Yoruba elites hiding behind ‘Yoruba unity’

I wrote this update to celebrate two things:

1. On 19 November 2021, @baasegun1 was elected to lead the UK Chapter of Ilana Omo Oodua.

2. Over 5,000 people have now signed 'United Nations Security Council: Self-determination for the Yoruba people of Nigeria - Sign the Petition! https://chng.it/fCrTtvjw via @UKChange'.

 
The Yoruba had an empire before the Europeans arrived on these shores. The empire was a confederation composed of city states. Each city state had its own territory, capital and government. One city state did not interfere in the affairs of another. Indeed, because the city states had existed autonomously for so long, each acquired its own dialect ie Ijebu, Egba, Ijesa, Ondo, Itsekiri, and so on. The Yoruba of yore regarded each other as equals.
 
At the end of the slave trade in the 1800s, the slaves that the British freed were deposited in their colony of Sierra Leone. There the children were educated to the highest standards that Britain could offer. They learnt British and European history, Greek and Latin languages, mathematics, philosophy, religion and so on. Some completed their education in England. They were being trained to be Christian missionaries and teachers. The freed slaves, now British educated, returned home to Yorubaland as the elites. They found a Yoruba empire spanning a very large geographical territory, with people who spoke the same language and had the same culture and tradition, but without a central authority like that which obtained in Great Britain.
 
The new Yoruba elites decided to create a central authority based on the Oduduwa myth of a common origin. Led by Rev Samuel Johnson, they ‘promoted’ the Alaafin of Oyo to the head of Yorubaland. Indeed, the Alaafin in 1888 was able to sign a friendship treaty with Queen Victoria in that capacity.  As a consequence of their attempts to ‘unite’ the Yoruba, the elites introduced internecine rivalry into Yorubaland for the first time in their history and caused a series of civil wars that lasted half a century. The Yoruba unity initiative fell silent when the British took control of Yorubaland.
 
The Yoruba unity initiative was revived by Obafemi Awolowo in 1945 when he formed an umbrella group that he called Egbe Omo Oduduwa. Awolowo previously led the Nigerian Produce Traders’ Association (NPTA). Awolowo’s underlying aim was to form a grassroots political party to rival Nnamdi Azikiwe’s NCNC, which Awolowo perceived to be an Igbo party. Indeed, Egbe Omo Oduduwa later became a Yoruba political party, the Action Group. Political organizations had emerged in Nigeria in response to the 1922 Clifford Commission, which established legislative councils for Eastern and Western Nigeria.
 
In truth, unity has always been the preoccupation of the elites only, and not the preoccupation of the Yoruba masses. The elites are people who achievement, election or selection has placed at a vantage position to give direction and/or make decision on behalf of the Yoruba masses. In their desire and quest for that leadership role, the elites paper over obvious differences between the groups that they wished to merge. The elites claim a self-imposed duty, and an almost divine right, to articulate and defend Yoruba interests.
 
Evidence abound however that the desire for Yoruba unity was always politically motivated, characterized by a search by the elites for political relevance. Sir Ademola and Dr Majekodunmi, for example, splintered off the AG to form Egbe Omo Olofin; Olofin is another name for Oduduwa. The ‘unity’ does not even encompass everybody. It is a ‘unity’ of exclusions. For example, when Afenifere emerged, they excluded those that they regarded as renegade or anti-Awo. Those that Afenifere excluded later formed the Alliance for Democracy and the Yoruba Council of Elders. This ‘Yoruba unity’ virus is now being peddled to the Diaspora. We must not succumb to it.
 
How seriously the various Yoruba groups, particularly the so-called umbrella organisations, take Yoruba unity is exemplified by their reaction or non-reaction to the Ilana-NINAS rift. Not a single Yoruba group, not a single Yoruba person, has attempted or volunteered to mediate. Instead, some said they belonged to NINAS and their NINAS was business as usual regardless. Some said they were only focused on what they are doing and not on what others are doing. Some said this was internal affairs of Ilana and they would not interfere. Some have been gloating at their perceived demise of Ilana. On this I say this: there is only one Ilana and Ilana remains as strong as ever under the able leadership of Professor Akintoye. The Ilana message remains unchanged: ‘Yoruba self-determination by peaceful means’.
 
We at Ilana pursue 3 strategies to actualize our goal of a free Yorubaland. One, we have a ‘Propaganda’ strategy aimed at convincing international organisations including the UN to support our quest. And we also liaise with countries that are sympathetic to our cause. Second, we have a ‘Yoruba Movement’ strategy. At home we seek to mobilise our people using the mega rallies, which have stalled since the attempted assassination of Sunday Igboho, but are about to resume. Abroad, we seek to mobilise the Yoruba Diaspora which numbers in millions particularly in Brazil and in the UK. Three, we have an ‘Emancipation Declaration’ strategy. We are dialoguing with our Oba for them to make an independence declaration as it is their duty to liberate their subjects from Fulani subjugation.
 
Although we act alone, Ilana was and is always alive to, and we explore and seek possibilities of cooperation with other groups who have like minds. The Yoruba say: ‘onakan owoja’, that is, ’not just one entrance into the market’; in other words, the ideal is to have many entrances into the market. Now close your eyes and imagine which one to choose; one entrance, which would clog up access to the market, or many entrances that would ease the passage of people and goods.
 
The Yoruba say a broom is a bunch of broomsticks you tie together to sweep the yard clean. Now close your eyes and just imagine that instead of tying the broomsticks together, you glued them to each other one-by-one. It is self-evident that you would end up, not with a broom, but with a clog of broomsticks that you could not use to sweep. When the Yoruba say: a collection of hands lifts the load onto the head, they do not mean that the hands are joined together. No. The hands act independently yet together to achieve the common goal.
 
These proverbs tell us several things. First, that the Yoruba instinctively believe in ‘unity of purpose’, which required that all organisations focused on one common goal. The goal in Ilana’s case is Yoruba self-determination. Second, that the Yoruba culture emphasised individualism or freedom of action. Action by each individual and each group is expected regardless. Third, that the Yoruba tradition emphasised allegiance or loyalty to one’s root.  The Ibadan man, for example, sees himself always as Ibadan first. It is well to accept that the Yoruba man will not easily give up an organisation that he helped to birth and establish. We Yoruba are what we are, confederationnists! Accept us for we are and build on our individualism.
 
So, how can several disparate, individual organisations achieve the same political goal without uniting or fusing together?  I see 3 possibilities. One, the organisations could agree to set up a joint strategic group to provide a list of road maps from which the individual organisation could then pick whatever they think they can achieve. The problem with that option is lack of time. We must aim to achieve Yoruba self-determination before 2023. Two, the organisations could agree to set up a central database to collect information about what each individual group is doing. Such a database opens possibilities of networks and collaboratives. I personally favour this proposition, but the problem for many could be neutrality and trust. This I understand was what the Central Office was established for.
 
Direct project-by-project collaboration is the third possibility; probably the least contentious, and the more likely to succeed in the present climate. It could be in the form of assistance from other organisations to enable a particularly excellent project to succeed. For example, a group organized a rally in Manchester the other day; they invited others to join which we at Ilana did, and we had a successful day. Such collaborative efforts could extend to other projects, such as, symposia, food fests and musical carnivals. To make project-by-project collaboration successful, large groups must assure smaller groups that they are not out to poach members.
 
Rather than the doom and gloom, we should celebrate the fact that many Yoruba groups have risen up to be involved in the quest for self-determination for the Yoruba people. It should make us all proud, not downcast. It is better to have many arrows in the quiver than just one. Multiple voices make a choir. That is ‘Megaphone Politics’.
 
‘Unity’ is a nice sounding word. Isn’t it? The magic bullet. The solver of all our problems. If only the Yoruba were united. Do they mean all Yoruba? 25% of them? 50%? 75%? Do they mean all Yoruba organisations or just the invited ones? Unity of elites? Or masses? Or both? The elites want us to speak with one voice before they act, so they ask for referendum. For them, pain and suffering of victims of Fulani abuses is not enough; mega rallies is not enough. We have generals who will not fight until they have first met in the officers’ mess! The strong must act for the weak without preconditions. To ask the weak for instructions is not strength but weakness. The current obsession with unity is just obstructive.
 
‘Constitution’ is also a nice sounding word. Isn’t it? The same ‘unity’ people tell us that we must have a constitution with belts and braces, several pages long, to cover all eventualities known to man. But wait a minute! The British who gave us the constitution don’t have a constitution! Yet, the British are doing fine, and have always done just fine, without a constitution.  Constitution to me is the refuge of the ‘alainikan se’; the person wants to do nothing. Constitution is where people share positions to show how important and how powerful they are in the organisation. The more constitution a constitution is, the more it becomes a straitjacket, shifting focus from what to do, to what to write.
 
Many of us today speak Yoruba, but do not think Yoruba. The ancient Yoruba were remarkable people. They were exceedingly clever people who understood human frailties and organized themselves accordingly. We must learn from them.