No country was born a republic. Some countries are archipelagos and others a conglomeration territories forming one body, under a federalism and observing the rules of sovereignty.

The truth of Nigeria’s prospects being ruined by the amalgamation of 1914 might be valid, but countries have survived worse situations and crazier civil wars, yet stand on the throngs of greatness and world power status.

At the root of Nigeria’s problem is tribalism and lack of regard for humanity as well as selfishness and insufficient respect for diverse perspectives. We don’t strive for greatness. That is why we need WAZOBIA.

What is ‘WAZOBIA’?

A forced term of togetherness; a cliché unification of Yoruba (WA), Hausa (Zo) and Igbo (Bia) for come. A pedagogue that was thought would be an antidote for unification and create a unified voice.

It was also a byproduct of another forced Nigerian narrative or concept, “national character”.

ALSO READ: How 1977 created entitlement to national wealth

What is national character?

A cue for tribal balance of any Nigerian concept involving the three major Nigerian tribes — Hausa, Igbo and Yoruba. It is why Nigerians create all versions of the average church song.

It is why people force the concept of flexibility of concepts to consider other tribes. It is why Nigerian forces diversity over fairness in circumstances. While shared glory is necessary, fairness often gets eroded.

Often, Nigeria purports to share certain things across tribes, just for inclusion and in the end, it creates problems more than solutions.

Nicholas Nassim Taleb, an American essayist once opined that when a standard for inclusion is made a rule, what you get is pretence towards that rule, to not be punished, than organic originality which that rule sought to create.

National character has long been forced on Nigeria and these days, it is a tiring cliché that people force, so one tribe does not feel derogated or neglected or maligned.

It is also about fostering the long lost love between the tribes of Nigeria, sealed by the selfishness innate in us, preventing such unity.

Is national character right?

Yes. National character purports to integrate all the factions of a sovereign state under one umbrella of inclusion, vertical participation, respect and tribal appreciation, to foster recognition.

[No available link text]

It is why senatorial seats are made equal for each state. It is why ministerial appointments and shared amongst all states. It is created on the assumption that diverse perspectives — a necessity — does not become a luxury.

[No available link text]

The concept of love however cannot be forced. The mutual hate, suspicion and derogation will not be eradicated by something as flimsy as national character.

If anything, it will only foster pretence and a need for everyone to claim what is his, not what he actually feels is his platform to contribute his quota based on his life experiences.

He wouldn’t see it as an opportunity to learn about other people’s perspectives. It is about selfishness and a need to be celebrated and 'get his', rather than also learn.

Any lessons are equally geared towards other selfish ends, nothing else.

Is national character then necessary?

[No available link text]

Yes, it is. It is the only reason people are not acting out in purity of their selfishness. It might seem forced, cliché or unnecessary, but it is actually necessary. It might also be Nigeria’s only chance against the scourge of selfishness, triggering tribalism.

Tribalism doesn’t have to involve abuses and tirades to be derogatory. Thinking a tribe is inconsequential and shouldn’t be celebrated even through remote things like church songs or political inclusion is tribalism in small doses.

Those plant the seeds for major, direct and larger doses of tribalism that ruins countries and breaks sovereignty and independence. The worst thing that could happen to a country is feeling maligned.

People are naturally selfish. Thus, maligning a people might be counter-productive.

National character is necessary.

Thereality of national character

It is pretentious act at face value that people adhere to over political correctness, not because they understand what is does or should do, but its importance remains unabated.

Some people finish translating a Yoruba song Igbo and Hausa languages, only to go and say, ‘Omo Nna’ or ‘aboki’ in very derogatory manner that only a Yoruba person can conjure up.

People just see it as another thing that is usually done without a firm grasp of its essence.

Nonetheless, the effects of certain things are subtle and felt over an extended period of time. Maybe national character is one of those, we will only find out later.

But will later ever end? Maybe, maybe not.