Some beliefs have it that democracy was rooted from the old Greek empire where people converge on a sphere to make decisions for themselves. In the same vein, some sections of the society have it that the concept of democracy was propagated by the erstwhile president, Abraham Lincoln. But I staunchly denounce these two school of thoughts. Democracy had been part of Africa even before the Western knew where Africa was. In Africa, Igbo community, in Nigeria to be precise, have always been democratically ruling themselves. That is why political scientists refer to this Igbo system as acephalous.
But the bone of contention here is, was the system of democracy practiced in ancient Greek and Igbo community in managing their affairs, in any way, synonymous with the concept of democracy being preached by the U.S and its Allies? The obvious answer to this question is absolutely contrary. In these cities, democracy was neither imposed nor introduced by any external force rather was inherently conceived by these people with regards to their traditions and values.
If democracy is one major determinant of modernization, development and growth, and democracy itself proclaimed self-determination, I find it a little bit too hard to decipher the correlation existing between the imposition of wills and freedom of choice. Since freedom to make choice is one major tenet of democracy, why wont the Developed world ‘leave the third world be’ and make countries rule themselves by any practice that best suit their values and traditions. If by imposing Wills is the one true means of enshrining democracy in a state, I say democracy is nothing but a subterfuge use to brandish evils and wrongs as acceptable. It’s a decoy used by the so called ‘savior of the universe’ to perpetrate their ideologies and their continuous dominations.
Sometime in 2011, the Egyptians were under the regime of Hosni Mubarak. West championed by U.S propaganda, saw him as a dictator, authoritarian and a selfish leader, as such, he was forcefully deposed by an armed group legitimized by the West and its media. This agitation ushered in Mohammed Morsi, the first democratically elected leader. Unfortunately, he was soon removed by a coup, backed by the Western media, only because he was unable to quench the thirsty throat of the U.S and its Allies. The ‘savior of the universe and protector of democracy neither denounce this action of the military or came to Morsi aid as he was tossed into the prison. The protector of the realm certainly did not call for his reinstatement nor his release. This president now languish in the El’Sisi dungeon yet no words from ‘the savior of the world’.
More tellingly, what happened in Libya was an eye-sore. Would you rather live under Gadafi whose administration, though perceived as dictatorial by the westerners, was more than able to provide sustainable transformation for his subjects, than have a shelter under the newly anarchic and war consumed Libya created by the Westerners? A Libya where explosion and shelling among several rivals have suddenly become a ritual. If not for the prompt intervention of the Russian, Vladimir Putin, Syrian president would have either gone the way of Morsi or Gadafi. Millions of lives have been lost, thousands have been displayed of their homes-becoming a sudden refuge- all in the name of imposing the doctrine of democracy on the Libyan people. Should the savior of the world be the only thing to embark on asphyxiating missions and unleashing mayhem on the same world it proclaim saving? Who cares how many years a leader spends in power as long as he gives his people the dividends of leadership? The only thing average peoples of the world care about is the consequence of the leaders’ actions and in-actions. All other things are inconsequential to them. Not long ago, attention was shifted to Turkey. As usual, Erdogan was named mad-dog, and dictatorial who was nicked to be on a mission to rejuvenate the dead and buried Ottoman Empire. Like they say in my place of birth ‘we named any animal dog only to justify its killing’. This perhaps may have played a significant role in inducing a military coup in the country. Erdogan would have toe in the path of Morsi or Gadafi safe from the strong-willed exhibited by the people during the coup.
If democracy is respecting the wills and wishes of the people, if it’s about putting shelter and food on the tables of the majority, then the world should warmly embrace it. But if the inherent essence of democratizing a state is to cause bloodshed, unlawful removal of a generally chosen leader and the use of other shenanigan techniques, it will be a valid justification to say democracy is a curse that every country should staunchly reject with every arsenal they have at their disposal.
No doubt, the only people that may probably blink an eye for who becomes what and how many years a leader spends in power, are the crooks who called themselves democrats. It is high time we purged the world of bad eggs and say no to Western pressure. If care is no taking, this policy of ‘democracy by all means’ will soon drive the world to the point of ruin where everything will be so shattered that centers will not even be recognized let alone hold once more.