspired) policies, usually handed down by arm-twisting compulsions, are not working.”

What seems to be trending now is the suggestion that because these neo-liberal policies do not seem to be helping the economy and the citizens of Nigeria, at least in the short term, it would be better to think up homegrown solutions to Nigeria’s economic problems.

Late Speaker of America’s House of Representatives, Tip O’Neill, is quoted to have quipped that, at the end of the day, “All politics is local.” He may have come to that conclusion after observing that it takes the locals in a community to know what is best for them.

This aphorism must apply to economics, a field of study that is derived from sociology, which is the study of the way of life of a people. Proof of this is in “The Wealth of Nations,” written by Adam Smith, who is regarded as the first scholar of economics.

In his Introduction to the Penguin Classics edition of “The Wealth of Nations,” Andrew Skinner observes: “Adam Smith was undoubtedly the remarkable product of a remarkable age and one whose writing clearly reflects the intellectual, social and economic conditions of the period.”

To drive the point home that Smith’s book was written for his people and his time, Skinner reiterated that “the general ‘philosophy,’ which it contained was so thoroughly in accord with the aspirations and circumstances of his age.”

In a Freudian slip of the Darwinist realities of the Industrial Revolution that birthed individualism, capitalism, and global trade, Smith averred that “How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principle in his nature which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it, except the pleasures of seeing it.”

And, he let it slip that capitalism is for the advantage of Europe when he confessed that “Europe, by not leaving things at perfect liberty (the so-called Invisible Hand), occasions… inequities,” by “restraining the competition in some trades to a smaller number… increasing it in others beyond what it naturally would be… and… free circulation of labour (or expertise) and stocks (goods) both from employment to employment and from place to place!”

Policymakers, who think Bretton Woods institutions will advise policies to replicate the success of the Euro-American economy in Nigeria must be daydreaming. After advising elimination of subsidy, as global best practices that reflect market forces, they failed to suggest that Nigeria’s N70,000 monthly minimum wage, neither reflects the realities of the global marketplace, nor Section 16(2,d) of Nigeria’s Constitution, which suggests a “reasonable national minimum living wage… for all citizens.”

After Alex Sienart, World Bank’s lead economist in Nigeria, pointed out that the wage increase will directly affect the lives of only 4.1 per cent of Nigerians, he suggested that Nigeria needed more productive jobs to reduce poverty. But he neither explained “productive jobs,” nor suggested how to create them.

In admitting past wrong economic policies that the World Bank recommended for Nigeria, its former President, Jim Yong Kim, confessed, “I think the World Bank has to take responsibility for having emphasized hard infrastructure –roads, rails, energy– for a long time…

“There is still the bias that says we will invest in hard infrastructure, and then we grow rich, (and) we will have enough money to invest in health and education. (But) we are now saying that’s the wrong approach, that you’ve got to start investing in your people.”

Kim is a Korean-American physician, health expert, and anthropologist, whose Harvard University and Brown University Ivy League background shapes his decidedly “Pax American” worldview of America’s dominance of the world economy.

Despite his do-gooder posturing, his diagnoses and prescriptions still did not quite address the root cause of Nigeria’s economic woes, nor provide any solutions. They were mere diversions that stopped short of the way forward.

He should have advocated for the massive accumulation of capital and investments in the local production of manufacturing machinery, industrial spare parts, and raw materials—items that are currently imported, weakening Nigeria’s trade balance.

He should have pushed for the completion of Ajaokuta Steel Mill and helped to line up investors with managerial, technical, and financial competence to salvage Nigeria’s electricity sector, whose poor run has been described by Dr. Akinwumi Adesina, President of Africa Development Bank, as “killing Nigerian industries.”

He could have assembled consultants to accelerate the conversion of Nigeria’s commuter vehicles to Compressed Natural Gas and get banks of the metropolitan economies, that hold Nigeria’s foreign reserves in their vaults, to invest their low-interest funds into Nigeria’s agriculture— so that Nigeria will no longer import foodstuffs.

Nigerians need homegrown solutions to their economic woes.