African Journal of Business Management Vol. 4(14), pp. 2999-3004, 18 October, 2010 Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJBM ISSN 1993-8233 ©2010 Academic Journals
Full Length Research Paper
Social order, education and democracy in Nigeria: Some unresolved questions C. Ikeji Chibueze*, J. Otisi Kalu and Utulu Paul Institute of Public Policy and Administration (IPPA), University of Calabar, Cross-Rivers State, Nigeria. Accepted 24 September, 2010
The democratization drive in contemporary Nigeria is undoubtedly, a serious project. Education of the citizenry is pivotal in this process. To be more succinct, the efficacy of democratization drive, including its sustainability, is unquestionably dependent on the enabling capacity provided by education. It is this enormous potential of education that makes it prone to manipulation by powerful forces to serve vested interest - a trend that is increasingly being reinforced in contemporary times. This trend calls for proper analysis, about which efforts have been made. However, the tendency is for most analyses on education and democracy to be rendered in a manner that ignores the character of social order, which affects and is affected by education and democracy. This paper is a departure from this trend. Orthodoxy is challenged by showing the nexus and interface between social order, education and democracy in Nigeria. It is argued that, in the final analysis, the social order, more than anything else, determines the kind of education and democracy a society gets. With a focus on Nigeria, the paper raises some questions begging for answers: Is the provision and acquisition of education a neutral issue? Is the status quo, in terms of content and direction of education, appropriate for our purpose? To what use have powerful social and political forces put education; for meaningful and sustainable democracy or self-serving class end? These and other questions forms part of the unresolved questions this paper attempts to deal with. Key words: Social order, education, democracy. INTRODUCTION The democratization drive in contemporary Nigeria is putatively a serious project if meaningfully enthroned and nurtured, given the vast promise it holds for Nigerians. Success in this direction depends, to a great extent, on the critical elements of social mobilization and citizen participation in the process. Education of the citizenry is the pivot in this process. To be more succinct, the efficacy of the democratization drive, including its sustainability, is unquestionably dependent on the enabling capacity provided by education including increased awareness, civic enlightenment, mental empowerment, increased critical consciousness, raised political consciousness, imparting, imbibing and internalizing of appropriate values, among others. Against this backdrop, education is a very critical element in
*Corresponding author. E-mail:
[email protected].
shaping the outcome of the democratization project and indeed, democracy itself. Accordingly, anything that affects shapes or determines the content and direction of education, certainly affects, shapes and determines the content of democracy. It is this enormous potential of education that makes it prone to manipulation by powerful forces to serve vested interests. In his 1925 seminal work entitled: “The Modern School in Retrospect”, Harry Kelly (Pruitt, 1987) wrote thus:… The school system is a powerful instrument for the perpetuation of the present order… The child is trained to submit to authority, to do the will of others as a matter of course, with the result that habits of mind are formed which in adult life are all to the advantage of the ruling class. Close to eighty years after Kelly wrote, little evidence exist to reject his observation on the potentials of education and how it can be manipulated to serve the interest of existing social order and the dominant class that controls it. Indeed, the trend is even being reinforced
3000
Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
in contemporary times in a manner that assume automatic character. We cannot easily void this historical fact, regardless of our mental and ideological disposition when discussing these issues. To be sure, mention must be made of the tendency for most analyses on education and democracy to be rendered in a manner that ignores the character of social order, which affects and is affected by education and democracy. This paper is a departure from this trend. By striving to show the interface between social order, education and democracy, we may well be challenging orthodoxy. The task of this paper therefore, is to show the nexus between social order, education and democracy in Nigeria. The paper posits that there is a direct interlocking relationship among these elements – in a way that each, in varying degrees, affects and is affected by the others. It is, however, argued that, in the final analysis, the social order, more than anything else, determines the kind of education and democracy a society gets. The empirical referent, Nigeria, is no exception. It is held in this paper that powerful social forces manipulate education to serve deeply entrenched interests in the existing social order and, by so doing, ensuring that the prevailing democracy in the society conforms to the need of perpetuating the status quo ante. For the purposes of this paper, some pertinent questions are inevitably raised, given the great potentials of education in shaping the outcome of the democracy project in Nigeria: Is the provision and acquisition of education a neutral issue? Is the status quo, in terms of content and direction of education, appropriate and acceptable for our purpose? To what use have powerful social and political forces put the instrumental value of education: for meaningful and sustainable democracy or self-serving class end? The position of this paper is anchored on the following premises: 1. Education is a veritable instrument of consciousness shaping. 2. Education is veritable instrument of behaviour modification. 3. Education is historically neither ideologically-free nor value-free. 4. Historically, education, has been, in varying degree, manipulated to serve, and has accordingly served and continue to serve the goal of sustaining the existing social order – including the values (democratic ones inclusive) it foists on the society. Clarification of some key concepts is considered appropriate at this juncture.
in the society at a particular historical juncture. It describes the intricate web and character of every social formation (otherwise called social system) including the nature of mode of production (MOP), superstructure, social consciousness and social relations whether antagonistic or non-antagonistic. The phenomenon of social order must be discussed within the context of social formation. This is so because every social formation Primitive Communalism, Asiatic/ Ancient/ Antiquity, Feudalism, Bourgeois/ Capitalist and Socialist/ Communism - is characterized by a distinct social order. Let it be noted that every social order breeds social consciousness which is peculiar to and indispensable for the existence of that social order. Internalization of social consciousness is ensured by imbibing social ideas and socio-psychological attitudes which are necessary for the existence and continuation of the existing or established system or social order. Stripped of complexities, the study identifies two dimensions or form of social consciousness, namely: revolutionary and non-revolutionary. Revolutionary consciousness assumes militant and oppositionary character. In contrast, non-revolutionary consciousness is essentially non-militant and conservative in character. Historically, most social formations hardly enthrone social order that promote revolutionary social consciousness, given their inherent conservation disposition. Education Regardless of differences in conception among writers, education basically involves the teaching and training of the mind and character moulding. It is conditioning process to mould and remould. It is usually transmitted through socialization whether formally or informally. As a socialization process, education possesses the potentials of developing the intellect and nurturing critical consciousness by way of enhanced enlightenment. Properly rendered, education has the capacity to accomplish, among others, the: 1) Abolition of ignorance; 2) Liberation of man; 3) Rejection of orthodoxy; 4) Equipping man better to conquer his environment; and 5) Developing society’s productive forces for national development. In a nutshell, education holds the promise of ‘empowerment of man’. To be sure, meaningful education for all is tantamount to effective power to all.
Social order In simple terms, social order refers to socio-economic and political environment of a society. It expresses the way things, in general, usually happens or is happening
Democracy An over-flogged concept, democracy means different things to different people at different times in different
Ikeji et al.
3001
Figure 1. Showing the nexus between SO, ED and DM.
places. For various reasons, the phenomenon continues to defy any single definition that lays claim of universal applicability. For the purpose of this paper, however, with Abraham Lincoln’s definition (a cliché to many) considering its all-embracing nature. He defines democracy as government of the people, by the people and for the people. The OF, BY and FOR elements in this definition, when accorded real meaning, provide very useful criteria for ascertaining the utility or otherwise of the phenomenon in every situation or circumstance. It is noteworthy that, regardless of the differences in perception, a common meeting point is the apparent universal desirability of democracy. The tendency for all to desire democracy derives from high expectations of dividends it is said to offer. Successful enthronement and sustenance of democracy depends on a number of factors, including education. The relationship between education and democracy in Nigeria is part of the focus of this paper; and to this end, the following section. SOCIAL ORDER, EDUCATION AND DEMOCRACY: THE NEXUS Perhaps, the maxim, ‘garbage in, garbage out’ in the computer world, aptly applies to the discussion of the connexion linking social order, education and democracy. Every social order evolves the kind of education that suits
its elements. Put differently, democracy and education cannot wear any image other than that offered by the social order and vice-versa (Figure 1). S0 conditions (1a) significantly and is conditioned (1b) by ED. S0 conditions (3a) significantly and is conditioned (3b) by DM. ED conditions (2a) significantly and is conditioned (2b) by DM. Figure 1, though hypothetical, is quite illustrative of the nexus linking social order, education and democracy. For instance, in a social order characterized by exploitative social relations ensured, for instance, through either internal or external colonialism, education will be structured to serve the character of the social order. On the other hand, if education is structured to be progressive, the citizenry will be empowered in terms of appropriate consciousness that will impact on democracy if properly instituted. An interface between appropriate education and democracy will make room for meaningful citizen participation in public policy processes, election and electioneering, citizenship obligations, political empowerment, enthroning public accountability, among other activities that promote democracy. History teaches us that, given their conservative character, beneficiaries of the status quo hardly will do
3002
Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
anything that will enthrone any socio-political process (education and democracy) that will undermine the system which offers them so much power and unearned privileges. For this reason, the content and focus of education are made scarcely a neutral matter. There is always the ideological component to the content and character of education provided by the system. Education remains one of the most potent instruments for sustaining the ideology conforming to a given social order. The instrumental value of education in generating and sustaining social consciousness compatible with the social order need not be over-emphasized. To be sure, in line with the law of necessary conformity between ideology (sustained social consciousness created by education) and social order (Marx, 1968; Mandel, 1962; Kozlov, 1977), those elements of social consciousness which are incompatible with the requirements of the existing social order are systematically undermined or eliminated outrightly. This trend is, furthermore, in line with the law of conservation of social order and social formations (Marx, 1968; Mandel, 1962). If the conditions envisaged by these laws are not met, an inner contradiction capable of causing disequilibrium within the system develops; and the net effect is systemic maladjustment and disintegration. Hardly do any system and its patrons allow this situation arise willingly. It is appropriate to see how this intricate nexus apply to Nigeria. SOCIAL ORDER, EDUCATION AND DEMOCRACY IN NIGERIA Discussion of the issues involved at this point is undertaken from two perspectives: colonial and postcolonial eras. The choice of these two perspectives does not ignore the fact that the same logic (linkages among social order, education and democracy) applied to the pre-colonial social formations in Nigeria. Indeed, it applied with equal force even though expressed and transmitted mainly through informal educational structures and methods in those pre-colonial societies (more where state structures were fairly developed and less in the stateless ones). For most part, social order in Nigeria – pre-colonial, colonial and post-colonial – presents institutionalized framework for the exploitation and marginalization of the masses of Nigerian people who are rendered powerless by a conspiracy of many factors and powerful forces committed to sustaining the status quo and this is a condition conceptually viewed as internal colonialism (Coleman, 1960; Hoseliz, 1962; Cassonova, 1969; Havens and Flinn, 1970) when it pertains to, and perpetuated, at the national level; in contradistinction to externally induced colonialism and neo-colonialism. In colonial times, the environment of marginalization and exploitation (social order) was systematically planted and nurtured in ways decidedly compatible with colonial
and imperialistic interests. In post-colonial times, the environment has been modified, perfected and reinforced through various means or instruments of internal colonialism. In both cases – colonial and post-colonial milieu – education remained one such veritable instrument employed in manipulating, promoting and perpetuating existing social order. The issue of education serving to perpetuate the social order is particularly pertinent to our examination of the Nigerian situation. Gramsci (1980), reminds us that the ruling classes, in whatever dispensation, are usually armed with two vital sets of instruments that enable them perpetuate their hegemony over their victims. These are the coercive instruments such as the military and the police; and the ideological apparatuses such as the school system, (education) and mass media. For avoidance of doubt, the present Nigeria and her neo-colonial social order is essentially a product of British imperialism and colonialism. As a dependent neo-colonial social formation, it thrives, in large measure, on colonial legacies. Very little has been done to severe linkages and legacies planted by self-serving colonial regimes and its concomitant values. Educational system is perhaps, the most vivid example of the continuing presence of colonialism. Evidence of this is found in the structure of schools, structure of curricula orientations, the language of instruction, the focus of intellectual discourse, the content of books, journals, and other literature for learning, and above all, the values inculcated in the beneficiaries of the system. The net effect of this state of affairs is that the educational system ends up producing people that find little or no reason to reject the status quo. It is clear that neo-colonialism in Nigeria (including the educational component) is a product of a complicated nexus of relationships among social order, education and democracy. Focusing on Nigeria, Pruitt (1987) tells us that the equation is further complicated by the fact that within Third World countries, there is a “centre” that is closely linked with the “centre” in the industrialized nations. The Third World “centre” consists of segments of the indigenous elite that control the educational and cultural apparatuses, and which, by virtue of its mastery of the techniques of Western education, and often, Western languages, holds considerable power. This “centre” (Third World) has a vested interest in the maintenance of the Western-oriented educational system, since this system helps to maintain its monopoly over acceptable credentials, and thereby, over prestigious positions in government and the private sector. It have been argued that the forces and logic impelling industrialized “centres” to maintain hegemony over neo-colonial (Third World) countries are similar to those responsible for the hegemony by the “centre” of the Third World countries (Nigeria in this case) over the masses of the exploited people of Nigeria. It is the same logic produced by existing social order that is responsible for the dualism – stagnated / underdeveloped segment and facilitated/
Ikeji et al.
progressive segment – in the education sector in Nigeria. The stagnated/underdeveloped segment refers to the public schools that are victims of decades of unmitigated neglect which, by and large, offers cheap and qualitatively inferior education that, for reasons of poverty, are accessible to the poor. In contrast, the facilitated/progressive segment refers to the privately owned schools proliferating across the country that provide comparatively superior education from which the poor are precluded on account of prohibitive costs of accessing them. The rich, by this arrangement, are ensuring today the future dominance of their children over the children of the poor. The extant system or social order characterized by deep-rooted inequality is, by this process, being perpetuated. The paper is convinced that the progressive underdevelopment of the public segment of the educational system by successive regimes in Nigeria is neither a coincidence nor an accident. Let it be noted that no oppressor will want to equip the oppressed in a manner that will sufficiently empower the oppressed. That will be antithetical to the oppressor’s survival need. That would amount to class suicide. For this reason, the oppressive ruling blocs or class are wont to manipulating education to a state of underdevelopment if only to serve the overall purpose of perpetuating the status quo. The manipulation is rendered in three distinct ways: first, by shaping the content of educational curricula to serve neocolonial, conservative and reactionary ideological end; second, limiting access to quality education by the majority of the people through under –funding as a deliberate state policy (evidence of this is the decay in our schools at all levels, crises in our tertiary institutions, brain-drain syndrome, etc); and third, the tacit programme of guaranteeing quality education for the rich/elites occasioned by relatively prohibitive cost of accessing it. The sad promise of the underdevelopment of the educational system in Nigeria includes; 1. Entrenchment and sustenance of ignorance among the people; 2. Increasing bondage of Nigerians (captivity) by our environment; 3. Continued acceptance of unrewarding orthodoxies engendered by ideological conditioning; 4. Dousing of revolutionary consciousness and maintenance of status quo; 5. Stagnation of progress in the development of social productive forces and national development; and 6. Lack of meaningful citizen participation in the political and policy process. The necessary implications of the aforementioned outcomes for democracy in Nigeria include, among others:
3003
1. Citizen apathy and marginalization in the public policy process. 2. Dysfunctional electioneering (including disenfranchisement, rigging, etc). 3. Jettisoning of public accountability principle. 4. Enthronement and maintaining of oppressive, unpopular and illegitimate regimes. 5. Undermining of the rights and obligations of the citizenry. The question is whether sustainable democracy under the above conditions is feasible in Nigeria? I have a strong doubt. Conclusion The inevitable thesis is that education in Nigeria - viewed against the background of content and access – is not a neutral issue and leaves a lot to be desired in terms of the diminishing promise it holds for democracy and democratization in Nigeria. This state of affairs is not accidental but rather a product of the social order to serve predominantly the interest of the dominant groups in the Nigeria society. Distance between development and the people will continue to widen just as the instrumental value of education for sustainable democracy continues to diminish, as long as the status quo remain unchanged. Our position serves to provide a clue in answering many unresolved questions regarding the relationship between social order, education and democracy in Nigeria. The following form part of the unresolved questions before us. Is the status quo appropriate and acceptable to us as a people? Have the political leadership and intellectuals fulfilled their historical role of re-charting the course of history positively? Answers to these leading questions will depend on how answers are given to the following concomitant questions, namely: How egalitarian is the system and the education it offers? What is the content of the educational programmes? Who should pay, and who really pays, the bill of education? How is the incidence of sacrifice distributed? Of education: who gets what, how, when and where? What is the direction of public policy (ies) in education? Let it be stated unequivocally, that two sets of actors owe the society the duty of re-charting the faulty course: the intellectuals and the political leaders. More than any other group(s), they, acting jointly or separately, has a historical function of promoting the society’s progress, not joining forces to retard it. They must either fulfill this objective role or betray it. Optimism that they are fulfilling this historical function strikes as standing truth upside down. The paper speaks of Nigeria’s objective condition. REFERENCES Gibbons M (1998). “Higher Education Relevance in the 21st Century”
3004
Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
(Presented at the UNESCO World Conference on Higher Education,Paris, Oct.pp. 5 – 9) Khosa MM (1999).“New Wine in Old Bottle: The National Commission on Higher Education Debacle”, in M. Cross (ed) No Easy Road: Transforming Higher Education in South Africa. Cape Town: Maskwe Miller/Longman. Kouzes JM, Postner BZ (1995). The Leadership Challenge, San Francisco: Jossey – Bass. Lyotard JF (1986). The Post Modern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Manchester: Manchester University Press. Pruitt WN (1987). “Educational Neo-Colonialism: An Inhibitor of Nationalism and Development in Third World Countries” (Presented at a National Seminar on ‘Strategies for National Development in Nigeria’ held at University of Calabar, Jan.pp. 20 –22)
Schuftan C (1998). Beyond Mal-development Praxis in Africa, CODESRIA, S/N.1/. Smart B (1992). Modern Conditions, Postmodern Controversies, N.Y: Routledge. Ward FC (1974). Education and Development Re-considered, N.Y: Praeger. World Bank (2001). World Development Report (2000/01), Oxford University Press. World Development Indicators (2002). The World Bank. World Development Indicators (2003).The World Bank.