By David Titiloye
Reading your piece titled “Saraki’s 419 Northern PDP “Consensus Candidacy” dated April 24th, 2022 established two important facts as an ardent reader of yours.
(1) Perhaps, Farooq can’t be brilliant and intelligent at all times; (2) Farooq can equally speak from the position of ignorance and can be educated, informed and reoriented by others without his consent. After all, there is a “consensus” that those that refuse to be educated on certain issues will be a menace and an “intellectual 419′ to not only Northern Nigeria, North Central and Kwara State, but also Nigeria. What you wrote is an opinion devoid of facts. Hence, you can be informed and educated.
Professor, let me state that a writer that wants to educate the public must limit his usage of adjectives that depicts hatred, I believe there is a “consensus” that hatred and anger are impediments to deep reasoning. Whatever adjectives you see attributed to you here are borrowed words from you. Intellectuals have been the custodian of the advancement of the respective human society, why are you failing in yours?
In 2023, with your vast exposure, experience, we are still talking about zoning, tribal, and religious politics? Isn’t that an indicator of wasted education sir? Your opinion on Saraki is not sufficient enough to hide your cluelessness and inability to transform to a proper intellect in the Nigerian space. How many Professors are like you, bullying everybody on the media rather than proferring solutions to mutual issues that are drawing us back as a people? You wrote as if Aisha Yesufu was in you during your thought process, lost balance and failed to digest your experience and acquired knowledge, then deploy them for the good of your readers who hoped to learn from you.
What you described Saraki to be in politics, is what you are in writing, egocentric, shortsighted, self-conceited, thoughtless, narcissistic, and intellectual bully. However, your ability to switch between sounding bright and thoughtless occasionally seems to be aided by your belief that you have no responsibility; hence, there are no consequences. However, do not forget that even foolish people have opinion(s) and consensus on issues, this is why self-evaluation is critical, the opinion of a Professor must be distinct from such category of people, and should not share consensus with them. This symptom of intellectual decline must be addressed before it is too late, for this is the laziest of all your writings as a reader of yours.
For clarity, there was no point in time that Saraki unilaterally zoned any office to a particular region. The Kwara North 2023 power shift was not about a particular LGA, unit or person, it was about the North. In fact, it was more like Bukola Saraki and many other people in the state were intimidated, coerced; both the willing and unwilling to share in their agitations, that unity of the North redefined politics within the fence of Saraki, that Saraki even conceded and his hands were forced off from looking at the Central is a defeat to him, we all know Saraki is a stubborn politician, takes calculated risks and this is the first time in the history of his politics that he is aiming for safety instead of the usual risks. Only Kwara North has been able to do that, and that is what politics means, force people to change (I even hate the fact that I have to acknowledge Saraki, but that is the difference between you and I).
So, where the unilateralism surfaced from shows that you are not observant or choose to be ignorant on Kwara politics, I can’t blame you, you’re opionated, the fact that you dismissed research and findings before forming hypothesis calls your Professorship into question. A Professor is not expected to speak and give opinion without accurate findings.
Also, your years of experience should have taught you that when one wants to teach the public and write for the purpose of enlightenment and education, no matter how difficult, one must put sentiments aside. Plato never liked democracy because it killed Socrates, Aristotle inherited the same. Both Plato and Aristotle dismissed democracy, with more logical arguments that shows they are thinkers, not pepper soup joint analysis like yours.
The consequences of Plato and Aristotle’s dismissal on democracy is that thousands of years after they left, democracy is what gives people like you opportunity to be opionated as this. Both men self righteously assumed that they are “royalty” in the world of thinkers and became tyrannic in their concept. Thousands of years later, in a democracy, you are doing the same, not only with Saraki but many others. Writing is beyond drinking coffee and getting Harry Maguire type of inspiration and rolling it out to the public, you must be pensive and set aside your hatred.
Democracy was rebuilt and given a chance after people saw possibility in it. Across history, because of the tyranny of such thinkers like you, democracy got a very bad name in history until thousands of years after. Professor sir, write like a Professor.
The consequences of zoning is that it accommodates mediocrity ahead of competency, it isn’t even something that is to be discussed in Kwara or Nigeria, it is a terrible political concept and calculation regardless of the intentions. Absorbs interest above brilliancy and intelligence, these are the issues, the fears. Either at national or state level, brilliant men must come on board, that is what Nigeria needs not intellectuals finding faults within such a faulty arrangement. Think differently from politicians.