My OperaYou need to be logged in to post in the forums. If you do not have an account, please sign up first.
Nigeria's political stuation. What's the way forward?
Mr Goodluck Jonathan is the Excecutive President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and he declared his intension of running for election for the second time. Does he has agenda and is he compitent to rule once more
I still think it's very amusing how the Flemish nationalist party wants to copy the Netherlands in each and every way, but does *not* want to join the Netherlands.
Can I say Frenzie that we have a man here called the naked rambler because he insists of long hikes with no clothes on and just a rucksack. He attempted to walk the length of Gt Britain form the far north of Scotland to Land's End but kept getting arrested. He was a married man with children but I think she eventually gave up on him. I recall that for a time he got a new fried - a woman who joined him. For all the eccentricuty he is an interesting and bemusing man to listen to. Basically he isd harmless and we haven't had a cult joining him. In his own odd way he is quite courageous!
Interesting comment there Jaybro. I didn't realise Mississippians were ugly they needed to wear burkas. Gee the things you learn and pick up here.
Originally posted by The Economist:
Democracy 1, vote-rigging 0
Gambling on the world’s most expensive voting system has paid off
ANYONE who has received a Nigerian scam e-mail—offering to share vast wealth in exchange for just a teensy bit of advance capital—will instantly grasp how rife corruption is in Africa’s most populous and entrepreneurial country. This is true of politics as well as commerce. Cheating has become so brazen that few Nigerians expect fair elections. Politicians have for years larded voter lists with the names of foreign musicians, including deceased ones like Marvin Gaye, and have stuffed ballot boxes with abandon.
At parliamentary elections on April 9th, allegations of rigging were once again in the air. Violence also flared up. And the late delivery of ballot papers, which were securely printed abroad, delayed the voting by a week. Nonetheless, the poll marked the first credible election in Nigeria since the end of military rule 12 years ago (see article).
What made it different is that officials fought back hard for the first time. They introduced a new voting system that severely limits fraud, using a clever mix of high-tech and low-tech. All 73.5m voters were fingerprinted and screened to stop duplication. Most polling booths opened for only an hour to prevent multiple voting. Electoral officials tallied the results in front of the voters. Independent monitors collected the numbers instantaneously using mobile phones in an exercise called “crowd tabulation”.
The process has been expensive: the government has set a record for public spending on elections of $580m. Western donors argued at first that the system was too complex for a developing country to handle. They were wrong.
The credit goes mostly to two men. The first is President Goodluck Jonathan, who is himself standing for re-election on April 16th. He may thus benefit personally from the reforms, but he acted against the interests of his party, which had perfected the dark art of rigging. The second is Attahiru Jega, head of the official election commission, who designed a voting system that angered many powerful lobbies. Together they have given new hope to the many Nigerians who are embarrassed that their vibrant country, often ranked as the most optimistic in the world, has become a byword for swindling and fraud.
More has to change before Nigeria’s political leaders can claim full legitimacy. The elections may be more transparent, but governing still takes place largely behind closed doors. The legislature remains too weak. The Official Secrets Act, which makes it illegal to publish government data independently, needs reform. So do the courts, which are suspected of bias and corruption. Legal challenges after previous elections have failed to produce a single conviction for electoral fraud.
Fit for export
Better elections should in the end help resolve Nigeria’s existential question—whether this wildly diverse country of 150m people from 250 ethnic groups created by British colonial masters can work. But ambitious talk of taking over regional leadership is premature. Nigeria should first try to close the democratic gap with South Africa, the continent’s top dog, as well as improve its scam-ridden economy.
The best way for Nigeria to show leadership is to help its neighbours to stop rigging their polls. Not all have the right staff or can afford high-tech answers. But as countries from Côte d’Ivoire to Kenya have found, bad or contested elections can be the costliest mistakes of all.
Originally posted by rjhowie:
And how many US/UK thread?This is one of 4 Nigeria threads at the same time. This is silly.
Originally posted by jax:
Nigeria's successful elections
Originally posted by The Economist:
Democracy 1, vote-rigging 0
Gambling on the world’s most expensive voting system has paid off
ANYONE who has received a Nigerian scam e-mail—offering to share vast wealth in exchange for just a teensy bit of advance capital—will instantly grasp how rife corruption is in Africa’s most populous and entrepreneurial country. This is true of politics as well as commerce. Cheating has become so brazen that few Nigerians expect fair elections. Politicians have for years larded voter lists with the names of foreign musicians, including deceased ones like Marvin Gaye, and have stuffed ballot boxes with abandon.
At parliamentary elections on April 9th, allegations of rigging were once again in the air. Violence also flared up. And the late delivery of ballot papers, which were securely printed abroad, delayed the voting by a week. Nonetheless, the poll marked the first credible election in Nigeria since the end of military rule 12 years ago (see article).
What made it different is that officials fought back hard for the first time. They introduced a new voting system that severely limits fraud, using a clever mix of high-tech and low-tech. All 73.5m voters were fingerprinted and screened to stop duplication. Most polling booths opened for only an hour to prevent multiple voting. Electoral officials tallied the results in front of the voters. Independent monitors collected the numbers instantaneously using mobile phones in an exercise called “crowd tabulation”.
The process has been expensive: the government has set a record for public spending on elections of $580m. Western donors argued at first that the system was too complex for a developing country to handle. They were wrong.
The credit goes mostly to two men. The first is President Goodluck Jonathan, who is himself standing for re-election on April 16th. He may thus benefit personally from the reforms, but he acted against the interests of his party, which had perfected the dark art of rigging. The second is Attahiru Jega, head of the official election commission, who designed a voting system that angered many powerful lobbies. Together they have given new hope to the many Nigerians who are embarrassed that their vibrant country, often ranked as the most optimistic in the world, has become a byword for swindling and fraud.
More has to change before Nigeria’s political leaders can claim full legitimacy. The elections may be more transparent, but governing still takes place largely behind closed doors. The legislature remains too weak. The Official Secrets Act, which makes it illegal to publish government data independently, needs reform. So do the courts, which are suspected of bias and corruption. Legal challenges after previous elections have failed to produce a single conviction for electoral fraud.
Fit for export
Better elections should in the end help resolve Nigeria’s existential question—whether this wildly diverse country of 150m people from 250 ethnic groups created by British colonial masters can work. But ambitious talk of taking over regional leadership is premature. Nigeria should first try to close the democratic gap with South Africa, the continent’s top dog, as well as improve its scam-ridden economy.
The best way for Nigeria to show leadership is to help its neighbours to stop rigging their polls. Not all have the right staff or can afford high-tech answers. But as countries from Côte d’Ivoire to Kenya have found, bad or contested elections can be the costliest mistakes of all.
Originally posted by ensbb3:
The last thing we need is another messed up ex-british colony. There's enough of those.
Is there any other kind?
FNORD14. Wipe thine ass with what is written and grin like a ninny at what is Spoken. Take thine refuge with thine wine in the Nothing behind Everything, as you hurry along the Path.
THE PURPLE SAGE, HBT; The Book of Predictions, Chap. 19
Originally posted by rjhowie:
They are incompetent running their own affairs and revery back to old tribal customs of doing the others in.
When so many past world troubles can be attributed to a now dead empire, how can you assume their model of government varies much? Seems most of the US of A's foreign troubles come from earlier British follies... who's to say they didn't screw up every place they once ruled or tried to? Seems likely the ex-colonies owe their disposition to something other than cultural tendencies alone?
Originally posted by rjhowie:
Considering that the USA is running a global empire of military and business and constant wars and invasions it really is a hoot for a Yank to come on here and belabour Britain for a long gone colonial style empire.
You make the empire sound so innocent. One need only look through the history of things like diamonds and many other example the brits gave on how to setup monopolistic control with global influence. Speaking of history, why not walk through the british museum and look at all the empire stole from her colonies, proudly displayed only arrogantly conceived.
Originally posted by rjhowie:
You ARE running an empire of your own and look at the mayhem you have caused and causing today. Really is a bit of a nerve lecturing me coming from that not so much land of the great Satan but of the great hypocrite.
I'm not running anything. And hypocrite is what I'm calling you for suggesting anything more glorious came from Britain, sorry you missed it.
Originally posted by rjhowie:
At least they do copy the American empire when it comes to greed, corruption and wars.
Soooo, where do you think we may of got the notion? Silly rabbit.
ps. It's been pointed out repeatedly I don't Identify with the term "yank" anymore than you do being called an englishman. But using it does show what I was trying to prove... That your short sidedness stands in the way of any real objective opinions. You try to generalize me based on nationality because your own prejudices won't let you see how things really are. Well, that and a smidgen of jealousy. You wanna say empires are great... as long as we're talking about the british empire, it's only other examples that seem to be full of tyranny. LOL! Get over it, the british were just as bad if not worse.
Even if for satirical response we followed your argumwent about what you sneer you inherited it would be destroyed by the fact that such would show you lot as a load of dumb brain dead fools who cannot solve anything after two centuries. You are dominating the world with a massive military arm and having constant confrontations on "freedom" when that word has been so self corrupted internally. The day you do collapse the bettwer it will be for the safety of the world from your greedy corporate and military hands. And also a replacement world currency rather than the dollar and we may be seeing something in one part of the globe via the BRICK nations. Even Russia is doing better. Your empire is not one of traditional empires all in history but a diffrent human kind of control The trouble is you think you are better than the rest of the world and cannot see that all empires have gone. Because of that arrogance in thinking you can outlast what is a gone philosphy the decline will be hard. When your time comes it will be cruel but deserved so.
As for the thread - come back here in ten years time and I bet Africa is essentially much as it is now with those odd excepts I give credence to.
So when it comes to silly rabbits beware of your own as you have a self-created disease which will in time wipe you out.
Originally posted by rjhowie:
You extended west everywehere and where you couldn't destroy the Indians you lied and chated them.
Something else we inherited from the British?
Originally posted by rjhowie:
Early would-be death camps in the Civil War and a century afterwards racial discrimiation or infighting was still in vgour.
So there are no British examples of the likes?
Originally posted by rjhowie:
That Constitution which is meant to be a beacon mas been misuesed ever since written.
Since around the 1860's, but facts do escape simple minds bent on pointing the finger.
Originally posted by rjhowie:
In another thread I have in fact indicated the difference in America before and after the revolution of all revolutions.
Nothing you know anything about. I'm not going to follow your rantings around the forum... bla, bla, blah. Your over zealous attempt to classify americans as less humane is laughable. The standing the US holds now is a direct result of Europeans not being able to act right. Britain being one of the lead agents for escalating conflict, so look to your own when you don't like how things have turned out. And look to yourself for examples of intolerance. I come from a nation of immigrants the likelihood we'll workout how to deal with more is good. You blather on about immigrants constantly cause they want to express their culture too... LMAO! you can't even tolerate other peoples there, best you keep your nose out of morality and finger pointing... Tolerance and humane treatment is nothing your ilk has shown proficiency at.
Originally posted by rjhowie:
Who is it that has over 100 military folk based all round the world?
Who doesn't? If you're gonna pull numbers out of the air, at least make them relevant.
Originally posted by rjhowie:
Who is it that continually leads in undermining or attacking others it doesn't like. We are talking about modern days here as well.
Yeah, only I've never disputed any US wrongs, there's plenty. Such is the way when war becomes business. It's sad but this is human nature not nationalism. There's plenty good on both sides. Your usual rantings are based on prejudice, my observations are in rebuttal based on sick of it. Damn condescending load of bollocks. It's stupid to watch you talk down to other cultures because they show pride in what they come from. Guess I'll break out one of my old sayings for ya... "Every country has things to be proud of and other things not". Attacking every aspect of american history cause you're a grumpy gramps, ain't cool. You'll criticize loyalty to the constitution, something that you don't even understand, while Britain still 'maintains' a monarch? Ummm, hello?
Originally posted by rjhowie:
It would be interesting seeing you mention Europe and where your family roots come from?
That hits closer to home than you may like. I've said before I can trace roots to scotland, furthest back I've bothered is northern england. Doesn't mean I don't see the faults there or can't understand why my ancestors would want to leave.
Originally posted by Wall Street Journal:
Nominee Rattles World Bank
U.S. Pick for President Is a Shoo-In, but Nigerian Rival Challenges Status Quo
While global public-health expert Jim Yong Kim remains on track to win the World Bank presidency within days, he is the first U.S. nominee to face competition for the job.
His chief rival, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the Nigerian finance minister and former senior World Bank official, is shaking up the process. In recent weeks, she challenged the traditional U.S. control of the selection as out-of-date and garnered international support—despite her own rocky tenure in her home government.
This year's race is the first time any countries have nominated a challenger to the U.S. pick. A third candidate, former Colombian Finance Minister José Antonio Ocampo, has also called for an overhaul in the selection process.
Dr. Kim, president of Dartmouth College, is likely to secure his win easily after racking up endorsements from world leaders and holding support from the U.S. and Europe. The World Bank board could make its decision by Monday, and the new president will take office in July, succeeding Robert Zoellick.
As for the World Bank, it is perhaps time there was competition and I look forward to the day that the African Continent can throw off the shackles of tribal conflict, mass corruption and real democratic progress. However I fear it wil be a trite longer.
Originally posted by rjhowie:
Yes we retain a monarch ensbb3 but we aren't trying to control the world by money and military foraging are we like a certain republic? Plus the hard and interesting fact that we don't have a written Constitution and just as democratic as others who have and constantly argue over such. 1. Our parliamentary deomcracy under a Monarch is a wider constituency than that rather money influenced carve up by the Democrats and Republicans. So in the end our system represents more constructively than the thing across the pond. Having been founded by money men and therefor that way ever since hardly a stalwart beacon that somehow being a 'great republic' is automatically the paragon. 2. You could learn from that but won't because the money barons don't just control everyhing but the two-party dictatorship.
What in the world does number 1 above mean? For that matter, number 2, also.
What precisely does that two party dictatorship do that diminishes my life? How would I be better off without it?
I have no bone to pick with the UK, but the reality is that it caused as much grief in the world as other notable modern mischief makers.
I've lived here for most of my life and didn't recognize how controlled I've been. Or what that even means.
To put details to it, I have a wife, two children, a dog and two cats; I own a house, a car and an assortment of junk. Additionally, I'm a very happy man. Am I missing something?
Originally posted by rjhowie:
As for the World Bank, it is perhaps time there was competition and I look forward to the day that the African Continent can throw off the shackles of tribal conflict, mass corruption and real democratic progress. However I fear it wil be a trite longer.
Colonialism and Violence in Nigeria looks closely at the conditions that created a legacy of violence in Nigeria. Toyin Falola examines violence as a tool of domination and resistance, however unequally applied, to get to the heart of why Nigeria has not built a successful democracy. Falola's analysis centers on two phases of Nigerian history: the last quarter of the 19th century, when linkages between violence and domination were part of the British conquest; and the first half of the 20th century, which was characterized by violent rebellion and the development of a national political consciousness.
I can provide more if you wish.
Originally posted by jbrothernew37:
I can provide more if you wish.
But what would be the point of providing such to someone who looks "forward to the day that the African Continent can throw off the shackles of […] real democratic progress"?
As you know, Jaybro, I'm not a big fan of democracy; so, I doubt most or many of the problems that persist in nations on the African continent are resoluble via that panacea… But the rule of law (specially regarding private property and contracts), free markets and individual liberties can, if promoted, offer them hope.
As can dealing with people who can say what they mean. (God knows, where they'd find them nowadays…)
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
(iBook G4 - Panther) Opera 9.64 (5270), 10.10 (6795)
"I have heard it remarked that men are not to be reasoned out of an opinion they have not reasoned themselves into." Fisher Ames
Must say OakdaleFTL you may have something not being a great fan of democracy the way so many of them go!
Originally posted by rjhowie:
What does that mean? Run the place? I'd love a detailed explanation, but know that none will be proffered.Well bully for you Jaybro but then you aren't typical. However that aside I still don't think you are a proper democracy just a front to keep the "weans" happy while the 1% run the place.
What's a "proper democracy"?
Vague words sans substance.
Trust me, I'm as typical as toast.
You apparently imagine yourself knowledgable on the U.S., but you aren't. It's much like childish nonsense about Scots being cheap penny pinchers.
Showing topic replies 101 - 137.