Deconstructing Aristotle’s Idiot, Tribesman, Citizen Categorization: Why only the Naive/Gullible Qualify as ‘Citizens’ of post 1914 Nigeria

Wale Adeleke

MaTaZ ArIsInG
Dallas, Texas

A critique/response to The Danger of Stupid Idiots & Aristotle’s Categorization. See below.

Aristotle’s categorization of people in a society —the “idiots, tribesmen/tribalists, and citizens” concept— is frequently employed by those who criticize tribalism and vilify tribalists while simultaneously extolling the virtues of individuals, including themselves, who they claim have transcended the supposed pettiness of the idiot and tribesmen classes to attain the esteemed status of the citizen class.

The uncritical wholesale application of Aristotle’s categorization to Nigerian society, devoid of any contextualization as routinely espoused, exemplifies a classic case of professing ignorance, demonstrating that, while the adage “half a loaf is better than no bread” may apply to bread, it is inapplicable in matters of knowledge, as half-knowledge is worse than ignorance.

To fully grasp the essence of the issues, it is essential to clarify what “tribes” meant in Aristotle’s time, as it significantly differs from our modern understanding of tribes. By examining the concept of tribes in ancient Greece, we can begin to appreciate that all of us, with minor exception —both individuals and nation-states alike— including the vast majority of clear eyed rational thinking intellectuals are, predominantly, tribalists, as the term was understood during Aristotle’s era, leaving only the naive and gullible in the citizen category.

Firstly, in ancient Greece, people shared a common ancestry, tracing their origins to the mythical figure Hellen. They identified themselves as Hellenes, referring to non-Greeks collectively as “barbarians.” Contrast this with contemporary Nigeria, where the Yoruba trace their ancestry to the mythical figure Odùduwà, while other ethnic groups have their unique ancestral narratives.

Secondly, today, tribes are associated with distinct ancestries, diverse cultures, and unique traditions. However, in ancient Greece, tribalism was more about political and to a lesser degree, cultural differences rather than ethnic or racial distinctions. People identified themselves by their city-state, or polis, rather than larger ethnic groups.

Essentially, tribes represented groups with shared political, and, socio-economic interests, not ethnic ancestry.

In terms of tribe defined by shared political interests , the modern-day equivalent in Nigeria would be political parties, so we would have the APC, PDP, LP, and SDP tribe. In the USA, there is the Republican tribe, which worships at the altar of infallible Leviathan, DJT.

In terms of shared socio-economic interests, the Nigerian tribe by this definition could be those who abuse public office to misappropriate the commonwealth. Their unifying factor is ethno-religious agnostic, but solely the shared interest in exploiting public resources and fleecing the public treasury. If in doubt, take a look at the list of celebrated icons of industry with billions of non-performing loans that have now become nationalized debt to be managed by AMCON.

Lest it appears as if the concept of tribe in Aristotle’s time refers only to kleptocrats in public office and debtors in the private sector with enough clout to take loans, refuse to pay, keep the loot, and stand idly by while debt is nationalized to be paid by the poor in the society, it is essential to note that Aristotle’s categorization of tribes also includes groups with redeeming qualities.

In the private sector, this includes groups with shared socio-economic interests that transcend ethnicity or tribe, similar to modern organizations such as the NLC, NBA, NMA, Chambers of Commerce, and industry lobbying groups.

In intergovernmental relations, what does the “America First” or “American Interest First” policy mean when the USA uses it to justify its support of the Gaza genocide, seizure of US dollars belonging to Afghanistan, Iran, Libya, North Korea, just to mention a few, and support for illegal regime changes in other countries? In which category does America belong as it excuses and justifies its acts of terrorism all over the world? Tribesman. That’s it.

At the intergovemental level, within the European Union (EU), member countries commit to the collective EU agenda (citizenship) yet advocate for advantageous positions for their respective countries, such as agricultural subsidies (tribesmanship). Stripped to its basics, the entire BREXIT issue was about tribalism, even though it was framed as control of immigration.

At the national level, in the United States, Senators from constituencies with defense companies advocate for increased defense budgets to benefit their local industries and constituents. Which category does the senator belong. Citizen or tribesman? Tribesman, of course.

In Nigeria, a country with diverse ethnic groups, each possessing unique cultural, linguistic, and historical characteristics, compounded by intra- and inter-ethnic rivalries spanning generations, applying Aristotle’s categorization informed by or derived from a nearly ethnically homogeneous Greek society is simply inapplicable.

Building a unified nation from such diversity lies in acknowledging the imperatives of Nigeria’s ethnic diversity rather than engaging in futile attempts at de-ethnicization by vilifying the “idiot” or “tribesmen” category.

Since nationality is inherent to one’s identity and inalienable, it often commands greater allegiance than citizenship, a mere legal concept. In a multi-ethnic society like Nigeria, where issues of national citizenship versus ethnic nationality are still evolving, the tribesman/citizen hybrid status is more realistic.

Rather than adopting a zero-sum analytical model that treats both interests as mutually exclusive, the hybrid model seeks to harmonize these interests.

Applying Aristotle’s “idiot, tribesman, citizen” categorization in a multi-ethnic society like Nigeria only serves to promote a de-ethnicization agenda that strips people of their ethnic identity in public affairs. In contrast, the hybrid approach fosters harmonious coexistence by encouraging individuals to embrace both their ethnic and national identities depending on the context.

Recognizing diversity, rather than denying it, is crucial for achieving unity. The hybrid model allows people to identify with their ethnic roots while recognizing their roles and responsibilities as citizens of a larger nation.

This approach is similar to how U.S. officials, particularly Senators regardless of party affiliation, advocate for American international interests as citizens while championing policies in domestic affairs as both citizens and representatives of their constituencies.

In the public sphere, the government policy of making state of origin, rather than state of residence, an indispensable prerequisite for admission to public schools, employment in the public sector, and accessing a broad range of public services inadvertently reinforces ethnic allegiances, leading to ethnic politics and inequalities.

In the private sphere, a society lacking a consistent distinction between a tribesman and a citizen, where one group claims citizenship while residing in other ethnic regions only to revert to their tribal identity within both the host community and their own ethnic territory, it is unrealistic to expect individuals to abandon their ethnic interests for a self-destructive national interest.

In a multi-ethnic society where one ethnic group thrives and prospers in other groups’ territories while denying the same accommodation to people of different ethnicities in their own tribal area, inequality and imbalance inevitably arise. When Tribe A benefits from integration and prosperity in other tribes’ territories but refuses to extend the same hospitality in their homeland, it fosters a climate of unfairness and resentment.

In such a society where ethnic affiliation and state of origin are the primary organizing principles, only the naive and gullible would prioritize citizenship over ethnic nationality identity.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER NOW

Support MATAZ ARISING’ journalism of integrity and credibility.

Good journalism ensure the possibility of a good society, an accountable democracy, and a transparent government.

We ask you to consider making a modest support to this noble endeavour.

0.00USD

Amount
0.00

TEXT AD: To advertise here – Email ad@matazarising.com

LATEST POSTS