Nigeria at 66: Independence and the Unfulfilled Promise
Every October 1, Nigeria celebrates the raising of its flag in place of the Union Jack. We are reminded that in 1960, Nigerians supposedly finally took control of their own political affairs after decades of British colonial rule.
After the long decades that have followed this journey, the question still remains: what did independence actually liberate Nigerians from, and what did it leave intact?
Independence ‘ended’ colonial political rule. It did not, however, fundamentally reorganise the economic foundations of Nigerian society towards moving it forward. The colonial state disappeared, but the capitalist economy remained. The British colonial authorities promoted its collaborators and nascent local elites to the status of political class (national bourgeoisie) ruling in its direct absence, while neo-colonial capitalist economy remained integrated into the world economy structured by the unequal development of capitalism.
This is the unfinished business of independence.
Nigeria’s tragedy is not that independence achieved nothing. It is that political independence opened possibilities that were never carried through to their social conclusion. The promise of independence was never simply that Nigerians would have Nigerian politicians. It was that the resources of Nigeria would be used to build a society capable of providing a decent life for its people. That promise, however, remains unfulfilled. After 66 years, this is no longer simply a promise delayed, but a promise that capitalism and the Nigerian ruling class cannot deliver.
The generations that fought for independence inherited a country whose economy had been developed to serve colonial interests. Production was oriented heavily towards the export of primary commodities, while the industrial and productive foundations necessary for genuine economic transformation remained limited. Political independence created the possibility of changing this. And change did take place: the Nigerian state assumed greater control over the economy and a national capitalist class emerged. But the break was political, not a rupture with capitalism itself.
The result is the peculiar situation we find ourselves in today: a country with extraordinary resources and productive potential, yet where basic questions of food, energy, housing, transport, employment and public services remain unresolved. The problem is therefore not simply that Nigeria has been “poorly governed since its independence,” but that the wealth of society has never been placed under the collective direction of the society that produces and needs it.
Here Comes the Age of Prosperity. Again…
Yes oh, the promise is still being made…66 whole years after. In his Independence Day address, Tinubu declared that Nigeria had passed through a difficult period of reform and was now entering an “age of prosperity.” He pointed to increased production, industrialisation, infrastructure, investment and job creation as the road ahead, despite an administration whose economic policies have subjected millions of Nigerians to a punishing deterioration in their living conditions like never before, while still asking us to endure these sacrifices in anticipation of a prosperity that remains perpetually out of reach.
But the failure is not unique to Tinubu. Why has this apparent prosperity all this while remained a promise rather than a reality for the majority? Again, the answer cannot be found simply in the personalities occupying Aso Rock. It lies in the economic relations that every government of the Nigerian capitalist state inherits and reproduces.
Prosperity cannot be meaningfully shared if the decisions about what society produces, how it produces it and where the resulting wealth goes remain principally governed by the requirements of capital. So long as production remains organised around the accumulation of private capital, the wealth created by society will continue to be subordinated to the interests of those who own and control capital.
This is why the promise cannot be fulfilled within capitalism. This is why a simple change of government cannot deliver that promise. Only revolution can.
The Only Way Forward
If the promise of independence cannot be fulfilled within capitalism, then the task is not to find a better way of administering the same system. It is to build the political force capable of replacing it.
The material basis for such a transformation is already present. Nigeria has a vast working population, increasingly socialised production and a society whose functioning depends upon the collective labour of millions. What is missing is not the capacity to produce a different kind of society, but the political organisation capable of putting that capacity under the conscious control of the working class.
Socialism will not arrive automatically. The existence of exploitation and inequality does not, by itself, produce revolutionary consciousness. The working class must organise around a clear socialist programme. It must organise beyond the timid and compromising politics of the NLC, whose leadership has repeatedly failed to exploit the immense power of organised labour into a force capable of challenging the existing order. The working class must develop its political understanding and build the power necessary to transform society.
This is the task before us.
The Naija Marxists is part of that effort: building a revolutionary socialist organisation rooted in the Nigerian working class, studying the conditions of Nigerian society, developing political education and helping to organise the forces capable of carrying the struggle beyond the limits of capitalism.
If the promise of 1960 was that Nigerians should control their own destiny, then the struggle for that destiny is not over.
The flag has been Nigerian for 66 years. The wealth of Nigeria must now belong to those who produce it.
The promise that capitalism could never fulfil must become the starting point for a different future.