Efio-Ita Nyok |17 August 2015 |4:03am
The advent of Sen. Prof. Benedict Ayade, the Executive Governor of Cross River State, on the political scene of the state as governor, has been characterised by a new form of policy approach, notable among which is the rave of the moment, the trending Signature Projects which comprise three basic features:
1. A 240km Super(dual capacity) Highway from Calabar to Obudu
2. Deep Seaport in Akpabuyo LGA, &
3. Calabar Garment Factory.
These projects, if accomplished, would be what Ben Ayade would wish to be remembered for sequel to his exit from government, reason why they are tagged 'legacy projects'.
However, the proposal of the Legacy Projects as it is otherwise called has incited a handful of reactions: on the one hand, are commendations for the conception of such a laudable idea(even the worst critics admits that it is a well thought out idea); while on the other hand, are the sternest criticisms perceived to be an ill wish against the materialisation of Ayade's pet projects. It is with regards to the latter that I am being compelled to write this paper. Put differently, the question which this article attempts to respond to may be couched thus: Are the critics of Sen. Prof. Ben Ayade's Signature Projects, naysayers? Or, should the plethora of criticisms that have attended the said pet projects be perceived as an ill wish against its materialisation?
It is in an attempt to rationalise the materialisation of Ayade's Signature Projects in view of the perceived goodwill of its critics/criticisms that the intellectual temper of G. W. F. Hegel will be invoked. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831 ) is the influential German philosopher of the idealist bent who was notable for the concept of Dialectics. Ordinarily, in Plato's Republic 'the dialectical method is discourse between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject, who wish to establish the truth of the matter guided by reasoned arguments'.
Albeit, Hegel's dialectic contends that reality is characterised by three processes, namely, thesis, antitheses and synthesis. The 'thesis' refers to the initial stage of a thing which generate a contradiction referred to as the 'antithesis', both the thesis and its contradiction in the antithesis blend themselves into a resolution called the 'synthesis'. That is to say, in the synthesis the tension generated between the thesis and its antithesis is resolved. Again, it should be noted that one salient feature of this triadic reality is that the "thesis-antithesis-synthesis' approach gives the sense that things or ideas are contradicted or opposed by things that come
from outside them. To the contrary, the fundamental notion of Hegel's dialectic is that things or ideas have internal contradictions. From Hegel's point of view, analysis or
comprehension of a thing or idea reveals that underneath its apparently simple identity or unity
is an underlying inner contradiction'(Wikipedia).
To instantiate the above Hegelian claim, let's take the example of sociopolitical events in Nigeria's fourth republic(1999-present). In 1999, the PDP assumed the leadership of the center and was the dominant political party in the country. It enjoyed the allegiance of two-third of the 36 states. From informal speculations it had boasted of wishing to rule the country for 50years. Unknown to her that she was only a political thesis which would logically incite a contradiction in the antithetical APC. No metaphor best described this role of the APC other than 'change'. And majority of Nigerians keyed into it. We are to expect a synthesis but the dimension is not the concern of this paper. We have a similar trend in the United States where we have the interplay of the Republican Party and the Democratic Party both acting at one instance and the other as thesis and antithesis interchangeably.
To localise this argument within the foci of Ayade's Legacy Projects and its critics. Let us posit that the Signature Projects represent the thesis. If this is assumed to be true then Ayade's pet projects was bound to incite contradiction(s). This contradiction must emanate from within not without. The seeming serenity of anything doesn't rule out internal contradiction. And the contradiction, internal as it were, isn't geared at negating the fulfilment of the projects. In this case, the antithetical contradiction is represented by the critics/criticism of the said projects. Logically then, there was bound to be tension between the thesis and antithesis. This is beside being logical, natural.
Ayade's pet projects cannot be immune to criticism – whether constructive or destructive. This tension would have to be further resolved in the synthesis. However, our perceptions do not see this big picture especially the third resolutory phase of synthesis. We unfortunately halt at the second phase of contradiction and therefore label the critics and their critical wares as being enemies and inimical respectively to his Excellency's proposal. This is obviously incongruous! Accordingly, instead of taking the antithesis/critics positively by looking at the genuine concerns the latter raises, we try to cushion the dear proposal from the scathing character of the critic and fail to introduce changes. When we thus fail to incorporate the role of the critic within the general infrastructure of the Legacy Projects we in other words say there should not be a resolution. The projects therefore is bound to fail.
Sen. Prof. Ben Ayade's Signature Projects despite its lofty conception can't be said to be devoid of weaknesses. And the weaknesses of the projects have been highlighted by critics notable among which are Mr. Paul Ifere and Barr. Joseph Odok among others. Irrespective of whatsoever may be informing their critical bent it should be emphasised for the umpteen time that these gentlemen as well as their critical wares occupy an indispensable role in the actualisation or better still resolution of the much talked about Signature Projects. The faster we recognise and admit this reality the better for us and the safe landing of the projects.
To the best of my knowledge, Ayade and his team are yet to incorporate the genuine concerns raised by their criticisms: that is to say, we are at the second stage, inferring that there is tension between the proposal and the criticisms. There is yet to be resolution. Resolution comes in when the projects is reconceived or reconciled with the object of the criticism(s). It stands to reason then that Ayade's pet projects is still half baked being in the second phase of contradiction(it has been scientifically contradicted or negated and bares the less likelihood to succeed). Ben Ayade's signature projects should not be the governor's sole idea(he did not elect himself to the office of governor), it should be a collective idea of both he and his critics and by extension all Cross Riverians. It's at this stage that it becomes a robust, 'resolved' or synthesised idea bound by all means and standards to succeed.
Ayade should consider modifying his Legacy Projects in view of the criticisms that have attended it. His critics should not be perceived as enemies; rather, it should be appreciated that any given reality incites internal contradictions. Critics of the Ben Ayade's Signature Projects are internal contradictions that allow for a balanced existence of the said projects. If there is no conceptual robustness to the projects, as occasioned by criticisms/critics, then there would not be a realistic materialisation.
