posted
The Political Structure Envisaged for the Future Biafra.
Fellow Biafrans, as we promised in our last broadcast, here now are the outlines of the political structure we envisage for Biafra. As stated earlier, we re-emphasize that the state of Biafra will be built on the principles of self-determination and autonomy. Every ethnic group, every community, will exercise the freedom to govern itself. Make its own local laws peculiar to the community provided they do not conflict with the constitution and well-being of the nation at large, provide for the safety and protection of its own members, determine for itself what priorities it wants to pursue, plan its own educational program, economic development and general infrastructure for the welfare and destiny of its people without interference from any outside bodies. Contrast such freedoms with what obtains in Nigeria today. A clear case in point is the total mess that has been made of politics and governance in the Nigeria-imposed and artificial geographical entity known as Anambra State. The Federal Government under Obasanjo has determined to usurp and destabilize the operation of this regional government by first installing through a fake election, a puppet governor. This was followed by brazenly ignoring the constitution to overthrow the puppet in broad daylight on the suspicion that he was not following to the letter, all aspects of the evil program to destroy the people. To forestall any hope of a reprieve for the people, the fortunes of the region have been mortgaged by Obasanjo to the private greed of an illiterate, hand-picked contractor who is provided with all state security and further invested with the official paraphernalia of state power. This sorry state of affairs is what politics in Nigeria has become for our people.
Further on, our last broadcast states: The State of Biafra will be built on the principle of liberty. Freedom from arbitrary and despotic government arrest and imprisonment will be the hallmark of the Biafran State and the people of Biafra will reserve the right and freedom to use every means at their disposal to resist and throw off any arbitrary and despotic imposition by any government or its functionaries including the right to terminate membership of the Biafran State. The noble principle inherent in the latter pledge revolves around the supremacy of the people's will. This fact is further recognized in the following statement from the Ahiara Declaration of 1969: Again and again, in stating the principles of our revolution, we have spoken of the people. We have spoken of the primacy of people, of the belief that power belongs to the people, that the revolution is the servant of the people. We make no apologies for speaking so constantly about the people, because we believe in the people, we have faith in the people. They are the bastion of the nation, the makers of its culture and history. But in talking about the people, we must never lose sight of the individual who makes up the people. The single individual is the final, irreducible unit of the people. In Biafra, that single individual counts.
In recognition of the supremacy of the people's will and the resultant right of the individual, the State of Biafra will be built on the principle of full respect for the human rights of the individual and protection of the civil rights and liberties of all citizens and groups. Freedom of speech, __expression, assembly, press and religion will be guaranteed by the state. Rights to life, right to ones language, right to communicate with whoever one chooses, right to protest, right to disassociate, right to vote and be voted for, right to legal protection, right to popular participation in legislative process will all be guaranteed and protected by the State of Biafra. Contrary to these valued goals, Nigeria has reduced all within her boundaries to her degrading level of abysmal disregard for the individual and utter debasement of the people's traditional value system. One distressing example is the creation of states which has introduced unnecessary division and strife in Igboland. For instance, when Enugu State was created out of Anambra , every civil servant not an indigene of Enugu was driven out without compensation or regard to the attendant suffering so imposed. It was so bad that even men who were married to indigenes and had children by them were equally affected. This is an abomination! In Igboland, a child is never disowned by the mother's clan and often would seek refuge with them when in distress. The desecration of this sacred injunction may be one of the reasons Igboland is in disarray, and all because of remaining in Nigeria.
In accord with the respect and value of the individual, the Ahiara Declaration states: The Biafran revolution believes in the sanctity of human life and the dignity of the human person. The Biafran sees the willful and wanton destruction of human life not only as a grave crime, but also as an abominable sin. In our society, every human life is holy, every individual person counts. No Biafran wants to be taken for granted or ignored, neither does he ignore or take others for granted. This explains why such degrading practices as begging for alms were unknown in Biafran society. Therefore, all forms of disabilities and inequalities, which reduce the dignity of the individual or destroy his sense of person, have no place in the new Biafran social order. The Biafran revolution upholds the dignity of man. The Biafran revolution stands firmly against genocide, against any attempt to destroy a people, its security, its right to life, property and progress. Any attempt to deprive a community of its identity is abhorrent to the Biafran people. These noble ideals for the Biafran State should be contrasted with the current reality of the Nigerian state where certain groups are made to be second class citizens. A country where the ruling class comes from selective areas of the country and who lord it over all others. A country where religious intolerance is a state-sponsored program in which fundamental Islamic jihadists are prescribed the right to murder non-believers at the slightest opportunity. We absolutely refuse to remain in the man-made hell called Nigeria when the glorious alternative of Biafra continues to beckon. Biafra is our destiny and our right. Biafra shall come to stay for this is the people's will.
Biafran Foundation
___________________ achieve Biafra and show the difference Posts: 642 | From: Los Angeles, CA | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
“The servant-leader is servant first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. The best test is: do those served grow as persons: do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society; will they benefit, or, at least, not be further deprived?”
The Servant as Leader Robert K. Greenleaf
A comparison of leadership styles:
Motivation :
Since the end of Nigeria Biafra war, Igbo leadership has virtually been non-existent. In this project we attempt to compare and contrast other leadership styles including that of the Igbo traditional model in the hope of establishing why the Igbo collective model holds the most promise for Ndi Igbo both at home and in Diaspora.
Some forms of governments :
“Some authors, such as Vilfredo Pareto, Gaetano Mosca and Robert Michels believe that any political system will eventually evolve into an oligarchy (Iron law of oligarchy). According to this school of thought, modern democracies should be considered as elected oligarchies. In these systems, actual differences between viable political rivals are relatively small and strict limits are imposed (by the oligarchic elite) on what constitutes 'acceptable' and 'respectable' political positions. Furthermore, politicians' careers depend heavily on unelected economic and media elites.
autocracy - "rule by a single individual". meritocracy - "rule by those who most deserve to rule". While this has on the surface a nearly similar meaning to "aristocracy", the term "meritocracy" has usually implied a much more fluid form of government in which one is not considered "best" for life, but must continually prove one's "merit" in order to stay in power. plutocracy - "rule by the wealthy". In actual practice, aristocrats are often just plutocrats whose wealth allows them to portray their own virtues as the "best" ones. oligarchy - "rule by the few". Whether an aristocracy is also an oligarchy depends entirely upon one's idea of what are a "few". monarchy - "rule by a single individual". Historically, the vast majority of monarchs have been aristocrats themselves. However, they have also been very often at odds with the rest of the aristocracy, since it was composed of their rivals. The struggle between a ruling dynastic family and the other aristocratic families in the same country has been a central theme of medieval history. democracy - "rule by the people". For the past two centuries, democracy has often presented itself as the greatest enemy of aristocracy. The linguistic conflict between them began with the American Revolution ideal of all men being "created equal", quickly followed by the French Revolution (the first in Europe), and continued throughout the 19th century, occasionally flaring up in violent episodes such as the revolutions of 1848. Arguably, the end of the First World War in 1918 marked the final linguistic victory of "democracy" over "aristocracy" as a preferred term for government.
Monarchy Monarchy, (from the Greek monos, "one," and archein, "to rule") is a form of government that has a monarch as Head of State. One of the distinguishing characteristics of monarchy is that the Head of State usually reigns for life; in a republic, the Head of State (often called the president) is normally elected for a certain amount of time. There are currently 29 extant monarchies in the world.
The term monarchy is also used to refer to the people (especially the dynasty, also known as 'royalty') and institutions that make up the royal or imperial establishment, or to the realm over which the monarch reigns.
In most monarchies, the monarch serves as a symbol of continuity and statehood. Many monarchies are constituted by tradition or by codified law so that the monarch has little real politcal power, but in others, the monarch holds substantial power. In some cases, the symbolism of monarchy alongside the symbolism of democracy can lead to divisions over seemingly contradictory principles of sovereignty.
Monarchies are one of the oldest forms of government, with echoes in the leadership of tribal chiefs. Many monarchies began with the Monarch as the local representative and temporary embodiment of the deity: (King of Babylon). The Monarch often ruled at the pleasure of the deity and was overthrown or sacrificed when it became apparent that supernatural sanction had been withdrawn: emperor of China, Mayan kings, Achaemenid King of Kings of Persia. Other Monarchs derived their power by acclamation of the ruling or of the warrior caste of a clan or group of clans: Kings of the Franks, Roman emperors. Even where law is simply the monarch's will, the king must rule by custom.
Since 1800, many of the world's monarchies have ceased to have a monarch and become republics, or become parliamentary democracies. Democratic countries which retain monarchy have by definition limited the monarch's power, with most having become constitutional monarchies. In England, this process began with the Magna Carta of 1215, although it did not reach democratic proportions until after the Glorious Revolution in 1689. Among the few states that have absolute monarchies are Swaziland, Brunei, Bhutan, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. In Jordan and Morocco, the Monarch retains considerable power. There are also recent (2003) developments in Liechtenstein, wherein the regnant prince was given the Constitutional power to dismiss the government at will. Nepal saw several contradictory trends related to the violent rebel movement and the killings by the suicidal crown prince.
Oligarchy Oligarchy is a form of government where most or all political power effectively rests with a small segment of society (typically the most powerful, whether by wealth, family, military strength, ruthlessness, or political influence). The word oligarchy is from the Greek words for "few" (oligo) and "rule" (arkhos). Some political theorists have argued that all governments are inevitably oligarchies no matter the supposed political system.
Oligarchies are often controlled by a few powerful families whose children are raised and mentored to be heirs of the power of the oligarchy, often at some sort of expense to those governed. In contrast to aristocracy ("government by the 'best'"), this power may not always be exercised openly, the oligarchs preferring to remain "the power behind the throne", exerting control through economic means. Although Aristotle pioneered the use of the term as a synonym for rule by the rich, for which the exact term is plutocracy, oligarchy is not always a rule by wealth, as oligarchs can simply be a privileged group.
A society may become an oligarchy by default as an outgrowth of the shifting alliances of warring tribal chieftains, although any form of government may transform into an oligarchy at some point in its evolution. The most likely mechanism for this transformation is a gradual accumulation of otherwise unchecked economic power. Oligarchies may also evolve into more classically authoritarian forms of government, sometimes as the result of one family gaining ascendancy over the others. Many of the European monarchies established during the late Middle Ages began in this way.
Oligarchies can often become instruments of transformation, by insisting that monarchs or dictators share power, thereby opening the door to power-sharing by other elements of society. One example of this process occurred when English nobles banded together in 1215 to force a reluctant King John of England to sign the Magna Carta, a tacit recognition both of King John's waning political power and of the existence of an incipient oligarchy. As English society continued to grow and develop, the Magna Carta was repeatedly revised (1216, 1217, and 1225), guaranteeing greater rights to greater numbers of people, thus setting the stage for British constitutional monarchy.
A modern example of oligarchy could be seen in South Africa during the 20th century. Here, the basic characteristics of oligarchy are particularly easy to observe, since the South African form of oligarchy was based on race. After the Second Boer War, a tacit agreement was reached between English- and Afrikaans-speaking whites. Together, they made up about twenty percent of the population, but this small percentage had access to virtually all the educational and trade opportunities, and they proceeded to deny this to the black majority even further than before. Although this process had been going on since the mid-18th century, after 1948 it became official government policy and became known worldwide as apartheid. This lasted until the arrival of democracy in South Africa in 1994, punctuated by the transition to a democratically-elected government dominated by the black majority.
In some Latin American countries, the concept of oligarchy is extended to include governmental and military officials, without necessarily implying nepotism.
Some authors, such as Vilfredo Pareto, Gaetano Mosca and Robert Michels believe that any political system will eventually evolve into an oligarchy (Iron law of oligarchy). According to this school of thought, modern democracies should be considered as elected oligarchies. In these systems, actual differences between viable political rivals are relatively small and strict limits are imposed (by the oligarchic elite) on what constitutes 'acceptable' and 'respectable' political positions. Furthermore, politicians' careers depend heavily on unelected economic and media elites.
Autocracy Autocracy is a form of government where unlimited political power is held by a single individual. An emperor may rise to power through heredity, but is referred to as an autocrat rather than a monarch when his power overshadows his bloodline. The term autocrat is derived from the Greek word autokratôr (lit. "self-ruler", "ruler of one's self"). Today it is usually seen as synonymous with despot, tyrant and/or dictator, though each of these terms originally had a separate and distinct meaning (see their respective articles).
Autocracy and monocracy are considered synonyms by most dictionaries, although the term monocracy is more often used to refer to a form of government ruled by a monarch rather than any single ruler.
The principal titles of what modern historians call the "Roman emperors" were imperator, Caesar, and Augustus; the latter two words were transliterated into Greek as kaisar and augoustos, while the existing word autokratôr was substituted for the former. When the Emperor Heraclius introduced the "Byzantine" system of co-emperors, the senior emperor (or, in the absence of a co-emperor, the sole emperor) took the title autokratôr, although the junior emperor also began to take that title in the 14th century under the Palaeologi.
In keeping with the contention of the rulers of Imperial Russia that Moscow was "Third Rome" (after Constantinople and Rome), the formal title of the Russian Tsar was Imperator i Samodyerzhets Vserossiysky ("All-Russian Emperor and Autocrat"). The absolutist rule of the Russian Tsars is probably chiefly responsible for the modern meaning of the words "autocrat" and "autocracy".
Compare with oligarchy (rule by a minority, by a small group) and democracy (rule by the majority, by the people).
Democracy Democracy (from Greek δημοκρατία (demokratia), δημος (demos) the common people + κρατειν (kratein) to rule + the suffix ία (ia), literally "the common people rule") is a system where the population of a society controls the government. It may be narrowly defined as that of nation-state government specifically, or more broadly to describe a society as a whole, which can also exert political power and social power.
Democratic government aspires to serve under "the people" rather than ruling over them. This ideal is pursued by implementing some form of a voting system, usually involving indirect representation. It shares links with the concept of a republic.
Liberal democracy is defined as democracy over an entire society, and implies individual liberty and individual responsibility as a citizen of that society. It extends the concept of distributed power all of the way to individual citizens in their personal domains - personal sovereignty and private property tempered by civic duty. In such a society, sovereignty originates in the people and is delegated to government rather than vice versa.
Because democratic government and democratic society are inter-related and used interchangeably, they are often confused, usually when one expects all of the benefits of democratic society to follow from the mechanisms of democratic government. While a democratic society has a democratic government, the reverse is not always true. A democratic government, while preventing despotism of abuse of power by a governing minority, does not protect other minorities from social forces from other members of society with other forms of power that may be played out through plutocracy within an existing democratic government, or majoritarianism. Democratic governments may be "liberal", where fundamental rights of individuals in the minority are protected by law, or they may be "illiberal" where they are not.”
Communism
Communism refers to a conjectured future classless, stateless social organization based upon common ownership of the means of production, and can be classified as a multivariant branch of the broader socialist movement. Communism also refers to a variety of political movements which claim the establishment of such a social organization as their ultimate goal. Early forms of human social organization have been described as "primitive communism." However, communism as a political goal generally is a conjectured form of future social organization which has never been implemented. There is a considerable variety of views among self-identified communists. However, Marxism and Leninism, schools of communism associated with Karl Marx and of Vladimir Lenin respectively, have the distinction of having been a major force in world politics since the early 20th century. Class struggle plays a central role in the theory of Marxism. The establishment of communism is in this theory viewed as the culmination of the class struggle between the capitalist class, the owners of most of the capital, and the working class. Marx held that society could not be transformed from the capitalist mode of production to the communist mode of production all at once, but required a state transitional period which Marx described as the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat. The communist society Marx envisioned emerging from capitalism has never been implemented, and it remains theoretical. However, the term "Communism", especially when the word is capitalized, is often used to refer to the political and economic regimes under communist parties which claimed to be the dictatorship of the proletariat.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Servant-Leadership:
We consider how the ‘western world’ view Servant-Leadership before we consider OHACRACY, the Igbo form of Servant-Leadership that is thousands of years old.
“On Character and Servant-Leadership: Ten Characteristics of Effective, Caring Leaders
by Larry C. Spears, Chief Executive Officer The Greenleaf Center for Servant-Leadership
Our fundamental understanding of character has much to do with the essential traits exhibited by a person. In recent years there has been a growing interest in the nature of character and character education, based upon a belief that positive character traits can be both taught and learned. Many people today are familiar with the Character Counts! (sm) program of the Josephson Institute of Ethics. That program has been adopted by a number of schools and communities nationwide and teaches core values, which they call "Six Pillars of Character." Those six particular character values are: trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, and citizenship.
The nature of character and its relationship to leaders has also taken on increased significance in recent years. A number of noted leadership authors have looked at issues of a leader's character. James Hillman, in The Soul's Code: In Search of Character and Calling, describes the "invisible source of personal consistency, for which I am using the word 'habit,' psychology today calls character. Character refers to deep structures of personality that are particularly resistant to change." (p. 260).
The literature on leadership includes a number of different listings of character traits as practiced by leaders. I particularly like Warren Bennis's short list as contained in his book, On Becoming a Leader, in which he identifies, "vision, inspiration, empathy and trustworthiness" as key characteristics of effective leaders. (p. 140). Much of the leadership literature includes as an implicit assumption the belief that positive characteristics can-and-should be encouraged and practiced by leaders. Robert Greenleaf, the originator of the term, "servant-leadership," is someone who thought and wrote a great deal about the nature of servant-leadership and character.
Servant-Leadership and Character
The servant-leader is servant first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. The best test is: do those served grow as persons: do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society; will they benefit, or, at least, not be further deprived?
The Servant as Leader Robert K. Greenleaf
With that definition in 1970, retired AT&T executive Robert K. Greenleaf (1904-1990) coined the term servant-leadership and launched a quiet revolution in the way in which we view and practice leadership. Three decades later the concept of servant-leadership is increasingly viewed as an ideal leadership form to which untold numbers of people and organizations aspire. In fact, we are witnessing today an unparalleled explosion of interest in, and practice of, servant-leadership.
We are experiencing a rapid shift in many businesses and not-for-profit organizations--away from the more traditional autocratic and hierarchical models of leadership and toward servant-leadership as a way of being in relationship with others. Servant-leadership seeks to involve others in decision making, is strongly based in ethical and caring behavior, and it enhances the personal growth of workers while improving the caring and quality of organizational life.
The words servant and leader are usually thought of as being opposites. In deliberately bringing those words together in a meaningful way, Robert Greenleaf gave birth to the paradoxical term "servant-leadership." In the years since then, many of today's most creative thinkers are writing and speaking about servant-leadership as an emerging leadership paradigm for the twenty-first century. The list is long and includes: James Autry, Warren Bennis, Peter Block, John Carver, Stephen Covey, Max DePree, Joseph Jaworski, James Kouzes, Larraine Matusak, Parker Palmer, M. Scott Peck, Peter Senge, Peter Vaill, Margaret Wheatley, and Danah Zohar, to name but a few of today's cutting-edge leadership authors and advocates of servant-leadership. In her groundbreaking book on quantum sciences and leadership, Rewiring the Corporate Brain (Berrett-Koehler, 1997), Zohar goes so far as to state that, "Servant-leadership is the essence of quantum thinking and quantum leadership." (p. 146)
Ten Characteristics of a Servant-Leader
After some years of carefully considering Greenleaf's original writings, I have identified a set of ten characteristics of the servant-leader that I view as being of critical importance--central to the development of servant-leaders. My own work currently involves a deepening understanding of the following characteristics and how they contribute to the meaningful practice of servant-leadership. These ten characteristics include:
1. Listening: Leaders have traditionally been valued for their communication and decision making skills. Although these are also important skills for the servant-leader, they need to be reinforced by a deep commitment to listening intently to others. The servant-leader seeks to identify the will of a group and helps to clarify that will. He or she listens receptively to what is being said and unsaid. Listening also encompasses getting in touch with one's own inner voice. Listening, coupled with periods of reflection, are essential to the growth and well being of the servant-leader.
2. Empathy: The servant-leader strives to understand and empathize with others. People need to be accepted and recognized for their special and unique spirits. One assumes the good intentions of co-workers and colleagues and does not reject them as people, even when one may be forced to refuse to accept certain behaviors or performance. The most successful servant-leaders are those who have become skilled empathetic listeners.
3. Healing: The healing of relationships is a powerful force for transformation and integration. One of the great strengths of servant-leadership is the potential for healing one's self and one's relationship to others. Many people have broken spirits and have suffered from a variety of emotional hurts. Although this is a part of being human, servant-leaders recognize that they have an opportunity to help make whole those with whom they come in contact. In his essay, The Servant as Leader, Greenleaf writes, "There is something subtle communicated to one who is being served and led if, implicit in the compact between servant-leader and led, is the understanding that the search for wholeness is something they share."
4. Awareness: General awareness, and especially self-awareness, strengthens the servant-leader. Awareness helps one in understanding issues involving ethics, power and values. It lends itself to being able to view most situations from a more integrated, holistic position. As Greenleaf observed: "Awareness is not a giver of solace--it is just the opposite. It is a disturber and an awakener. Able leaders are usually sharply awake and reasonably disturbed. They are not seekers after solace. They have their own inner serenity."
5. Persuasion: Another characteristic of servant-leaders is reliance on persuasion, rather than on one's positional authority, in making decisions within an organization. The servant-leader seeks to convince others, rather than coerce compliance. This particular element offers one of the clearest distinctions between the traditional authoritarian model and that of servant-leadership. The servant-leader is effective at building consensus within groups. This emphasis on persuasion over coercion finds its roots in the beliefs of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)--the denominational body to which Robert Greenleaf belonged.
6. Conceptualization: Servant-leaders seek to nurture their abilities to dream great dreams. The ability to look at a problem or an organization from a conceptualizing perspective means that one must think beyond day-to-day realities. For many leaders, this is a characteristic that requires discipline and practice. The traditional leader is consumed by the need to achieve short-term operational goals. The leader who wishes to also be a servant-leader must stretch his or her thinking to encompass broader-based conceptual thinking. Within organizations, conceptualization is, by its very nature, the proper role of boards of trustees or directors. Unfortunately, boards can sometimes become involved in the day-to-day operations--something that should always be discouraged--and, thus, fail to provide the visionary concept for an institution.
Trustees need to be mostly conceptual in their orientation, staffs need to be mostly operational in their perspective, and the most effective executive leaders probably need to develop both perspectives within themselves. Servant-leaders are called to seek a delicate balance between conceptual thinking and a day-to-day operational approach.
7. Foresight: Closely related to conceptualization, the ability to foresee the likely outcome of a situation is hard to define, but easier to identify. One knows foresight when one experiences it. Foresight is a characteristic that enables the servant-leader to understand the lessons from the past, the realities of the present, and the likely consequence of a decision for the future. It is also deeply rooted within the intuitive mind. Foresight remains a largely unexplored area in leadership studies, but one most deserving of careful attention.
8. Stewardship: Peter Block (author of Stewardship and The Empowered Manager) has defined stewardship as "holding something in trust for another." Robert Greenleaf's view of all institutions was one in which CEO's, staffs, and trustees all played significant roles in holding their institutions in trust for the greater good of society. Servant-leadership, like stewardship, assumes first and foremost a commitment to serving the needs of others. It also emphasizes the use of openness and persuasion, rather than control.
9. Commitment to the growth of people: Servant-leaders believe that people have an intrinsic value beyond their tangible contributions as workers. As such, the servant-leader is deeply committed to the growth of each and every individual within his or her organization. The servant-leader recognizes the tremendous responsibility to do everything in his or her power to nurture the personal and professional growth of employees and colleagues. In practice, this can include (but is not limited to) concrete actions such as making funds available for personal and professional development, taking a personal interest in the ideas and suggestions from everyone, encouraging worker involvement in decision-making, and actively assisting laid-off employees to find other positions.
10. Building community: The servant-leader senses that much has been lost in recent human history as a result of the shift from local communities to large institutions as the primary shaper of human lives. This awareness causes the servant-leader to seek to identify some means for building community among those who work within a given institution. Servant-leadership suggests that true community can be created among those who work in businesses and other institutions. Greenleaf said, "All that is needed to rebuild community as a viable life form for large numbers of people is for enough servant-leaders to show the way, not by mass movements, but by each servant-leader demonstrating his or her unlimited liability for a quite specific community-related group."
These ten characteristics of servant-leadership are by no means exhaustive. However, they do serve to communicate the power and promise that this concept offers to those who are open to its invitation and challenge.
Interest in the meaning and practice of servant-leadership continues to grow. Hundreds of books, articles, and papers on the subject have now been published. Many of the companies named to Fortune magazine's annual listing of "The 100 Best Companies to Work For" espouse servant-leadership and have integrated it into their corporate cultures. As more and more organizations and people have sought to put servant-leadership into practice, the work of The Greenleaf Center for Servant-Leadership, now in its 36th year, continues to expand in order to help meet that need.
Servant-leadership characteristics often occur naturally within many individuals; and, like many natural tendencies, they can be enhanced through learning and practice. Servant-leadership offers great hope for the future in creating better, more caring, institutions.
References
Bennis, W. (1989). On Becoming a Leader. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Inc.
Greenleaf, R.K. (1977). Servant-Leadership: A Journey Into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.
Hillman, J. (1996). The Soul's Code: In Search of Character and Calling. New York: Random House.
Josephson, M. & Hanson, W. (Eds.). (1998). The Power of Character. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Kellerman, B. & Matusak, L. (Eds.). (2000). Cutting Edge: Leadership 2000. College Park: James MacGregor Burns Academy of Leadership.
Spears, L.C. (Ed.). (1998). Insights on Leadership: Service, Stewardship, Spirit and Servant-Leadership. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Zohar, D. (1997). Rewiring the Corporate Brain. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
This article first appeared in Concepts & Connections (Vol. 8, Issue 3, 2000), a newsletter of the National Clearninghouse for Leadership Programs, located at the University of Maryland.
The Robert K. Greenleaf Center for Servant-Leadership 770 Pawtucket Drive, Suite 200 ~ Westfield, IN, 46074 U.S.A. Phone: (317) 669-8050 ~ Fax: (317) 669-8055
Copyright 2002 The Robert K Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership All Rights Reserved Worldwide webmaster@greenleaf.org”
Igbo leadership - the Servant Leadership Model: ”OHACRACY”
“IN IGBO SOCIETY POWER BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE. Ndiigbo elect their own leaders and tell their leaders what to do and how to lead them. Ndi Igbo have never accepted "rulers", not even when the British imposed warrant chiefs on them
Describing the political philosophy and organization of the Igbo, Cronje in his book The World and Nigeria stated as follows:
"In the East indirect rule failed altogether. There were no big chiefs, emirates or empires, which could be adapted to the needs of British administrators. The Eastern people lived in village groups administered by councils which were presided over by senior men who held office by virtue of their personal ability as much as by age or lineage" [Cronje, S. 1972, The World and Nigeria, Sidgwick and Jackson, London]
Reporting on the position, status and influence of chiefs and natural rulers in the Eastern Region of Nigeria, G. I. Jones stated as follows:
“ ...the community particularly in the Ibo(Igbo) area is not prepared to surrender its legislative authority to any chiefs, elders or other traditional office holders...”
Individualism and Communitarism:
Philosophically, Ndi Igbo maintain a very delicate balance between INDIVIDUALISM and COMMUNITARISM.
Very early in the socialization process the Igbo child is taught that he is the master of his destiny. He learns that success in any task, which he or she undertakes, is his responsibility and that he will equally take personal responsibility for any failures. He is instructed to strive for excellence, success and status and is taught that his status in society will be the result of his personal achievement and not the result of any ascription.
In a rather paradoxical way Igbo Society also emphasizes COMMUNITAL relationship.
When they organize themselves into age grades, they undertake community projects such as building roads, hospitals, civic centers, health clinics etc. All these are meant to emphasize to the individual the indispensability of the group, the community to their survival. The community is not seen as just a collection of individuals. It is seen as a unique relationship in which the survival and happiness of the individual is intricately interwoven with the survival and happiness of the community to which the individual belongs.
Beginning with the family and extending outward to Umunne (extended family), Umunna (kindred), Village (Ogbe) and town (Obodo, Ala), Igbo society is seen not as a collection of individuals each with his own rights and liberties in an atomistic manner but rather as collections of individuals in groups that systematically and progressively become enlarged. The structure can be likened to concentric circles that expand outward in a systematic manner, the larger circles containing the smaller circles and yet allowing them to maintain their identities and structures and at the same time using the identities and structures of the smaller circles to maintain the integrity and strength of the larger circles in a rather symbolic manner. Just as symbiotic relationship in living organisms requires careful maintenance of this delicate balance for the survival of each organism, Igbo society require careful maintenance of this delicate balance for her survival. The importance of group affiliation in Igbo philosophy and worldview is captured in Igbo proverbs and idioms. For example, "Ofu osisi adi eme ofia." [A tree does not make a forest.] "Ofu onye nie onwe ya aka ya aputagi ukwu aputa." [If a person buries himself, one of his hands or legs must show above ground.] "Onye gbara umu nna ya mgba isi n'ebu ya aja aja" [He who wrestles with his kindred folk will have his hair covered with sand.] "Onye kwulu so ya, ijiji atagbue ya." [Even flies will devour him who stands alone.]
How is this apparent contradiction between individualism and communitarism resolved? Individualism provides the philosophical base for individual achievement and the strive towards excellence, while communitarism acts as a counterweight to the temptation so often abundant in selfish, survivalist, individualistic, ascendancy-inspired activities (survival of the fittest philosophy) to trample upon and possibly destroy others including relatives and friends in the scramble to get to the top.
Because an individual sees himself as an integral part of the community, he or she feels obligated to protect the welfare, integrity and honor of that community by not engaging in any acts that will be prejudicial to the good of the community, and by doing those things that will promote the welfare and survival of the community. The community on the other hand spreads its wings of protection and care over the individual, but wastes no time in calling an erring member of the community to order. On rare occasions it imposes such harsh sanction as ostracism or even banishment on an erring or recalcitrant member. This socialization enables an Igbo child early in life to develop the all-important principle of self-control in their daily activities. The delicate balance serves two purposes:
1.) It preserves the integrity of the community by shielding it from external and internal intrigues and acts of sabotage aimed at destroying that integrity.
2.) It protects the individual from destructive behaviors of other people as well as their own propensity towards self-destructive or community-destructive activities.
Thus the community protects and preserves the individual just as the individual protects and preserves the community.
Representation:
For example, if an Umunna (an extended family) is involved in a negotiation, consultation or conflict resolution with other groups at the level of the village or town (Ogbe, Ama, Obodo), the diokpa becomes the spokesperson for his Umunna. Consultation with members of his Umunna will precede all-important decisions that he will render. If he is requested to render an opinion on the spot by the Obodo (Town), or if he suspects that the opinion he is about to render will be regarded unfavorably by his Umunna, or if he is faced with a totally new development, that he was not prepared for, he will immediately request leave of the Obodo to consult with his Umunna through a procedure called "igba izu or izuzu", before rending the opinion. During the izu, which is usually done standing up in a circle a good distance away from the Assembly, all the members of the Umunna will have an opportunity to air their views on the issue at hand.
The discussion goes on for a few minutes and quickly they arrive at a consensus on what their leader should present as their view. When they get back to the assembly the diokpa or some other person delegated to present their view renders their opinion as clearly as he can. He will usually end by looking back at his Umunna who may be standing or sitting behind him, and intoning in a clear voice: "Okwa nu ya ibe anyi nu" or "okwa ihe unu kwuru" (is this what you resolved). And all the members will answer in unison, "iyaa obu ya" (yes it is).
The diokpa maintains his authority , power and status by virtue of his credibility, good judgement and excellent performance. He does not expose his umunna to ridicule by engaging in corruption, immorality, or injustice. He does not let the Umunna suffer humiliation, injury, injustice or other form of disability at community deliberations. He will do anything and everything within legal limits to protect the interest, rights and privileges of the Umunna and to ensure that their voice is not lost at the Community Assembly. If he does this, his Umunna will be very proud of him even when they lose a case. If for any reason the diokpa consistently exposes the Umunna to ridicule, injustice, humiliation, injury or other forms of disability, the power and authority given to him could be taken away by the Umunna and handed over to another person, who the Umunna believes is capable of protecting their interest. Usually, it will be the next oldest person, but sometimes it could be a younger person who may have proved his capacity to represent the Umunna effectively. If the diokpa commits a minor infraction, or engages in behavior unexpected of his elevated status, the Umunna will reprimand him respectfully.
This same procedure of representation is repeated at the level of the Town Union or Community Assembly. Each town is made up of several villages. The Town Union government is made up of officers elected from all the villages. Each village elects a stipulated number of representatives to the Town government. In electing the representatives to the town government, each village makes deliberate effort to have at least one representative from each Umunna where possible. These representatives know that it is their responsibility to project and protect the interest of the village at the level of the Town government. They take this responsibility very seriously aware that if they fail to project the views of the village, they will not only be recalled but may also face severe socio-psychological sanction such as shaming or even economic sanction such as a fine. In addition to representing their village, they are aware that they are ambassadors of their Umunna.
Therefore they strive very hard to avoid any actions that could portray their Umunna in bad light e.g. taking bribes, being a drunk. Because of the importance, which Ndi Igbo attach to the "representative" function or duty, they adopt very stringent parameters in choosing these representatives. Such parameters include demonstrated wisdom, knowledge, honesty, oratory, and other achievement characteristics like bravery, wealth, titles, and valor in battle. It is important to emphasize that unlike what happens in Western democracies where money and affluence seem to be the determining characteristics for election to representative office, in Igbo culture, the value or quality of a person is not determined in dollar and cents or naira and kobo. It is determined by the individual performance on the assigned task. Therefore money and material possession do not constitute supreme parameters in selecting an individual to represent his Umunna or Village.
Because an individual’s wealth or financial status does not play an overwhelming role in determining an individual’s suitability for election to representative office, the group the individual is representing does not feel overawed or intimidated to recall the representative any time they conclude that he is not living up to their expectation. In a similar way, the deference and respect accorded an elder in the socio-political arrangement in Igbo Society is not seen as willy-nilly obedience to the elder. No. The elder strives at all times to earn, maintain and therefore retain this respect through exemplary conduct at all times. Failure to do so might result in loss of respect, status and withdrawal of this authority by the group.”
Leadership Series
By Ekwe Nche Research Institute/Organization
Comparison (Message from the Ancients):
The common thread from this study can be summarized as follows:
1. “Nku di namba na eyelu mba nri - The foundation of each system is built on the culture, tradition and history of the people” .
2. Odi be ndi - The philosophical basis of the world view of the citizens.
3. Uwa Awughi Otu - An outright rejection of the “ONE SIZE FITS ALL” Mentality is obvious. ”The ancient lgbo contemplated this phenomenon of worldview and concluded that there is no universal worldview. Uwa Awughi Otu! Different men, different worldviews! One man, one worldview!” Maazi Osuagwu (Ph.D.)
4. Igbo leadership concept totally rejects Ndi Ochichi (Rulership), but embraces Ndi Ndu hence unwavering courage based upon knowledge of self, culture, philosophy and tradition (mara onwe gi).
5. Keen sense of wisdom (vision, outright imagination, mastery of details), justice and self-control. You must be armed with “Ofo na Ogu”, “Ezi okwu bu Ndu”, without the spirit of fairness, love, equity, and justice, self-control; leadership transforms to rulership.
6. There must exist a cooperative spirit, willingness to assume full responsibility and above all sacrifice, humility and selflessness.
7. Must at all times be servant of the people, more emphasis on deeds , less emphasis on titles; the competent leader requires no “title” to give him the respect of OHA.
4. The present chaotic nature of the modern African states and organizations built on “ONE SIZE FITS ALL” vindicates [3].
VISION:
IGBO CULTURE: Establishment of IGBO house in every city where there are Ndi Igbo. To actively research, document and practice IGBO culture and tradition.
IGBO EDUCATION: Establishment of IGBO schools in every city where there are Ndi Igbo, with a strong emphasis in speaking, reading and writing IGBO language.
IGBO FAMILY: Re-establishment and emphasizing the IGBO family values and the upbringing of our children in IGBO ways.
IGBO LANGUAGE: Establishment of IGBO newspapers, radio, television and cinema, theater, Internet and other communications services.
IGBO LEADERSHIP: Re-establishment of the True and Time Tested Collective Leadership models with the Elder-statesman/stateswoman as the highest achievable position, a position that can only be attained through a life long service to Ndi IGBO.
IGBO MONEY: Promotion of the strong economic financial growth and success of Ndi IGBO worldwide with emphasis in establishing and developing IGBO banks, companies, industries, real estate, etc.
IGBO NATION: Establishment of the Republic of Biafara based on Igbo culture, tradition and philosophy.
Ekwe Nche Research Institute/Organization P. O. Box 408250 Chicago, IL 60640 Phone: 773-206-9401 Website:www.ekwenche.org E-mail: ekwenche@hotmail.com Ndi_nche@ekwenche.org
Posts: 166 | From: chicago | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
“The servant-leader is servant first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. The best test is: do those served grow as persons: do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society; will they benefit, or, at least, not be further deprived?”
The Servant as Leader Robert K. Greenleaf
****
Can the blind lead the blind? How do we define Igbo leadership? Do we have any idea of what Igbo leadership is or should be or are we grapping at straws? Is it possible to proffer solutions to what ails a people without the slightest idea of who or what the people are? Is it possible to use as example the failed leadership of yore as examples of the way forward, instead of as example of not repeating the same mistakes that continue to mislead Ndi Igbo? Can one use the experience of other nations with different culture, philosophies and traditions as example of the way forward?
May Chi Ukwu, save Igbo from intellectuals who have lost touch with the true Igbo worldview, who have no idea that the solutions to Igbo problems is a return to the path left us by our fore-parents, those geniuses that gave the world, ‘Civilization’, ‘Rule of Law’, ‘Democracy’, and ‘One God’, who now tell us that Igbo must now be like other nations – TUFIAKWA!
****
Saturday INDEPENDENT
Ohanaeze Think Tank And The Burden of Igbo Leadership 6th May By Sam Egburonu, Assistant Editor
On Wednesday, April 26, 2006, a group of young Igbo intellectuals and journalists spent hours discussing the political development of the Igbo race and the current crisis in Ohanaeze, the apex socio-political and cultural organisation of Ndigbo. Venue of the breakfast meeting was the palatial home of one of the active members of Ohanaeze Think Tank, located within Ogudu GRA in Lagos. The theme, though not clearly marked out, revolved round the socio-political and economic fortunes of the Igbo race. Discussed informally and objectively, the issues garnered more depth because the meeting held at this time, when the crisis within Ohanaeze is threatening to, not only destroy Ohanaeze but also, make a mess of the political gains so far achieved by Ndigbo since after the Nigeria/Biafra civil war.
The chief host, Chief Sidney Dike, effectively set the mood of discussion when he used seemingly common, personal experiences to illustrate the deprivations, and the frustrations that have been the lot of the average Igbo man in the Nigerian political family. In the same breath, he spoke so movingly of the fighting spirit that has, for long, contributed both in the survival of the Igbo adult and in the seeming hatred of the average Igbo man and woman by other tribes. Are the Igbos forced to suffer these only because they happened to be Ndigbo or is there anything in the worldview of Ndigbo, and in their fighting spirit that has made the other brothers and sisters in the Nigerian family to remain resolute on closely watching the survivalist tendencies of an average Igbo man? Why is it that in the present day political equation, even before, Igbo political leaders and by extension, Ndigbo, always seemed shot changed? Does it have something to do with the natural character of an Igbo man or has this robust tribe been simply unlucky in the Nigerian family?
Even before that meeting, it has been on record that the search for the true understanding of the Igbo spirit in the context of the perception of the average Igbo man by other Nigerians date back beyond this Republic and the current leadership crisis within Ohanaeze.
For example, former Vice President, Dr. Alex Ekwueme, in an article, Igbos And The Nigeria Of Our Vision, published in Daily Times, in 1998, said, “In fact, the high level of Igbo political activism produced a backlash, as the colonial administration conjured up the bogey of ‘Igbo domination’ as a propaganda to check the surge of nationalism that engulfed Nigeria in the early 1950s. The bogey gained credence, and struck fear into other Nigerians. The result was that the Igbo man was sometimes seen as the ‘evil spirit,’ which had to be contained or exorcised.”
Going back into history, Ekwueme said, “The period, 1945-1966, was a golden era in the political history of Ndigbo in Nigeria. Our revered Rt. Hon. Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, a pan Africanist, who took over the leadership of the National Council of Nigeria and Cameroons (NCNC), as it was then called, after the death of the great nationalist, Herbert Macaulay, was at the forefront of Nigeria’s struggle for independence, and this provided the historic catalyst that precipitated Igbo political activism.”
Ekwueme regretted that after the golden era, when, “The Igbo with their unquenchable spirit found full expression,” the Igbo had experienced major reverses. As he puts it: “The Igbo economic, bureaucratic and political reverses have a common origin; they are traceable to the Nigerian civil war-1966-1970.” He particularly identified and discussed ‘three revealing areas: The first, which he described as the most devastating, was the creation of a new Federalism in Nigeria, based on states. “The inequities and injustices of states’ creation exercised by successive Nigerian Governments have resulted in gross Igbo under-representation in all federal institutions,” he said.
The second and the third reverses he identified had to do with the fate of Igbo soldiers during and after the civil war. Even when some of them were reabsorbed through the ‘No Victor, No Vanquished’ policy, “they had lost much seniority and were psychologically ill-equipped to play any significant roles in the events which later unfolded as the military exercised a commanding influence in the politics of 1970-1979; and 1983-1999.” The consequence of this, added to the fact that Igbo youths were not available to be recruited in the Nigeria Defence Academy (NDA) during the war, he said, have been very weighty.
As has been observed over the years, this reality has continued to haunt Ndigbo and their political leaders. Even some of their most outspoken political leaders have once in a while admitted that the political fate of the Igbo race seem to have been precariously hanged on either her relationship with the other tribes, or the perception of her by the other tribes in Nigeria. Sometime in May, 1998, Chief Arthur Nwankwo, who was then the Leader of the Eastern Mandate Union, argued that, “It is very remote for an Igboman or woman to successfully aspire for the presidency if Chief Abiola’s mandate is lost; that is become buried by the self-succession and self-perpetuation goal of the present military dictatorship.” In an article, Igbo, Nationality Question And Struggle For Democracy, Nwankwo linked the struggle for the realization of Abiola’s mandate with that of the future of Nigerian democracy and the fate of the average Igboman in the country’s political equation. Acknowledging this reverse, Justice Chukwudifu Oputa, in a lecture, entitled, Ndigbo: The Way Forward, delivered in 2004 at the Ndigbo Lagos Dinner Party, identified some signposts on the way forward. They included revival of Ndigbo’s thirst and quest for education; free and fair discussion of issues affecting Igbo interest; revaluation of our values and putting wealth into its proper place; plus good and purposeful leadership. He pointed out the need to close ranks under an efficient and purposeful leadership to have a sense of direction. “We Ndigbo need, desperately need such leadership for us to find the way forward and the necessary discipline on the part of the followership to painfully, if need be, follow the way forward,” he said.
With the current struggle for power in 2007, and the emergent divisions in the ranks of the Igbo race, these questions have again come to the fore. It would be recalled that when in 1999, Dr. Alex Ekwueme managed to mobilise what has been described as the most formidable Igbo support for an Igbo Presidential aspirant since the days of the late Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, many predicted that the dream of producing a Nigerian President of Igbo extraction would be realised then. The prediction was based on Ekwueme’s role in the struggle against military dictatorship, his pioneering role in the formation of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party, PDP; his influence both within Igboland and across the country and the fact that he was in the right party and had made all the necessary political sacrifices expected to put the presidential ticket on his laps. But just when everyone thought Ekwueme would be given the ticket, General Olusegun Obasanjo was released from prison and handed over the Presidential ticket of PDP, by a clique, which claimed to be protecting the interest of the victims of the June 12 Presidential annulment. Besides the general disillusionment the sudden desertion would have caused Ekwueme, close observers said he was utterly shocked to realise that the political coup that denied him the presidential ticket was planned and executed with the active support of a lot of Igbo political elite, including members of his inner caucus.
Given this kind of scenerio, which has always been re-enacted whenever the political fate of Ndigbo was at stake, interested Igbo intellectuals and youths have been at a loss over the real problems militating against Igbo political growth? This dilemma played up even more when it became obvious recently that the Ohanaeze Ndigbo, which has managed to garner much political stature under the leadership of Professor Joe Irukwu, was facing a major crisis arising from a controversial tenure debate.
So, it was in the light of this development that the April meeting was organised. In a way, the issues discussed in that unique breakfast meeting and some of the resolutions reached may help to find further answers to these questions.
According to Chief Dike, Ohanaeze Think Tank “constitute the inner caucus of Ohanaeze Ndigbo and as the think tank, helps in shaping policies in the organisation. He admitted the concern of the group over the current crisis in Ohanaeze and explained that the group was moving to resolve the crisis and save Ohanaeze and Ndigbo’s socio-economic and political fortunes.
One of the ways the Ohanaeze Think Tank expects to tackle the current political dilemma of Ndigbo was to re-examine the traditional attitude of the average Igbo man with the view of determining whether or not such attitudes have paid off over the years. The intellectual arm of the Ohanaeze have undertaken some painstaking research over the attitudes of the Igbo man and an average Igbo political leader, vis-à-vis the political successes and failures of the Igbo race in Nigerian political context.
Symbolised by the general militant concept of Nzogbu Nzogbu, Enyi Mba, non compromising and extremely open and aggressive worldview of the Igboman, it was canvassed at the breakfast meeting that if generally accepted by the people, this attitude, and several others like it might be reviewed.
On the Ohanaeze leadership crisis, that has pitched Chief Joe Irukwu-led National Executive against some groups led by Professor Ben Nwabueze and others, it was agreed that a lot needed to be done to re-orient the political worldview of an average Igbo elite, if the Igbo must move forward. While frowning at a development that would bring about division amongst Ohanaeze leaders at a time like this, most of the participants agreed for example that it was wrong for Ohanaeze to continue to pretend that the organisation was not a political umbrella of Ndigbo. It was said that until the leadership of Ohanaeze understands and assumes this fatherly role for all partisan Igbo politicians and the entire Igbo race, at home and in the Diaspora, the race would not move forward. This wise, it was argued that though Ohanaeze has acquired political stature, the leadership seem to be politically shy or unprepared.
This kind of unfortunate situation must of necessity put Igbo race in political disadvantage. In that context, Ohanaeze was widely compared with Afanifere in the South-West and Arewa Consultative Forum in the North, and most of the speakers insisted that Ohanaeze must learn and understand that these ethnic nationality groups in the South-West and in the North have all along been serving as the political engine room of the various zones thereby making it possible to harmonise divergent views and come up with a united voice.
A situation where Ohanaeze continues to act as if one could truthfully extricate the political destiny of Ndigbo from its socio-cultural destiny was vehemently condemned. The point being that Ohanaeze must quickly realise and own up to the truth that its role goes beyond socio-cultural and must include that of the political umbrella of Ndigbo. It was the belief of most of the participants that it was this new awareness that would make it possible for the leaders of Ohanaeze to abandon the petty selfish interests that are currently fanning the ambers of division with which the enemies of Ndigbo had already made fun of the race. The participants also warned that if political godfathers succeed in using leadership tussle to disorganise Ohanaeze, they would have succeeded in disorganising the entire Igbo race, politically. This explains why the current tussle in Ohanaeze must be immediately contained, most of the participants said.
As Chief Sidney revealed, the Ohanaeze Think Tank has already lined up action plans geared at repositioning Ohanaeze on one part and Ndigbo in the body politics of Nigeria.
Posts: 166 | From: chicago | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
