In the theatre of Nigerian public discourse, we have conflated two distinct concepts: politics and nation-building. This conflation has cost us dearly. Politics — the mechanism through which we elect leaders and allocate resources — has consumed our collective energies, while nation building — the voluntary, collaborative process of creating a cohesive society — has been relegated to occasional rhetoric.
The distinction is not merely semantic. Politics is transactional; nation-building is transformational. Politics divides; nation-building unites. Politics operates in electoral cycles; nation-building spans generations. Until we, particularly the elite, recognise this distinction, Nigeria will continue to oscillate between fleeting progress and recurring setbacks.
|
|
The False Dichotomy
We have created a false dichotomy in which citizens must choose between supporting the government of the day or opposing it. This binary thinking has robbed us of the middle ground where most solutions actually reside. The truth is, one can hold government accountable while simultaneously participating in nation-building efforts that transcend administrations.
|
|
|
|---|
Consider this: When a child goes hungry in Sokoto or lacks access to education in Enugu, the impact doesn’t discriminate between PDP, APC, or Labour Party supporters. When our roads deteriorate or our hospitals lack basic equipment, the consequences affect us all, regardless of political affiliation, or our lack of affiliation. These challenges demand a response beyond political posturing.
The elite — those of us privileged with education, resources, and influence — have a particular responsibility that extends beyond our legal and civic obligations. We must recognise that the contract between citizens and government is necessary but insufficient for national development. What’s required is a concurrent and complementary effort: a nation-building agenda that operates above the fray of partisan politics.
Three Pillars of Nation-building
I imagine an agenda for national transformation that rests on three pillars, each demanding both policy frameworks and voluntary citizen participation.
The first pillar is centred on the Nigerian child. Every child, regardless of circumstances of birth, deserves nutrition, basic education, healthcare, and shelter until they turn 18. This is not merely a government responsibility but a collective one. While advocating for transformative legislation such as a 10 per cent minimum budgetary allocation to health and education, we must also create mechanisms for voluntary contributions based on individual interests and capabilities.
It has been my experience that when Nigerians are presented with specific, transparent opportunities to contribute to children’s welfare, the response is overwhelming. The challenge has never been a lack of generosity but rather a deficit of trusted channels. We need to build these additional channels — not as government appendages but as independent, citizen-led initiatives with rigorous accountability mechanisms. We need to activate the culture that empowered villages in the 1950s to come together and send one child to school, the communal spirit that meant citizens contributed personal resources to build public infrastructure when new states were created.
The second pillar focuses on cleanliness and wellbeing. A nation’s physical environment reflects its mental state. The correlation between clean surroundings and productivity, health outcomes, and even foreign investment is well-documented. This requires both legislative reforms (banning single-use plastics, implementing sugar and tobacco taxes) and cultural shifts (regular community cleaning exercises, waste management education).
In my travels, I’ve witnessed how nations transformed their environmental outlook not primarily through punitive measures but by cultivating a culture where cleanliness became a shared value. Same is also true of the lifestyles of the countries that have escaped the obesity trap as they became prosperous. We can achieve the same, but it demands that we move beyond expecting government to solve every problem.
The third pillar addresses our infrastructure deficit. Energy and transportation remain fundamental constraints on our economic potential. Here, we need innovative legal frameworks that protect citizen investments in critical infrastructure while attracting both domestic and international capital. The key insight is that infrastructure development cannot be the exclusive domain of government — it requires collaborative financing models where citizens become stakeholders rather than mere users.
A New Social Contract
What I’m advocating is essentially a new social contract — not between citizens and government, but among citizens themselves. This contract acknowledges that while we may disagree on political methodologies, we can agree on fundamental national objectives.
This approach offers several advantages. First, it enables broad-range collaborations, including between opposing political entities. Second, it fosters long-term commitments that transcend administrations and parties. Third, it builds social cohesion around nation building programs. Fourth, it empowers private citizens to become part of the leadership fabric of society. Finally, it aggregates all private voluntary efforts — CSR initiatives, foundations, NGOs, religious organisations — toward common goals.
The separation of nation building efforts from partisan politics will create a national identity based on shared goals rather than shared grievances. It will allow us to hold two thoughts simultaneously: that government must be held accountable, and that citizens must take initiative beyond criticism.
Leadership as a Contact Sport
Leadership is a contact sport. It requires direct engagement with problems, collaboration with diverse stakeholders, and a willingness to get one’s hands dirty. We cannot lead from the sidelines or through social media commentary alone.
The Nigerian elite must recognize that while we may not be the government, we are indeed leaders. And leadership demands that we work with others on the most important issues even when we disagree on everything else. It requires that we distinguish between the arena of political contest and the common ground of nation building.
This is not a call to abandon political advocacy or to cease holding government accountable. Rather, it is an invitation to operate on multiple levels simultaneously — to engage in the political process while also participating in the parallel, complementary process of nation building.
The challenges facing Nigeria are too complex and too urgent to be left to government alone. They demand the collective intelligence, resources, and commitment of all citizens, particularly those with the privilege of education and influence.
We stand at a crossroads. We can continue the cycle of political blame and counter-blame that has characterized our national discourse, or we can forge a new path — one where politics is understood as just one component of the broader project of nation building.
The choice is ours. And for those of us fortunate enough to have a voice in national conversations, it is not merely a choice but a responsibility. We may disagree on the “how” of governance, but surely we can agree on the “what” of nation building: a Nigeria where every child has opportunity, where our environment reflects our aspirations, and where our infrastructure enables rather than constrains our potential.
This is the path forward — not through government alone, but through the voluntary, collaborative efforts of citizens committed to a vision that transcends political cycles. It is time for the Nigerian elite to lead by example, to demonstrate that nation building is indeed a contact sport, and that we are ready to play our part.
Abubakar Suleiman is an economist and a banker with over 25 years experience in consulting and financial services.
