Unity in Diversity: A Facade? The Nigerian Paradox and the Illusion of Amalgamation

WARNING ⚠: Kindly spare 10 -15 minutes of your time, this article is philosophical and shall require more focus and reflection.

 

Verily, let us embark upon a discourse most profound, a meditation upon the nature of unity and the artifice thereof, as it pertains to the entity known as Nigeria. A land vast and varied, a tapestry woven of many threads—some vibrant, some frayed—yet bound together by the hand of colonial machination. The year of our Lord 1914 marked the birth of this contrived nation, a forced amalgamation orchestrated not by the will of its peoples, but by the decree of foreign overlords. "Ex injuria jus non oritur," saith the Latin maxim: from a wrong, right cannot arise. And yet, here we stand, beholding the edifice of Nigeria, a structure built upon the sands of coercion, its foundation cracked and its walls leaning precariously.

 

The words of Nigeria’s so-called "founding father," Sir Frederick Lugard, echo through the corridors of history, a damning admission of the nation’s inherent fragility. "Nigeria non est natio," he might as well have declared, for he himself confessed that Nigeria is not a nation, but a mere geographical expression. A collection of disparate peoples, cultures, and tongues, thrust together under the banner of administrative convenience. And yet, the mantra of "unity in diversity" is oft repeated, a siren’s song meant to lull the masses into a false sense of belonging. But is this unity but a facade, a veneer of harmony masking the fractures beneath?

 

The Illusion of Unity

 

In the words of the Bard, "All that glitters is not gold." So too doth the glittering ideal of unity in Nigeria conceal a darker truth. For what is unity if not the voluntary union of hearts and minds? What is unity if not the product of shared purpose and mutual respect? Yet, in Nigeria, unity is invoked not as a rallying cry for collective progress, but as a tool of subjugation. When the masses stir with discontent, when the cries for equity and justice grow too loud, the ruling elite doth wield the specter of disunity as a weapon. "O, beware, my lord, of disunity; it is the green-eyed monster which doth mock the meat it feeds on." Thus, the people are silenced, their grievances dismissed in the name of preserving a manicured and fragile peace.

 

But what peace is this, that is built upon the suppression of voices? What unity is this, that is maintained by the denial of identity? The Yoruba, the Igbo, the Hausa, the Kanuris the Ijaw, the Tiv—each a nation unto itself, each with its own history, its own aspirations. Yet, they are told to subsume their uniqueness beneath the umbrella of a Nigerian identity that feels, at times, as foreign as the colonial flag that once flew over their lands.

 

The Amalgamation: A Crime Against Nature

 

Let us speak plainly of the amalgamation of 1914, an act most criminal in its disregard for the natural order. Lugard, in his hubris, sought to bind the Northern and Southern Protectorates into a single entity, heedless of the chasm that lay between them. The North, steeped in the traditions of the Sokoto Caliphate, and the South, a mosaic of kingdoms and republics, were as oil and water—distinct, immiscible. Yet, the colonial hand stirred them together, creating a concoction that has simmered with tension, loss of lives and properties ever since.

 

"Quod natura non dat, Salmantica non praestat," saith the ancients: what nature does not give, Salamanca cannot provide. (A Latin proverb that emphasizes the limits of education and human effort in the face of natural limitations). And so, what nature did not unite, no decree of man could truly bind. The amalgamation was not a marriage of equals, but a shotgun wedding, orchestrated for the benefit of the colonial masters. And like all such unions, it has been fraught with strife, suspicion, and sorrow and destined to crush when the time is ripe and that time is NOW.

 

The Founding Father’s Confession

 

Lugard, in his more candid moments, admitted the folly of his creation. "Nigeria is not a nation," he declared, "it is a collection of independent native states, separated by differences of religion, custom, and language." And yet, this admission has done little to alter the course of history. Instead, the myth of Nigerian unity has been perpetuated, a myth that serves the interests of those in power. For as long as the people believe in the illusion of unity, they are less likely to question the structures that oppress them and steals away their dreams.

 

"O, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practise to deceive!" The deception of Nigerian unity is a web most intricate, ensnaring the minds of the people and binding them to a fate they did not choose. And yet, the truth remains: a house divided against itself cannot stand.

The Evocation of Unity: A Tool of Subjugation

 

In times of crisis, the ruling elite doth invoke the specter of unity, as if it were a sacred incantation. "E pluribus unum," they cry, "out of many, one” in other words “Unity in diversity”. But this unity is not a call to brotherhood; it is a demand for silence. It is a command to set aside one’s grievances, to accept injustice in the name of peace. "Peace, peace," they say, "where there is no peace." For true peace cannot be built upon the foundation of injustice and inequality.

The Nigerian people are not docile by nature; they are docile by design. The system has been crafted to numb their senses, to dull their instincts for justice. And when they stir, when they dare to dream of a better future, they are reminded of the fragility of their unity. "Do not rock the boat," they are told, "lest we all drown." But what is this boat, if not a vessel built by the hands of oppressors; design to siphon natural resources and other types of wealth from one side to feed the oppressor and its cronies? And what is this unity, if not a chain that binds the people to their fate?

 

Conclusion: The Path Forward

 

In the end, the question remains: is unity in diversity a facade? In the case of Nigeria, the answer is both yes. Yes, because the unity imposed by the amalgamation of 1914 is a construct, a fiction maintained by force and fear.

Certainly! Here's the revised section of the article, reframed to argue for the total dissolution of Nigeria along nationalities, while maintaining the philosophical and literary tone:

 

The Path Forward: Dissolution and the Rebirth of Nationalities

 

The path forward is not the path of forced assimilation, nor is it the path of hollow reconciliation. It is the path of dissolution—a return to the natural order, where the diverse nationalities that were bound together by colonial fiat may once again determine their own destinies. Nigeria, as it stands, is not a nation but a prison of nationalities, a cage forged by the hands of imperial ambition. "Natura non facit saltus," saith the ancients: nature does not make leaps. And so, the artificial construct of Nigeria, a leap against nature, must be undone.

 

The Yoruba, the Igbo, the Hausa, the Ijaw, the Tiv, and all the other nations within this contrived entity must be allowed to reclaim their sovereignty. For true unity cannot be imposed; it must arise organically, from the free will of peoples who share a common purpose and mutual respect. The time has come to reverse this curse.

The dissolution of Nigeria is not an end, but a beginning—a return to the roots of identity and self-determination. Let each nationality chart its own course, free from the shackles of a union that was never of its making. Let the Hausa build their future in the North, the Biafrans in the East, the Yoruba in the West, and all others in their ancestral lands. For as the Bard hath written, "To thine own self be true." And how can a people be true to themselves when they are bound to a false identity, a nation that exists only on paper?

 

The illusion of Nigerian unity shall one day shatter, and when it does, the peoples of this land shall awaken from their slumber. They shall rise, not as Nigerians, but as Yoruba, Biafrans, Hausa, Ijaw, Tiv, and more—proud and free, masters of their own destinies. "Ex nihilo nihil fit," saith the philosophers: from nothing, nothing comes. And so, from the ashes of this failed experiment, new nations like phoenix shall emerge, forged not by the decrees of colonial masters, but by the will of their people.

 

Until that day, the struggle continues. The people, though docile now, shall one day rise, for as the Bard also wrote, "The wheel is come full circle; I am here." And when that day comes, the chains of amalgamation shall be broken, and the true work of nation-building shall begin—not as one, but as many.

 

By ~MAZI OGBUEFI ©2025~

                                                                         NOT AVAILABLE 

Debunking the Misguided Attacks on Nnamdi Kanu: A Response to Baseless Accusations and Personal Vendettas by “Ugochinyere David”

 

Debunking the Misguided Attacks on Nnamdi Kanu: A Response to Baseless Accusations and Personal Vendettas by “Ugochinyere David”

 

“Ugochinyere David”, an obscure writer hiding behind a pseudonym, seeks relevance by attacking Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, a prominent freedom fighter. His article, "Kanu continues a futile attempt at grandstanding," is a biased, sensationalist piece that undermines journalistic integrity. Rather than addressing the complex legal and political issues surrounding Kanu, “David” resorts to ad hominem attacks, sweeping generalizations, and a blatant disregard for factual accuracy. This response dissects the article’s flaws and exposes its personal vendetta against Kanu.

 

1. Mischaracterization of Kanu’s Struggle

“David” claims that Kanu has plunged the South-East into "chaos and backwardness," ignoring the decades-long marginalization and systemic injustice faced by the Igbo people. He conveniently overlooks the terror perpetrated by Fulani herdsmen (MACBAN), the fourth deadliest terrorist group globally, and the brutal, extortive actions of Nigerian security forces, which have killed innocent civilians in a manner suggesting they were deployed for that very purpose. At this point, it’s clear that "David Ugochinyere" is likely a Fulani individual hiding behind an Igbo pseudonym for ulterior motives.

 

The Biafra agitation predates Kanu and stems from Nigeria’s failure to address ethnic grievances and blatant marginalization. “David”’s claim that Kanu incited violence and called for the killing of a sitting president lacks evidence—unsurprisingly, he provides none. His article disregards facts entirely, relying on sensationalism to paint Kanu as a violent extremist. This tactic delegitimizes political dissent and avoids engaging with the core issues, suggesting that facts are dispensable in his narrative.

 

2. Hypocrisy in Judicial Criticism

“David” mocks Kanu for seeking the recusal of Justice Nyako, framing it as erratic behavior. He dismisses the fact that a simple memo from a chief justice cannot replace a gazetted provision of the law. However, questioning judicial impartiality is a fundamental right, and the grounds for this request were clearly articulated by Kanu’s legal team—facts “David” deliberately ignores. This baseless criticism exposes his bias rather than any alleged "mental restiveness" on Kanu’s part.

 

3. Double Standards on Political Pardon

“David” dismisses the possibility of an unconditional political solution for Kanu—specifically a “nolle prosequi” (not a political pardon, as Kanu has committed no crime requiring pardon). He argues that Kanu’s lack of political office disqualifies him, which is illogical. Political solutions are often granted to individuals with significant implications, regardless of office. A *nolle prosequi* is entered when there is insufficient evidence to proceed, and so far, the prosecution has provided no evidence of any crime committed by Kanu or where such a crime occurred. “David”’s selective outrage ignores that political solutions have been granted to actual criminals in the past, revealing a personal vendetta rather than a principled stance.

 

4. Baseless Allegations of Contempt

“David” accuses Kanu of intimidating the bench and making "baseless allegations of N300 million bribes." While Kanu’s courtroom behavior may be unconventional, his frustration is understandable given his prolonged detention under inhumane conditions. “David” provides no evidence or context for the bribery claims, dismissing them outright instead of calling for an investigation. This lack of rigor highlights his willingness to accept the status quo without question.

 

5. Personal Vendetta and Bias

“David”’s disdain for Kanu is evident in his personal attacks, calling Kanu a "badly nurtured child" and questioning his mental and emotional capacity. These unprofessional remarks reveal “David”’s inability to engage substantively with the issues. His deep-seated bias against Kanu and the Biafra movement reduces his article to a petty diatribe, devoid of balanced analysis.

 

Conclusion: A Call for Fairness and Accountability

“David”’s article is a textbook example of how personal bias and sensationalism undermine meaningful discourse. It is riddled with unsubstantiated claims, lacks context, and fails to address the broader issues of justice, equity, and self-determination that Kanu’s case represents. “David”’s attempt to discredit Kanu through baseless accusations and ad hominem attacks is a disservice to readers seeking informed analysis. Those interested in understanding the complexities of Kanu’s case should look elsewhere for insight, as ”David”’s work serves only to perpetuate misinformation and division.

~MAZI OGBUEFI ©2025~

Mazi Nnamdi Kanu ~ “I AGITATE FOR BIAFRA; IT IS MY RIGHT TO AGITATE.”

The Unyielding Struggle of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and the Biafran libration

           

Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s declaration, “I agitate for Biafra; it is my right to agitate,” underscores the universal fight for self-determination—a right enshrined in international law. Yet, his persecution, illegal detention, and Nigeria’s disregard for court rulings and UN directives reveal a troubling erosion of justice. From his extraordinary rendition in 2021 to the indefinite adjournment of his case, Kanu’s plight demands global attention. As the Latin saying goes, "Iniuria uni fit iniuria omnibus"—injustice to one is injustice to all. It’s a call for activists and people of conscience worldwide to rise in solidarity and demand justice. 

“I AGITATE FOR BIAFRA; IT IS MY RIGHT TO AGITATE.”

In a bold declaration during a recent court appearance, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), asserted, “I agitate for Biafra; it is my right to agitate.” This statement underscores the fundamental principle of self-determination, a right enshrined in international law and recognized by Nigeria’s legal framework. Yet, Kanu’s pursuit of this right has been met with persecution, illegal detention, and a blatant disregard for judicial rulings. 

The right to self-determination is explicitly provided for under Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Article 20 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, both of which Nigeria is a signatory. Despite this, Kanu has faced relentless persecution for advocating the cause of Biafra. His ordeal began with his extraordinary rendition from Kenya in 2021, an act condemned by the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which called for his immediate release and compensation. 

 

Nigeria’s own courts have acknowledged the illegality of Kanu’s abduction. In a landmark ruling, the court held that the government could not benefit from its own illegality, referring to the unlawful rendition. Furthermore, the Supreme Court’s discharge and acquittal of Kanu in a related case reaffirmed his innocence. Yet, the Nigerian government continues to detain him, flouting both domestic and international legal standards. 

 

The refusal to replace Justice Binta Nyako, who recused herself from Kanu’s case, and the indefinite adjournment of his trial further highlight the systemic injustice he faces. Kanu’s plight is not just a legal battle but a test of Nigeria’s commitment to the rule of law and human rights. As he rightly stated, agitation for self-determination is a right, not a crime. The world watches as Nigeria grapples with this fundamental truth. 

 

Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s struggle is a reminder that the fight for justice and self-determination cannot be silenced by persecution or illegalities. It is a call for Nigeria and the international community to uphold the principles of justice and human dignity.

 

A Call to Action

To all activists and people of conscience in Nigeria, Africa, and the world at large, the time to speak up is now. "Iniuria uni fit iniuria omnibus"- Injustice to one is injustice to all. We must seize every opportunity, in every forum, to demand justice for Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and all those who are oppressed for daring to exercise their fundamental rights. Whether in courtrooms, classrooms, media platforms, or international assemblies, our voices must rise in unison to condemn the persecution of Kanu and the violation of his rights. 

 

For when one person’s rights are trampled upon, the foundation of justice for all is weakened. Speak up, act now, and let the world know that injustice anywhere is indeed a threat to justice everywhere.