By Douglas Anele

A few days ago, I was discussing with a colleague who is a Professor at the University of Lagos. Along the line, he told me that some of the things I wrote concerning our union, the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) and its proclivity to indefinite strikes made his stomach churn.

I challenged him to state any of the propositions I asserted in the essays he was referring to which was false or inaccurate. He did not; but he reminded me that indefinite strike is the only language Nigerian governments, including the present one headed by a former lecturer, President Goodluck Jonathan, understand.

I tried to convince my interlocutor that whenever Nigerians hear about ASUU, their minds are immediately drawn to indefinite strikes, and that the image of our union as a “strike engine” must be changed if it is to make profound positive contribution to university education in the country.

Unfortunately, we could not conclude the debate, because my colleague was in a hurry to attend a meeting. Thus, in this essay I ventilate the views which I wanted to defend had the discussion reached its logical conclusion even as ASUU, regrettably I must add, may eventually call out its members nationwide on an indefinite strike. Before I articulate the areas ASUU must initiate a paradigm-shift urgently in order not to be swept away by the blizzard of irrelevance, I should first of all clear some obfuscating brambles on the way.

Jonathan and his Education Team

It is disappointing that in a controversial matter such as indefinite strikes which paralyses academic activities in public universities, my colleagues and I who urge caution and circumspection on the matter are subjected to unwarranted obloquy by the vociferous majority who dogmatically support indefinite strike actions.

It is even more nauseating that academics who ought to know that criticism is the lifeblood of authentic intellectualism feel bad when one of their own publicly voices genuine concerns about the damage indefinite strikes are inflicting on our troubled “Ivory Towers.”

Indeed, the fundamentalist manner some strikemania lecturers verbally abuse others on the opposing camp is a cause for serious concern. Of course, as in any controversial and complex matter, the strike issue is better handled by dispassionate presentation of various positions in a civilised atmosphere for intellectual exchanges, after which superior logic should prevail.

However, to some die-hard or dyed-in-the-wool supporters of the strike option, any contrary position, no matter how well argued, must be stifled with ad hominems, name-calling and jejune vituperations.

Again and again, some lecturers, during debates on the best way to actualise ASUU’s vision for world-class university education in the country, become too emotionally charged, and without good reasons talk as if they are the onochies or omo niles of ASUU, as if they have greater stakes in the progress of the university system than those who oppose repeated recourse to indefinite strikes.

In 2009, when the ogbanje of strike reared its ugly disruptive head, I suggested that ASUU should produce well-documented evidence to show that strikes have been beneficial to the university system as a whole, not just to the emoluments of lecturers.

Not surprisingly, my candid proposal was passed over in silence, which confirmed my suspicion that either ASUU leadership was not yet ready for the rigorous research required for arriving at a scientific decision on strikes or that the outcome of such investigation would confirm what many lecturers had long suspected but are unwilling to admit publicly, that is, that indefinite strikes have been detrimental to the system despite improvement in salaries since 1992.

Unless we have lost our bearing due to dogmatic adherence to outmoded pseudo-revolutionary unionism and prefer to swim in the murky waters of delusionary self-importance and wily hypocrisy, as academics we should insist on scientific facts concerning the totality of consequences flowing from strikes, so that our response in future would be based on verifiable data, not on wishful thinking, hope and collective egoism.

At any rate, irrespective of the abuse that will be directed at me by some colleagues for saying this, it is an index of the decay in the system that lecturers would be content to adopt the same disruptive strategy repeatedly without seeking confirmatory evidence of its positive effects on teaching, learning and research.

Moreover, if indeed we really love teaching and research, why do an increasing number of academics eagerly abandon the classrooms, their students at both undergraduate and post-graduate levels, libraries and laboratories to take up political appointments, including the position of Special Assistant, from inferior people who manage to become local government chairmen, commissioners, ministers, governors and others up in the political ladder?

How many lecturers actively encourage their children to take after them despite the tough working conditions in our universities, based on the conviction that money is not everything and that many significant additions to knowledge have been accomplished in the face of extremely challenging circumstances, as the history of science amply demonstrates?

The reason is simple: the new generation of lecturers and some very senior colleagues as well wish to belong to the club of nouveaux riches, the class of “oppressors,” a situation that reflects the deteriorating value orientation in the society generally. Far be it from me to either directly or indirectly endorse the gospel of poverty for university teachers, usually disguised in the well-worn cliché, “teachers’ reward is in heaven.” Lecturers, just like other Nigerians with legitimate employment, deserve decent wages.

But when desire for primitive accumulation supplants desire to gather and impart knowledge, then the lecturer will abandon his or her job with alacrity to “go and eat” with politicians. I am not claiming that no academic in the history of Nigerian universities has ever turned down political appointment or that accepting such a position is necessarily bad in itself.

The point I am stressing is that craving for political appointments by some university teachers and the speed with which those selected accept such appointments create the erroneous impression that we do not truly love our jobs, that we are not committed to the academia.

Sometimes, acceptance of such appointments is justified as a patriotic duty to serve our country. But keep in mind that one of the best ways to serve a country, in particular, and humanity, in general, especially in a knowledge-driven civilisation in which we now live, is to acquire knowledge and pass it on to the next generation.

Therefore, let us not deceive ourselves by shying away from the truth. The spirit with which most people take up appointment as lecturers in Nigerian universities has changed, particularly since the economic downturn of the 1990s. Increasingly, avarice is supplanting idealism, and careerists have invaded our tertiary institutions.

To be continued