CC™ VideoScope
Monday
Flashback: The GOP and the dearth of true conservatives
![]() |
| Reagan takes oath of office |
In an article I wrote a few years ago, I touched on the debilitating frailties of the GOP as presently constituted and how they may have led to the election of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States.
As we get into the decisive months of presidential politics in the U.S. general elections, one sees the same pattern beginning to unfold once again, as the GOP-led Congress (at least on the House side) would much rather play side-bar politics, that could ultimately re-energize the left to turn out in solidarity of what most observers perceive to be an under-performing president.
There is no question that the president is vulnerable and worse-still is the fact that he seems unsure of what he needs to do, in order to get the economy moving again.
For independent voters (they hold the "swing votes" in key elections), the two choices for the White House would seem to be a replay of 2008 all over again.
Then, most independents seemed to initially lean towards John McCain, as they respected his service to country as well as his penchant for reaching across the aisle, to get the business of the nation done, when it was absolutely necessary.
The fringe right of the GOP was however cool to the McCain candidacy and they eventually forced his hand into choosing someone that many felt became a liability to both his candidacy as well as the poignant message true conservatives were trying to send to the American people.
Key political watchers would argue that true conservatives never warmed up to Sarah Palin the minute they realized there was nothing behind the looks or between the ears.
For all the so-called Tea Party would like most Americans to believe, conservatism is not defined by a resentment for a sterling educational pedigree or impeccable intellectual acumen. Rather than see those with the preceding qualities as snubs, a true conservative views the composite as an invaluable asset; one that typifies a sense of ambition, responsibility and ultimately speaks to the crux of the conservative message of a commitment to excellence.
The reality is that this president is way in over his head, but the GOP leadership in the House of Representatives has consistently giving him a way out by stalling and styming his feckless efforts aimed at "reviving" the American economy.
And when they are not styming the president's "well intended efforts" they are busy issuing subpoenas to the Attorney General of the United States for a program that was actually started under a Republican president; it was then called Operation Wide Receiver and it was the first known ATF "gunwalking" operation to the Mexican drug cartels, beginning in early 2006 (under the Bush White House) and ran till late 2007.
Not to digress onto this matter, but what makes the Darrell Issa-led over-reach even more laughable and at best mis-directed, is the fact that under the Bush administration, there were no known reviews by either the DOJ or the Congress at the time. In fact, it was not until Barack Obama took office in 2009, that the Eric Holder-led DOJ started an intensive review into Operation Wide Receiver, with arrests and indictments subsequently made, as a result of the investigations.
Rather than focus on the key issues that continue to affect the generality of the American people, the ECONOMY, ECONOMY and the ECONOMY, key GOP leadership and their surrogates, would much rather play divisive politics and once again, give a much needed opening and life-line to a struggling presidency.
True conservatives are not blinded by their parochial and ideological idiosyncrasies, but are instead committed to espousing the true values and ideals of transparency, accountability and responsible governance; doing so with dignity and firmness, as well as a sense of cordiality that belies their resolve and determination.
The message of individual responsibility, self-determination, personal discipline and accountability must not be lost in the abyss of incendiary vituperations laced with jingoistic redundancies.
The American people deserve much better this time around, than a default presidency as that may ultimately lead to a couple of plausible scenarios that could eventually obtain here. The first is that Barack Obama's "third term" is ensured (4 years from now) by the lack of purpose and direction currently being exhibited by the core GOP establishment. The other scenario is that an anti-establishment candidate may arise out of the ashes of the impending GOP establishment's implosion. That person would then become an unlikely but much welcome voice (to the far right) of parochial irredentism that may change the political landscape of the United States forever.
Sunday
The art of managing people
Organizations struggle everyday with the germane issue of what the effective management of people, an organization's most prized asset, actually entails. The effective management of people within an organization requires a thorough understanding of the following:
- Motivation - Whether intrinsic or extrinsic and the importance of positive triggers....
- Job design and environment....
- Company's rewards system and how it is structured and also possibly layered....
- Group influence as a function of Group-think and other allegiances....
Human beings are creatures of habit and by that, I mean it is natural to expect that individuals will have different triggers within their genetic and socio-cultural make-up, that ultimately control what their motivations are, where they originate from or worse still, whether or not they have any at all.
Of course, as a business owner or a leader, you would hope you haven't hired someone or lead a group of people on the bottom rung of the Motivation Trigger Index™ (MTI).
Usually, one finds that most people with intrinsic motivation tend to have a higher MTI. They are the high achievers and are usually not driven to succeed or excel necessarily as a result of positive external triggers, but do so because it is just in their make-up. It is however important to note that for these group, the Positive External Triggers (PETs) only serve to further elevate their MTI scores. As for those, whose Motivational Intelligence (MI) require external triggers, they tend to be either in the middle or the lower rung of the Motivation Trigger Index™. People in this category tend to require an appreciable amount of Positive External Triggers (PETs) and ironically, if they have quite a bit of this, they are bound to excel at their tasks, in some cases, even with distinction. However, unlike the first group, their MTI scores tend to vacillate between just above average to poor, as a function of the amount of PETs they are exposed to in their work and related environment.
Over the years, scientific management has sought to strip workers of their initiative, thus ridding the work environment of key intangibles such as skill set diversity, autonomy and most important of all, feedback, constructive or otherwise.
A perfect example of empowering employees and creating an environment that engenders optimum productivity and creativity is to seek input from your employees, even when you, as a leader, know what the solution to a problem is. They may even suggest the solution you have in mind and you can give them credit for it.
The rewards system must be one that does not give rise to suspicion or insinuations of favoritism. While majority of organizations, big or small, insist on building a "team atmosphere", it is imperative that top performers, particularly those that most closely espouse the company's core principles within the framework of its corporate culture, are duly rewarded and recognized as such.
This process should however be carefully monitored and managed, so as to ensure that everyone (including the non-monetary contributors) feels a sense of belonging to the organization, through their own respective contributions.
It is a well-known fact that the successful execution of a company's business strategy must involve everyone on the ship.
This can either be a "good thing" or a "bad thing", but it depends on how you look at it. Now, while it can create a negative work environment due to its potentially divisive and mostly political nature, it is an unavoidable phenomenon.
Most organizations have learned to not only exist but also flourish with just the "right amount" of group-think, as it actually may engender a spirit of collaboration towards reaching the ultimate objectives of the organization.
The overriding attitude becomes one where the conclusion is that if the company wins, then everyone wins.
Saturday
Friday
Thursday
Wednesday
Kiriji: The War That Ended The Yoruba Civil Wars
CC™ VideoSpective
Tuesday
Black Jesus: The Deep Dive
CC™ VideoSpective
Monday
Imhotep: The Real Father of Medicine is African
CC™ VideoScope
Sunday
Friday
Daniel Richman: Halleluyah Kadosh
CC™ VideoSpective
Thursday
Tuesday
Monday
Sunday
Saturday
Wednesday
Why Socrates Hated Democracy
CC™ VideoSpective
Monday
Cheikh Anta Diop - The Origin of Black People
CC™ VideoSpective
Friday
Has the great ‘American dream’ run its course?
CC™ Politico
By Muyiwa Adetiba
Decades ago, I had a colleague who later became a brother. He studied in the US and was besotted with the country. He often talked about life in the US in a way that tickled my curiosity and heightened my expectations. He talked about its system and its advanced technology.
Being young, I was interested by his narratives on the night life and his escapades with women. But mostly, he talked about America as the land of opportunities. He called America ‘ilu orun’. My reading of the words at the time, which might not be the literal translation, was ‘heavenly’. His constant renditions coincided with the era of Hollywood and its colourful portraits of America.
We watched the ‘cowboy’ films and fell in love with the swagger of the cowboy as one man battled ten ‘Red Indians’ to a standstill without feeling any empathy for the Red Indians who were being disposed of their land; we watched films of valour and freedom and films of romance. All of these made strong impressions on my young mind and I longed to see the US for myself.
It could be the timing – New York in winter; it could the company – I was with a fellow traveler; it could be that I was no longer a wide-eyed, neophyte traveler – I had by then, been to a few countries; or it could simply be an over expectation, but my first impression of the US was not that of ‘ilu orun’ (heavenly). In fact, subsequent visits gave more favourable impressions. But I remember traveling through Manhattan in the cold and thinking I had never seen so many high rise buildings in one place. I remember a city bubbling with life with attractive neon lights on my way to dinner. And oh yes, I remember my first visit to the Playboy Club and the seductive Bunnies. Those were some of the memories of my first visit to the US.
The US in the 60s, 70s and 80s was a shining country on a hill. Everybody saw it. Everybody admired it. Everybody wanted to emulate it. And almost everybody wanted to go there, if only for a visit. The US that was projected to the world was of democracy, the rule of law, and free enterprise. But more than that, the US projected human freedom and equality. A country of immigrants, it was a country where the first generation of immigrants felt the same sense of ownership as the fourth generation.
It also didn’t matter if your surname sounded Greek or Chinese or Italian; if your passport was American, then you were all supposed to have the same rights and entitlements. It was a melting pot of ideas and cultures with none seemingly more important than the other. From desert to swamp; from hot to cold; from oil to gold; it was a country that claimed to have everything.
It was God’s own country. It was on the cards that it would be the richest country in the world. It was inevitable that it would be the world’s first Superpower. It was a natural progression that it would become the world’s moral compass and eventually the Police Officer of the world, admonishing abusive governments which fell short of democratic or acceptable moral standards. For years, it used this enormous power so cleverly, so benignly, that it got away with many things even when it was protecting its own geo/political interests.
History tells us the US was originally home to the Red Indians. But it was such a vast, richly endowed country that it was soon home to people all over the world who wanted a better life and were not afraid of starting afresh. Its freedom was hard fought. History tells us of the war against its colonial master, against itself and against racism. The US acquitted itself on many fronts and emerged as a country where a child of a nobody could become a captain of industry, where a child of an immigrant could become the President or the Vice President, where an immigrant could become the wife of a President or the richest man in the world among many coveted positions.
It was called the Great American Dream and for years, held true to its promise. This promise was that America would give you a chance irrespective of what your background was. This promise was that if you were ready to keep your head down, your hands dirty and your nose clean, there would be a reward of a better life at the turn of the corner. This immigration flow has been America’s strength. It rejuvenates it. It gives it fresh oxygen, fresh ideas and fresh energy. At the time when Europe was aging and frankly decaying, America kept renewing itself. It has for years been the bastion of capitalism, rewarding enterprise and promoting trade without barriers – or tariff which is the new buzz word.
All of these are about to change drastically due to internal contradictions and demographic fears. Some of these fears are understandable. They could be primordial but natural fears of being overwhelmed and displaced. I mean, they almost had two Black Presidents in one decade which to the ‘owners’ was unthinkable. (It is now very convenient not to remember that America once belonged to a people who were not white.) So the fear that the current Lords of the Manor could easily be sidelined is real to them. But clamming down on immigrants could end up being an unenlightened self-interest. If America loses its ‘Great American Dream’, it will not only lose its allure and its cheap labour, it will lose its cutting edge. Trump with its isolationism might be what the White Americans want but is it what they need? Trade protectionism might be what they yearn for but would it really make their products competitive?
They might be romanticizing Trump as a strongman, but can they abide with a dictator? Speaking of dictators, am I the only one who sees a parallel between Trump, a descendant of a German and Hitler, the German who caused a World War? There is the same need to be loved and admired; the same feeling of grandeur, the same desire for racial purity bordering on xenophobia; the same disdain for checks and balances; the same thirst for territorial ambition. The perplexed world might find Trump’s stated desire to annex Panama, Greenland, Columbia, Canada and now Gaza as mere rhetoric. I hope it stays as rhetoric. Otherwise, it is a World War loading. Heaven help us all.
NEWSWIRE
Wednesday
The Psychology of Power: A Nigerian Experiment
CC™ ViewPoint
Power is "the ability to satisfy one's wants through the control of preferences and/or opportunities" [Kuhn, 1963] In writing this particular piece, I intend to delve into the issue of the power of psychology as it relates to the psychology of power. I have always been one to believe that you must claim in other to possess and once you possess, you must establish your position in the scheme of things, through personal conviction and resolve…that can only be sustained by an irrefutable air of palpability, requisite for the maintenance of that ‘power’ you now possess. But now the game has just begun.
Why? Simple, your claim on power must remain forever productive, workable, adaptable, attractive and progressive that inevitably, it begins to shape decisively your ‘domestic’ and ‘foreign’ sphere of operation; and just what do you intend to accomplish by this? Shape your immediate and larger environment of course! As a student of philosophy and psychology, I have always been fascinated by the affinity of westerners for political expediency over morality.
Yes, the end as they say does justify the means. How exactly do you get what you want in the midst of so many competing and sometimes conflicting ideas, philosophies, principles, ideologies and interests. Simple, or is it! The intricacies and complexities of human behavior and nature require more than anything else, the utmost in psychological and emotional aptitude/intelligence when dealing with foe and friend alike. I have always been one to take the approach of figuring out who my friend or foe is so as to better lay out a plan of 'attack' or 'defense' as the case may be. Actually, I believe it is also prudent and advisable to have a 'neutral' strategy as part of one's modus operandi. This then brings us to the issue of The Psychology of Power. What exactly is it and how does it manifest itself. Also, another rather logical question to ask would be how does it manifest itself in a particular setting? Be it politics, relationships or daily life.
I intend to stick with how this phenomenon manifests itself in the ‘political sphere’. Why? Because everything is politics and politics is everything! The ‘Nigerian laboratory’ would seem to serve as a viable medium for such an ‘experiment.’ In doing this, I will stick primarily to the three main nationalities, HausaFulani, Igbo and Yoruba that for all intents and purposes have dominated the Nigerian political landscape (albeit to varying degrees) for close to a hundred years! For close to 50 of Nigeria’s 61 years of independence, the Hausa-Fulani (through their leadership apparatus) have ruled Nigeria (note that I said ruled and not led).
Why where they able to do this? Simple. They incorporated another formidable Nigerian sectional interest (the middle-belt, comprising the Tiv and others) into their fold, as they, and not the Hausa-Fulani possessed (at least at the time) the skilled military personnel (mostly combatant) requisite for the control of their immediate and larger environment. Thus the theory of the ‘monolithic north’ was sold to the rest of the country (the south) and rehashed (rather successfully) along with the much-vaunted ‘indivisibility of Nigeria’, to the Yoruba towards a ‘successful’ prosecution of the bloody civil war. The truth is, the north (the Hausa-Fulani in particular) saw the defeat of Biafra as the defeat of the whole south. That, however was where they were wrong! That, without question has been the bane of the Hausa-Fulani political set-up till today. The north mistook power gained through military conquest for real power.
They also failed to take into cognizance the political wizardry of Chief Obafemi Awolowo in not getting the Yoruba dragged into a war they were not ready for…thereby positioning the Yoruba to be in a unique position politically once the war was over. Chief Awolowo knew from the onset that the decks were stacked against the south in the event of a military conflict. He had worked so hard and was continuing to work tirelessly to position the Yoruba through education, commerce, technology and industry, the true hallmarks of power…real power that is! He was therefore not going to let the inordinate and misguided ambition of a neophyte like Ojukwu, lead to the destruction of everything he had worked so hard to build.
One could therefore say that the late Yoruba sage and tactician chose political expediency over 'morality' when it came to the survival of his people (since most Igbo claim till today he left them high and dry by not going along with the east at the time). The north also underestimated the will and resilience of the Igbo people. It is amazing, even till today how quickly the Ndigbo recovered from a devastation of such magnitude, as was the Nigerian civil war. They (the Igbo) however had no choice. It was either grow from the ashes or die! And grow from the ashes they did!
The recovery of the Igbo (no doubt due to their ingenuity and adaptive nature) was more than facilitated and enabled on the one hand by the infrastructure and institutions Chief Awolowo had built in the old western region (talk about an irony of all ironies), and on the other by the hospitable nature of the Yoruba towards their brethren from the east; as the north for the most part still harbored intense hostility towards them for the events leading up to and during the civil war. Politically however, the Igbo were in a state of flux and have been ever since. With the end of the civil war, the stage was now set for the power play to begin.
The north, either as a result of a lack of political sophistication or plain lack of foresight, rather than seize the opportunity presented by their 'ascension to power', instead bungled the opportunity. An opportunity that will never come their way again…at least not the way they had it for 50 years! Not only did they not influence their larger environment, their claim on power (the military and a moribund aristocracy) was unattractive, unworkable, utterly unproductive and so regressive that it was unable to influence its own immediate environment…hence the abject poverty in the north and the resultant relative backwardness in comparison to the south. To make matters worse, their descent into the abyss of religious bigotry might yet prove to be the final nail in the coffin regarding the political and economic future of the north.
On the other hand, while the northern power structure persisted with its defective plundercracy (in cahoots with quite a few individuals of questionable character and integrity in the south, the southwest in particular, of course), the sense of adventure that had always been part of the southern psyche, continued to manifest itself by way of greater accomplishments in the fields of education, the arts, sciences, business and industry. The reasoning (and quite a proven one at that) being as Sir Francis Bacon once said, ‘knowledge is power.’ This is why real power will never reside in the north! The capital of Nigeria can be moved to Gusau for all they want, it will never improve the lot of the average northerner in as much as the mentality of the leadership structure in the north remains the same.
As the example of the American (Ashkenazi) Jews has shown and continues to show, a good head is a function of a developed mind…and a developed mind will forever be a veritable source of innovation and creativity, the indisputable hallmarks of true and sustainable growth; it is he who values and encourages such a concept that inevitably is able to influence his immediate and larger environment. The American Jews make up only 3% of the American population but control the entertainment industry, the law and medical professions, business (in particular banking) and industry…the list goes on. Mind you, the U.S. has never had a Jewish president!
The stage, I believe is set for a politics of coalitions in the Nigerian political arena…coalitions that will be shaped by the pervading north-south dichotomy. The bottom line…control and manage your resources (both human and natural) in addition to your immediate environment, and you will unquestionably influence the larger environment. Also, it is imperative that political expediency be your guiding principle when deciding who to align yourself with...remember, no one can go it alone! Hence, when you align yourself with a group, they must have something tangible, workable and complimentary to bring to the table. Shared (but workable) interests, principles and ideals are without question the recipe for true growth and development.
This is The Psychology of Power! “Everybody strives to become master over all space and to extend its force (its will to power:) and to thrust back all that resists its extension. But it continually encounters similar efforts on the part of other bodies and ends by coming to an arrangement ('union') with those of them that are sufficiently related to it: thus they then conspire together for power. And the process goes on”…. [Nietzsche].


