The Regressive Gratitude of Nigeria's Progressive Leaders: A Betrayal of Loyalty
In the tumultuous landscape of Nigerian politics, a disturbing trend has emerged among so-called progressive leaders, where loyalty is punished and opposition is rewarded. This phenomenon, often described as regressive gratitude, has left countless party members disillusioned and broken, their sacrifices forgotten in a cruel political calculus.
The High Cost of Devotion
Across states like Ekiti, Osun, Ogun, Ondo, and Lagos, devoted party members have sold cherished belongings such as farmlands, houses, and automobiles to fund campaigns. Others have endured accidents, trauma, and bodily injuries in the heat of political struggles. Some even approached bankers to wire staggering sums, all in a bid to placate party needs and facilitate logistics. Despite facing ridicule and hardship, these loyalists stamped their commitments with unwavering dedication.
Yet, when victory finally arrived for parties and candidates, the names of these committed members vanished from appointment lists. Instead, opposition hotheads, renowned for their attacks on the party and its personalities, were rewarded with coveted posts. Broken and forgotten, diehard loyalists who counted their years of devotedness in decades and investments in staggering sums found themselves discredited and disgraced.
Case Studies from the Southwest
In Osun State, a former governor who initially won through the courts openly declared he would not prosecute opposition elements who brutally tormented and even murdered scores of his supporters. Later, he became friends and hobnobbed with these same erstwhile 'dangerous' elements. Similarly, another past governor in the same zone relied on critical support from individuals both within and outside the country during his struggles to clinch party nomination. However, upon entering office, he turned away these 'used' individuals, denying them even the slightest opportunity to meet him throughout his eight-year tenure.
This regressive attitude is not isolated but has become a hallmark of progressive leaders in Nigeria, effectively an inverted ethic where sacrifice is disregarded and opportunism exalted. The irony is so stark that it borders on the grotesque, leaving one to wonder if the word 'progressive' has been emptied of its meaning.
The Logic Behind the Inversion
What logic could undergird this bewildering inversion? The answer lies in an awkward valuation of visibility over loyalty. In the theatre of politics, the loudest voice often eclipses the most steadfast heart. Those who have vociferously antagonised the party acquire a certain notoriety and public profile that strategists see as political capital. Co-opting such figures is viewed as a masterstroke to neutralise adversaries and flaunt magnanimity.
However, this magnanimity is counterfeit and misplaced, purchased at the expense of those whose devotion was unalloyed. The summation of progressive leaders is not moral but tactical, concerned with optics rather than honour, driven by sheer expediency. In this schema, loyalty becomes invisible because it is quiet and unspectacular, while dissent becomes valuable due to its noisy and dramatic nature.
Consequences and Historical Parallels
The consequences of this regressive gratitude are not abstract. They are interred in the biographies of countless party members who have suffered grievous losses. Some have mortgaged properties to finance campaigns, endured imprisonment, harassment, or lost family members. Many victims of party ingratitude have died tormented by a fate they considered unmerited.
History offers ample testimony to the dangers of such value inversion. Political movements that disregard genuine loyalists in favour of opportunistic characters often find themselves hollowed out, bereft of commitment, and vulnerable to implosion. The French Revolution, Russian Revolution, and countless postcolonial struggles bear witness to this tragic pattern of sidelining stalwarts while enthroning buccaneers.
Psychological and Moral Dimensions
Why does ingratitude persist in politics? The psychology of progressives seems animated by a peculiar insecurity. Having attained power, they fear the visibility of opposition more than they value the loyalty of supporters. This is compounded by arrogance, as they imagine loyalty is automatic and will remain regardless of neglect. They underestimate the corrosive power of ingratitude, failing to recognise that loyalty requires nourishment and withers when betrayed.
Beyond tactical and psychological dimensions lies the moral question. Preferring those who have opposed the party over committed supporters means abandoning the principle of honour. A party that rewards opposition while punishing loyalty is not merely tactically misguided but morally bankrupt. This moral bankruptcy corrodes the political culture of the nation, teaching citizens that loyalty is futile and opportunism is the path to advancement.
Weaponisation of Poverty and Electoral Repercussions
The wrongs foisted by progressive leaders extend beyond misplaced kindness. There is a trend of denying party members basic care through deliberate creation of artificial scarcity, often tagged 'weaponisation of poverty'. From states to councils, party leaders have become hoarders of goodies, such as food items meant for free distribution, cornering them for select favourites or selling them off for personal gain.
Items warehoused for years or decades eventually go bad and expire, highlighting a regressive and miserly wickedness. This behaviour partly explains electoral losses to opposition candidates in states like Osun and Ekiti, as it alienates the very base that should support the party.
Remedies and the Path Forward
The remedy lies in immediate extension of olive branches to surviving but wronged party members and active cultivation of an appreciation and generosity mindset by leaders. Progressives must renew their knowledge concerning the virtues of exalting those who have sacrificed for the party, halting the trend of rewarding individuals who have invested less. They must recognise that loyalty is not automatic but cultivated, not inexhaustible but finite.
Only then can progressives restore their moral compass, which has suffered significant atrophy. Criticisms of ambassadorial appointments for popular opposition figures are well-founded, as appointments should represent traceable commitment to party and candidate. When portfolios are awarded for undesirable actions, the threshold of decency is abused, and the integrity of awardees is challenged.
In conclusion, the regressive gratitude of Nigeria's progressive leaders is a betrayal that undermines the very fabric of political life. It is a call to action for a return to honour, loyalty, and genuine progressivism.
