One thing that went well for the Obidient Movement was that its icon, Peter Obi, has an enviably good public image. In the peak of the electioneering buzz, he had mustered such legendary credentials comparable to those of any celebrated political figure in recent global history.
Admittedly, such idolization is very key among the resources to be possessed by a leader of a movement of such magnitude if such a leader is to command a sufficiently fervent followership. However, there is a limit to how far the personality strength of a leader of a movement can take the movement. Throughout history, movements that stood the test of time had something more compelling and more enduring than the perceived qualities of their leaders. Such movements remained resolute irrespective of whatever happened to their icons simply because their beliefs and goals (i.e. ideology) had become so strongly entrenched that they transcended the individual members of the movements including the leaders.
Religious movements often typify this reality as insightfully articulated by sociologist, Emile Dukheim. According to him, given that the beliefs of a religious community are conceived as originating from a source beyond the community (i.e. from the divine), these beliefs become bigger than the community itself, such that even though the beliefs were freely adopted by the community, it can no longer repudiate them or choose when to act in line with their principles or not. In other words, the beliefs, despite being a creation (or an adoption) of the community, now rule the community and no longer vice versa. Hence, every member of the community, including the leaders, become equal worshippers before the altar of the group’s ideology, and no worshipper is indispensable as the worship will continue without anybody. This ideology is the SOUL of the movement which remains immortal even as some parts of its body may wither away.
This is how religious movements survive sustained persecutions. Christianity, in particular, incredibly withstood close to 300 years of brutal persecution under Rome between the first and fourth century of our era. Even as many of its leaders and icons were being killed, the new religious movement endured simply because its life is in its soul which is immortal. Also, the Arab resistant movement which began with the creation of the modern state of Israel in 1948 has remained undying despite decades of sustained assassination of its leaders and icons by the Jewish state and its allies. Iran, the self-appointed champion of that movement, and her allies in the likes of Hamas and Hezbollah are now like mere mortals serving the unassailable liberation ideology of the “gods” of Arab political freedom. This ideology is the soul of that movement; hence none of its members is indispensable. Instructively, the immortality of the movement is so much helped by the framing of that political agenda as a religious agenda whereupon the fight becomes God’s fight, the fighters become God’s warriors, and those dying fighting become martyrs. This imagining has vested the movement with some aura of divine mandate such that so many individuals, young and old, are ever ready to offer their lives including as suicide bombers.
This scenario explains why politics has always courted religion from time immemorial. Notable examples include the theocratic monarchies of medieval Europe, the absolute monarchies of some contemporary Arab states, and the experience of Japan under their “divine” emperors. During the second world war, thousands of Japanese soldiers offered their lives in the suicidal missions of KAMIKAZE and “final charge” – the latter involving a cataclysmic push where a military unit would fight on, refusing to retreat or surrender, until the last man was killed. Such an unconventional military doctrine, involving mass self-immolation, was made possible by elevation of the ideology of the state to assume precedence over the will of the individual to survive.
A proper understanding of the idea of the SOUL of a movement would help us appreciate why the Obidient Movement was not as strong as we assumed it to be. It was a movement that relied primarily on the personality and image of Peter Obi to thrive. If Obi was to be no more or in any way substantially diminished, the movement would have been deprived of its oxygen of life. This is why supporters of the movement were so much focused on defending the image of Obi – apparently more than they focused on discussing his programmes. They knew that a diminished Obi was a diminished Obidient Movement. The opposition as well knew this much, hence their desperate attempt to diminish him.
However, when a movement has got a soul, no one, including its icon, becomes indispensable. We saw this with the French Revolution where Maximilien Robespierre, who at some point emerged as its leader and icon, was neutralized by the movement itself. Despite being the leader, other members of the movement did not hesitate to try, condemn and execute him when his activities were perceived as a threat to the movement. Some other leaders were similarly sacrificed. No one was indispensable!
When the likes of Doyin Okupe, Kenneth Okonkwo and Julius Abure were renouncing the Obidient Movement, comments by sympathisers of the movement betrayed some feeling of sadness and regret that the movement was being weakened. That was an indirect admission that the movement is still in search of a soul. Such a soul would have made it a real ideological movement as against an electoral movement that was bound to unravel once the elections were over, particularly when the result was unfavourable.
Now how can the Obidient Movement be restarted, but this time in a way that enables it acquire a soul that will better guarantee its endurance and success? Incidentally, an answer that substantially aligns with my argument here has been offered by no less a person than a leading Obidient, Pat Utomi, a man who was so passionate about the movement that he gave up his right to the Labour Party presidential ticket to accommodate Obi. In a television interview months after the election, Utomi stated his intention to form a new political movement. He argued that the Obidient Movement fell short of the sort of ideological force required to change the course of the beleaguered ship of the Nigerian state being that it was a spontaneous and hurried sprint to wrest power from certain persons, leaving no room for the movement to ideologically nurture itself to become strong enough for the task it set out for itself. In other words, he was implying that the task to rescue Nigeria cannot be a sprint but a marathon that stretches a long distance.
He pointed out that his proposed movement would not be about instantly winning elections but would pursue building ideological consciousness first before talking about participating in elections. When the TV presenter asked him about who could be the party’s presidential candidate in 2027, he retorted that he was not talking about election yet. With visible frustration, he described Nigeria as “an election circuit” where people gather for elections every four years and disperse thereafter without getting anything right. Thus, Utomi was thinking about an ideological movement as against an electoral movement. The movement was not to be built around the electoral ambition of any person in order to give room for objectivity in its pursuit of ideological consciousness. He was proposing a cultural change where the new movement would first of all focus on building the right consciousness both internally (among the members) and externally (among the wider public). According to him, this was to ensure that in the event of the movement succeeding in winning elections, all and sundry, including that lowest-ranking officer in the civil service, would have been fully aware of the new direction things would take henceforth and his/her role in it. In other words, this movement would first realise its soul before seeking power.
Such effort at ideological clarification before grabbing power is crucial for ensuring that power will not be held and exercised for power’s sake, but exercised in accordance with a definite philosophical and moral persuasion directed towards transformation and progress. As I stated in the part 1 and 2 of this article, the commitment of the elite core of such a movement is crucial here; they are the ones who, through their intellectual inputs and actions, will entrench this ideological consciousness (the soul of the movement). Utomi knew exactly this when he stated his intention to start off by raising “a tribe” of ideologically committed individuals who would stand uncompromisingly by certain principles, professing these principles and living by them. This is the elite core and the frontline apostles of the movement. It is the activities of this elite core that would bring about the diffusion of the group’s ideology through the general population; this way, bringing everyone (the masses) on board an ideological ship so that all would be on the same page as to the direction being sailed to.
This is contrary to what we have had over the years where the masses desire change without knowing exactly what that change entails. My experience in the build-up to the 2023 presidential election is instructive here. It turned out that a friend, who was among those energetically calling for change during that frenetic episode, worked at a federal government agency and was in the business of extorting members of the public in the course of rendering service to them. His social media updates regularly reflected this disposition. He identified as an “Obidient.” During one of our conversations, I asked him, “you were once complaining of a new boss in your office who was restricting the rate at which you guys extort, yet you want a new Nigeria. Do you know that if Peter Obi would be the right person to change the system, he would do more than your new boss by not just restricting the rate of extortion but ending it completely?” He got a bit perplexed. This is a typical scenario of seeking for change without first achieving ideological clarification.
But then more than a year after, where is Utomi’s movement? Why has he not started? What might be holding him back? Let me hazard a guess: He must have struggled to get the movement going given the contradiction in his approach. He planned to get the major contenders in the 2023 presidential election – apart from President Tinubu – as part of the elite core of the movement. In his words, they are to be “the base” of the movement. This obviously contradicts his intention not to make the new group an electoral movement. Atiku has not given up his presidential ambition, and Obi, given his hugely impressive showing the last time, is not likely not to try again. With things set up this way, I am convinced Utomi must have experienced difficulties getting these gladiators of 2023 to accept to be part of a movement where partisan objectivity would be the starting principle.
In fact, what Utomi intended to set up is a political party that would function as a progressive movement. This approach must have been the factor that probably obscured his vision of how best to realise a progressive movement to change Nigeria. A political party is essentially a partisan and election-minded group meaning, as I wrote then, “that these influential politicians will likely see the new party as another platform to seek power. It will expose the platform to the risk of ending up like other political parties where politicians defect to for the sole purpose of grabbing power. This, evidently, will defeat Utomi’s vision.” I further came up with the following advice for Utomi: “If I had opportunity to advise Utomi, I would suggest that the new platform forget about contesting the 2027 elections and make this decision clear to all and sundry. (Even though he said contesting elections is not in the immediate agenda, but I believe he needs to be definite about the next elections coming up in 36 months’ time – 3 years). This will discourage power-seeking politicians from deflecting to the new party and only to desert it in the event of failure. Second, I would suggest to Utomi that the party constitution prescribe stringent criteria for qualifying to fly its flag. These would include being a member of the party for at least consecutive four years before the election in question. This will further discourage turning the party to a mere vehicle for riding to power.
“Without measures like these being strictly implemented, I’m afraid Utomi may labour in vain. His new party will become another space for the dirty politics of use-and-dump which has been the unfortunate fate of other political parties we have had. In the interview in question, Utomi lamented how the APC he played a crucial role in forming was “hijacked” by certain elements that did not share the vision that inspired the formation. He should watch it this time; history has a way of repeating itself.”
Perhaps, bugged down by the above noted contradictions, Utomi may have abandoned his plans – or perhaps suspended them for the time being. But ask me, I would simply say that any movement that can muster the ideological robustness and tenacity of purpose to salvage the sinking ship of Nigeria must have its base in the civil society and not in a political party. This, in my view, is the most assured way to shield it from some of the contradictions that bedeviled the Obidient Movement. In a future article, I will focus on the civil society and how this movement can be nurtured from it.
CONCLUDED
Henry Chigozie Duru, PhD, teaches journalism and mass communication at Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria.
Excellent piece 👏
This is highly intellectual. Keep it up.