The world is full of contradictions, which explains why people sometimes work against their best interests. Humans are not machines and, in most part, rely on their instinctive emotions to interact with their world – mostly the fight or flight theory; the grey middle point is where rational thinking resides.
The raging debate in the polity is the choice of a suitable running mate for Bola Ahmed Tinubu (BAT), the presidential flagbearer of APC. Without prejudice to other considerations and the “zoning” to the North, the heart of the debate is whether the person should be a christian or a muslim. A gambling man would throw a dice and be done with what seems a simple matter.
However, with the present alleged fragmentation that threatens the unity of the country, particularly the fear of tribal or religious domination, it would be foolhardy not to take the issue seriously. A muslim/muslim ticket (BAT himself being a muslim) has been touted to be a losing combination and a gross disregard of the sensibility of people of different faiths.
Admittedly, these are cogent and legitimate concerns and a reasonable course of action for anyone seeking to govern a complex country as Nigeria should be to acknowledge “this truth” and give it adequate attention. It is to be noted that there are other voices that believe religion should not be considered an important yardstick.
There are compelling arguments for both sides, the merits of which are not so apparent, and frankly, nothing to be gained analysing them without empirical evidence. Notwithstanding, the question that may lead to a reasonable decision in the circumstances could be: what exactly do the proponents of the various positions want? What does the flagbearer (and the party) want?
Supposedly, a possible answer is – good governance, or a reasonable expectation of this; but a party needs to win the elections first. For a political party, winning is the overriding interest, although one expects, within the legitimate pursuit of this.
It is expedient to realise that the basic trust of a people in a government that takes decisions on matters affecting their lives has, over the years, suffered what is termed structural violence, and one hopes not, irreparable erosion. People tend to seek assurance in what they are familiar with, in this instance, by religious association and whatever is outside this seems already rigged against their interests.
This yearning informs people wanting to support people of same tribe or religion as themselves. Beyond winning, repairing this trust should be the focus of the government. The path to winning, however, rests on the active and long-standing engagements of both the parties and the electorate in negotiating satisfaction of interests. This may be what dictates the choice of those who are, hopefully, given the privilege to govern.
Politics, at the end of the day, is serious horse-trading. The awareness of different but not necessarily contradicting interests should spur a group, with influence on a considerable cache of votes, to constantly engage political parties to trade off influence for the protection of their interests. Democracy and Nigeria should be the better for it.
Odunayo Bamodu, mni
Lagos.
