Fidelity bank banner Camano banner
On differences within the Nigerian Left, By Edwin Madunagu

By News Express on 17/10/2018

Share on facebook Yahoo mail icon Gmail icon Share on Google+

Views: 760

•Edwin Madunagu
•Edwin Madunagu

For almost a year now, since I resumed writing for publication in the media, I have deliberately referred to the Nigerian Left — my primary concern in this ideological and political enterprise — as if it is a homogenous or monolithic entity. But I know that most of my readers know, as much as I do, that the Nigerian Left — described here as the aggregate of Nigerian Marxists, socialists and pro-people radical democrats — is neither homogenous nor monolithic and has never been.

Even the Marxist group, the ideological core and the most self-conscious subgroup of the Nigerian Left, is far from being homogenous or monolithic. It has been defined, in part, by many differences, some major, some relatively minor. The question then is why I have continued to give this “false” impression of homogeneity and monolithism. I shall, in the present piece, attempt to answer this simple, but important question. This will lead me to a presentation, in summary form, of the differences I had “pretended” did not exist or had vanished or had dissolved.

I had written the preceding 25 or more articles as if differences did not exist or no longer existed in the Nigerian Left as the first step of a tentative new way of promoting internal unity in the movement. Put more directly: I have been presenting all fractions and factions of the movement with verifiable historical facts, analyses and basic common tasks whose critical adoption, I believe, can begin or significantly advance the project of unification. The common basic tasks which, as we may recall, include the drafting of a people’s manifesto, seeking political alliances, constructing a research and coordinating centre and establishing a journal, have all been informed by our experienced and lived differences, past and current.

The articles in which I had more blatantly “pretended” there were no longer differences or major differences in the Nigerian Left can be partially listed, for reference. They include: Murder of a leftist-feminist (8/12/2017); Drafting a people’s manifesto (21/2/2018); Further notes on people’s manifesto (27/2/2018); Between history and current demands (14/3/2018); The Left and election 2019 (22/3/2018); Restructuring: Propositions summarized (12/4/2018); In this 20th year of “democracy” (13/6/2018); Notes on political alliances (4/7/2018); Further notes on political alliances (13/7/2018); Revisiting “the people’s revolution” (3/8/2018); To Samir Amin, a personal tribute (27/8/2018); Revisiting “democracy and dictatorship” (13/9/2018).

From these articles a not-too-young Nigerian Leftist can recall specific issues which have divided the Nigerian Left for a very long time — at least since the First Republic (1960-1966). Some of them have been substantially resolved, transcended, eliminated or transformed by history; some are not now active because of the decline in Leftist political activism; some others are still active; and several others have now been sharpened by history.

The issues, randomly listed, include: Reform or Revolution; the National Question; type of organisation (vanguard, mass or combined formation); strategy for revolution (bourgeois/electoral politics or armed struggle); modes and forms of open popular–democratic struggles; the women’s question (that is, feminism); principles, rules and methods of organisation; “permanent revolution” or “revolution-in-stages”; the places and roles of the working class, intellectuals, the peasantry, the de-classed masses and the “middle” strata; principles and structures of governance after victory; democracy and dictatorship in the organisation and in the country; concept and reality of capitalism and imperialism.

In trying to properly formulate, organise and classify these differences or areas of differences I would like to tentatively adapt the French Marxist philosopher, Louis Althusser’s categories — determinant and dominant — which he employed in the analyses of factors and contradictions in social formations. But I would add a third category, secondary. Thus, a difference in the Nigerian Left will be described as determinant if it goes to the very roots and foundations of Leftism. An actually-lived illustration would be a consistent anti-working class ideological or political inclination in a Leftist group.

A difference will be described as dominant if, not being determinant, is serious enough not only to deeply or violently divide the movement politically but can set Leftists and leftist groups in armed conflicts against each other — each side fighting alone or in alliance or in combination with non-Leftist or anti-Leftist forces. An actually-lived illustration is the experience of the Nigerian Left during the Crisis and Civil War (1966-1970).  Another illustration is the range of positions and attitudes in the Nigerian Left in the current period on the National Question —  from “fiscal federalism”, through “restructuring” to “self-determination”.

Finally, a difference will be described as secondary if it is neither determinant nor dominant but is capable of leading to factionalism and significant weakening of the movement’s overall effectiveness, influence and authority. Secondary differences appear mainly in organisation, administration, discipline, methods, attitudes, tactics and other spheres that are often collectively regarded as “subjective”. A current illustration of secondary difference which may grow into dominant difference is the range of attitudes in the movement on the question of alliance with, or membership of, ruling class political parties and groups.

As further elaboration, I would like to present, at this stage, fragments of what I said on the subject of Left Unity in my 2016 book of six essays, The Nigerian Left: Introduction to History. In the third essay, on pages 75-79, I listed some “dangerous ideological trends” and proposed that their existence had led to differences that had, in turn, constituted “the greatest obstacles to the development of a unified strategic focus within the revolutionary movement”. The trends included: Infiltrationism, Putchism, Opportunism, Proprietor-ism and Sectarianism. They can all be classified as secondary differences.

Infiltrationism, according to the 2016 book, is the “belief that any type of ‘state power’ can be used by socialists to build socialism; this explains the adherents’ insistence on the primacy of ‘capture of state power’. This dangerous trend — which is a strange combination of revolutionary impatience, loss of faith in the masses’ capability and opportunism — leads, in practice, to the denial of any need to create a separate socialist organisation. Putchism, on the other hand, is “the search for the ‘quickest road’ to socialism, and hence, the reduction of socialism to technical, not political and ideological project”.

Opportunism as I defined it, is “essentially the adoption of the socialist platform, not for the promotion of the working people’s struggles for power and socialism but for the purpose of personal promotion and enrichment, as a bargaining weapon with the Nigerian bourgeoisie and the bourgeois state”.

Proprietorism “is not opposed to Left Unity in the absolute sense; it accepts unity provided it takes the form of enlargements of the adherents’ groups and the retention of the adherents’ leadership positions”. Sectarianism “is the perpetual incapacity to transcend, or the permanent and conscious embrace of, primitive and localised organisational work, perpetual lack of an overall national revolutionary perspective.

Let me end these notes by repeating the core of the proposal I made in the piece, In this 20th year of ‘democracy’ (June 13, 2018): A small ad-hoc group of serious and committed Nigerian Leftists should volunteer and select themselves and prepare, for the Nigerian Left, a draft people’s manifesto, a draft programme and structure, and a draft memorandum on participation in electoral politics. The group should then convene a “unity conference” and present the three documents. The next stage will be dictated by the proceedings and outcome of such a “unity conference”. It is, however, necessary to insist that to be able to move the Nigerian Left forward in the sense of history, individual contents of the draft documents may be tentative, but should not be ambivalent on any major concrete question before the nation, before the masses or before the Nigerian Left.

Madunagu, mathematician and journalist, writes from Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria.

Source News Express

Posted 17/10/2018 10:32:51 AM


Share on facebook Yahoo mail icon Gmail icon Share on Google+




You may also like...
Dangote donates $1 million to Tanzanian women, youths...

Chief Judge advocates English Language lessons for lawyers...

NBTE boss predicts more job losses

Lagos approves use of hijab in schools

INEC ends continuous voters registration

Zamfara donates 47 vehicles to security agencies

#BringBackOurGirls: Ezekwesili, others sue police for N200m; IG...

Coca-Cola replacing Coke Zero with a new drink...

Security Crisis: Group seeks Ambode’s resignation •Also wants...

FG cancels multi-million dollar Intels contract with NPA...

Ex-militants threaten mass destruction of oil installations

Minister gives aviation agencies deadline to recover N40.08bn...


Latest News 2019: Activists give South-East Governors, others ultimatum over alleged secret adoption of Buhari Soldier confirmed killed as troops repel Boko Haram attack 5,000 APC members defect to PDP in Ondo Buratai must account for money spent on Lafiya Dole, Crocodile Smile — Anti-corruption groups Stop discrimination against Igbo, Nwodo warns Nigeria 17 people killed in Niger road crash Nigeria, nine others spurn African Air Transport Agreement NAF, universities collaborate to combat insecurity Petrol tanker collides with tricycle in Yenagoa Ortom seeks prosecution of contractors for abandoning SUBEB projects Anambra will be crime-free during the Christmas/New Year period: Obiano Abuja new airport terminal can handle 15m passengers


Most Read NUDE PHOTO OF OMOTOLA JALADE-EKEINDE surfaces online (430,762 views) Nigerian female sex addict opens up, says ‘I like it with both men and women’ (395,380 views) Shameless Genevieve Nnaji exposes breasts in public (328,247 views) Finally named: The full list of friends of Nigerian female sex addict who prowled Facebook (282,540 views) OLUMBA OLUMBA OBU (the one who called himself God) IS DEAD (248,269 views) Igbo scholar disgraces Femi Fani-Kayode •Demolishes claims on Igbo/Yoruba history with facts and figures (229,463 views) Breaking News: POPULAR REVEREND CONVERTS TO ISLAM in Kaduna (Nigeria) (212,415 views) OBJ’s son reported dead in Lagos plane crash •Names of more victims emerge (193,617 views) My wasted years in Olumba Olumba Obu’s Evil Brotherhood (180,107 views) THE FINAL DISGRACE: Igbo scholar unleashes more facts about Igbo/Yoruba history, finishes off Femi Fani-Kayode with second article (170,712 views) Lagos plane crash: Journalist releases victims’ names (167,477 views) Gunmen kill ASP, 2 other police officers in vain bid to kidnap Rivers PDP chieftain (153,915 views)


CBN banner Zenith Zero Balance First Bank chat banking


Categories Advertorials (3) African Press Organisation (81) Art & Literature (76) Business & Economy (3,884) Business Verdict (54) Columnists (974) Complaints & Requests (95) Enterprise & Opportunities (208) Entertainment (575) Features (679) Global Business Monitor (313) International (2,836) Interview (167) Live Commentary (28) Love Matters (147) Maggie's Blog (74) News (41,493) Opinion (1,153) Pidgin (13) Politics (8,198) Religion (918) Sports (1,823) Stock Watch (35) AMA & Al Jazeera Global Update





APO Group Partner




GOCOP Accredited Member

GOCOP Accredited member



Africa Media Agency and Al Jazeera