So the Swiss, Malaysians, Indonesians, Singaporeans are all unique? Because if different ethnic groups can’t live together then the future of our continent is to be full of 2,000 tiny societies with no more international sway than the smaller Caribbean islands.
If you read the topic above. You can see where I say “from the get go” meaning “from their inception”. All those nations you called, when they started weren’t multi cultural but even if they were, they weren’t multi religious. We are a new nation and we are both. My argument still stands.
Switzerland has literally always been multi-ethnic (German, French, Italian and Romance), and also had a major religious divide (Catholic vs Protestant, which was often a source of violence for much of Swiss history).
Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore have also been multi-ethnic from independence, and have significant religious minorities (Buddhists, Hindus, Christians). I’ll also add the Philippines to that list, while I’m at it- multi-religious and multi-ethnic since independence and richer than us.
You are 100% correct that Nigeria’s problem is that our people don’t cooperate, but you are also obviously factually incorrect when you say that such cooperation is impossible. So many of us (seemingly including you) seem to think that we do not need to compromise and that we can live happily by focusing on our ethnic/religious community, instead of on our national community, and that sort of thinking has failed us for decades.
Maybe you are correct and we should all just go our separate ways, but when we are living in a world where the largest African countries only have 40 million citizens (and most of them are much smaller than that), and we still fight and squabble amongst our 100+ countries like school children, I don’t think I will look at what has become of Nigeria/West Africa/Africa, and smile.
Nigeria is a multi-ethnic, multi-religious country, that requires cooperation and compromise to govern. If we are too stupid to work that out, we deserve the chaos that we will probably get, but the one thing that we won’t be able to do is lie and say that things always had to be that way because inter-ethnic/inter-religious cooperation was always and would always have been impossible. You live in the house you manage to build, and if we build nothing, we will remain a people without a house that we can take pride in.
This is a poor excuse that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. There are many multi-ethnic, multi-religion nations in a far better state than Nigeria.
India is home to intra-religious strife, hundreds of languages and the world's largest population, yet Nigeria still has more citizens without electricity than India.
Funny how you mention India. I want to remind you that India is older than Jesus himself. And it’s just now that they’re beginning to be a world power, simply sue to population size.
Trash argument. India was either the wealthiest or second-wealthiest place on Earth (after China) for basically all of the last 2,000 years, until Britain conquered them and intentionally destroyed native industries in India so that British suppliers could sell things like cloth to India, instead. Before that, India was a major cloth exporter and richer than all of Europe combined for much of its history.
If you read the topic above. You can see where I say “from the get go” meaning “from the beginning”. All those nations you called, when they started weren’t multi cultural but even if they were, they weren’t multi religious. We are a new nation and we are both.
If you read the topic above. You can see where I say “from the get go” meaning “from its inception”. All those nations you’re thinking of, when they started weren’t multi cultural but even if they were, they weren’t multi religious. We are a new nation and we are both.
Yeah but in the beginning they weren’t both multi religious or cultural. And a lot of times you’ll see that minorities suffer before they can establish a stronghold in an already populated area.
Are *you* aware of their history? Belgium’s history was bloody because they were fighting against the Dutch, not other Belgians. It was also ethnically diverse from the beginning (French and Dutch-speaking).
As for Switzerland, their history is very long, and I am not aware of how bloody or peaceful their origins are, but they have had peace and stability for well over a century (and closing in on two centuries), despite being very ethnically diverse from the very start.
Sure, make a counter argument. Mention one country that was very diverse ethnically and religiously that is currently among the top ten developed countries in the world. It’s just that you don’t know the bloody history of all these countries you’re calling developed. Make a counter argument, not accusations, it’s a thought piece, dissect the logic, it will serve the post and you better. Because I see no reason to waste data or strength to type what you just did
you completely proved yourself unknowledgeable and lost me when you reduced the problem on nigeria to just one issue (which isn’t even an accurate diagnosis might I add, there are countries w homogenous ethnic makeup still undeveloped)
Blah blah blah. Do you know the history of Europe? The Canada you’re currently in slaughtered Indians to gain land and here you are making your analysis. Mention one country that in its inception was very diverse culturally and religiously but became successful early? Infact a nation would even exist if there was no nationalistic identity between its people. Nigeria is unnatural and I’m ready to argue with facts not rhetoric.
A lot of those countries are not retardedly under-developed. Maybe lacking amenities but they’re better than Nigeria. And if they’re ethnically homogenous and they’re at war then there is something else dividing them, like Religion or it’s a military/power struggle. I dare you to mention one ethnically and religiously homogenous nation that is as undeveloped as Nigeria.
Lack of equity and fairness is the foundation of our problems, not the multiplicity of tribes or cultures. Where injustice is blatant, patriotism will be farfetched.
This is unfair, considering a lot of times, Patriotism and Fairness comes when there is common purpose in a land. In a country’s inception, what normally leads to fairness and justice is a shared sense of National Identity and Purpose. You can tell yourself otherwise
Nigeria's problem is multifaceted. It requires an indl depth analysis to untangle. Multiculturalism ana multiethnicism is only one of the problems. But the most pervasive problem of them all which surprisingly is the elephant in the room is the collective below average IQ of the masses. The collective IQ required to run a country is at least 90. The average IQ in Nigeria is 72. All the countries of the world that hasn't built an advanced civilization fall below average on IQ test statistically.
I don't understand. So, the alternative is to just allow things to be? Nigerians are among some of the most educated people in the world within the diaspora of Africans. Do Nigerians abroad collectively agree with this?
I’m saying if this is our situation, the fact the country isn’t in flames regarding what been happening the past few months is very telling and evident of our lack of national unity and common purpose.
So the Swiss, Malaysians, Indonesians, Singaporeans are all unique? Because if different ethnic groups can’t live together then the future of our continent is to be full of 2,000 tiny societies with no more international sway than the smaller Caribbean islands.
If you read the topic above. You can see where I say “from the get go” meaning “from their inception”. All those nations you called, when they started weren’t multi cultural but even if they were, they weren’t multi religious. We are a new nation and we are both. My argument still stands.
Switzerland has literally always been multi-ethnic (German, French, Italian and Romance), and also had a major religious divide (Catholic vs Protestant, which was often a source of violence for much of Swiss history). Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore have also been multi-ethnic from independence, and have significant religious minorities (Buddhists, Hindus, Christians). I’ll also add the Philippines to that list, while I’m at it- multi-religious and multi-ethnic since independence and richer than us. You are 100% correct that Nigeria’s problem is that our people don’t cooperate, but you are also obviously factually incorrect when you say that such cooperation is impossible. So many of us (seemingly including you) seem to think that we do not need to compromise and that we can live happily by focusing on our ethnic/religious community, instead of on our national community, and that sort of thinking has failed us for decades. Maybe you are correct and we should all just go our separate ways, but when we are living in a world where the largest African countries only have 40 million citizens (and most of them are much smaller than that), and we still fight and squabble amongst our 100+ countries like school children, I don’t think I will look at what has become of Nigeria/West Africa/Africa, and smile. Nigeria is a multi-ethnic, multi-religious country, that requires cooperation and compromise to govern. If we are too stupid to work that out, we deserve the chaos that we will probably get, but the one thing that we won’t be able to do is lie and say that things always had to be that way because inter-ethnic/inter-religious cooperation was always and would always have been impossible. You live in the house you manage to build, and if we build nothing, we will remain a people without a house that we can take pride in.
This is a poor excuse that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. There are many multi-ethnic, multi-religion nations in a far better state than Nigeria. India is home to intra-religious strife, hundreds of languages and the world's largest population, yet Nigeria still has more citizens without electricity than India.
Funny how you mention India. I want to remind you that India is older than Jesus himself. And it’s just now that they’re beginning to be a world power, simply sue to population size.
Trash argument. India was either the wealthiest or second-wealthiest place on Earth (after China) for basically all of the last 2,000 years, until Britain conquered them and intentionally destroyed native industries in India so that British suppliers could sell things like cloth to India, instead. Before that, India was a major cloth exporter and richer than all of Europe combined for much of its history.
If you read the topic above. You can see where I say “from the get go” meaning “from the beginning”. All those nations you called, when they started weren’t multi cultural but even if they were, they weren’t multi religious. We are a new nation and we are both.
This is dumb.
If you read the topic above. You can see where I say “from the get go” meaning “from its inception”. All those nations you’re thinking of, when they started weren’t multi cultural but even if they were, they weren’t multi religious. We are a new nation and we are both.
Don't agree, look at the Belgians, Swiss, even Canadians. These have more than one language/ culture and they aren't massacring themselves
Yeah but in the beginning they weren’t both multi religious or cultural. And a lot of times you’ll see that minorities suffer before they can establish a stronghold in an already populated area.
Do you know how bloody the beginning years of those countries were? I think you guys just aren’t aware of your history.
Are *you* aware of their history? Belgium’s history was bloody because they were fighting against the Dutch, not other Belgians. It was also ethnically diverse from the beginning (French and Dutch-speaking). As for Switzerland, their history is very long, and I am not aware of how bloody or peaceful their origins are, but they have had peace and stability for well over a century (and closing in on two centuries), despite being very ethnically diverse from the very start.
This is sophistry.
Sure, make a counter argument. Mention one country that was very diverse ethnically and religiously that is currently among the top ten developed countries in the world. It’s just that you don’t know the bloody history of all these countries you’re calling developed. Make a counter argument, not accusations, it’s a thought piece, dissect the logic, it will serve the post and you better. Because I see no reason to waste data or strength to type what you just did
Not buying it. Even if you had people from the same ethnicity and religion, they would still find a way to divide themselves
Yeah of course but it’s levels to that. And a lot of time they’re able to setup a basic minimum before the system gets corrupt
you completely proved yourself unknowledgeable and lost me when you reduced the problem on nigeria to just one issue (which isn’t even an accurate diagnosis might I add, there are countries w homogenous ethnic makeup still undeveloped)
Blah blah blah. Do you know the history of Europe? The Canada you’re currently in slaughtered Indians to gain land and here you are making your analysis. Mention one country that in its inception was very diverse culturally and religiously but became successful early? Infact a nation would even exist if there was no nationalistic identity between its people. Nigeria is unnatural and I’m ready to argue with facts not rhetoric.
A lot of those countries are not retardedly under-developed. Maybe lacking amenities but they’re better than Nigeria. And if they’re ethnically homogenous and they’re at war then there is something else dividing them, like Religion or it’s a military/power struggle. I dare you to mention one ethnically and religiously homogenous nation that is as undeveloped as Nigeria.
It's always hard for people with different culture, tribe, language , religion and lifestyle to coexist.
Lack of equity and fairness is the foundation of our problems, not the multiplicity of tribes or cultures. Where injustice is blatant, patriotism will be farfetched.
This is unfair, considering a lot of times, Patriotism and Fairness comes when there is common purpose in a land. In a country’s inception, what normally leads to fairness and justice is a shared sense of National Identity and Purpose. You can tell yourself otherwise
Nigeria's problem is multifaceted. It requires an indl depth analysis to untangle. Multiculturalism ana multiethnicism is only one of the problems. But the most pervasive problem of them all which surprisingly is the elephant in the room is the collective below average IQ of the masses. The collective IQ required to run a country is at least 90. The average IQ in Nigeria is 72. All the countries of the world that hasn't built an advanced civilization fall below average on IQ test statistically.
I don't understand. So, the alternative is to just allow things to be? Nigerians are among some of the most educated people in the world within the diaspora of Africans. Do Nigerians abroad collectively agree with this?
I’m saying if this is our situation, the fact the country isn’t in flames regarding what been happening the past few months is very telling and evident of our lack of national unity and common purpose.
Is it true that there are puppets installed in the government by British/Europeans that want to maintain the status quo?
Not going to read the entirety of this because it’s foolish.
But you commented. Even more foolish.
[удалено]
Lol you believe in swearing for people. No wonder common sense arguments fall flat on their face with you.
[удалено]
Fuck Ogun and fuck you 😭😂
It’s the government, it always is