From last week continues the narrative that if the views of Dr Kayode Fayemi and  Chief Olusegun Obasanjo are anything to go by Nigerians should be worried at the validity of our democracy

AFTERWARDS empiricism in the philosophy of science emphasises evidence, especially as discovered in experiments. It is a fundamental part of the scientific method that all hypotheses and theories must be tested against observations of the natural world rather than relying solely on a prior reasoning, intuition, or revelation. Empiricism, often used by natural scientists, says that “knowledge is based on experience” and that knowledge is tentative and probabilistic, subject to continued revision and falsification”. Empirical research, including experiments and validated measurement tools, guides the scientific method. 

It is often said that it is those who wear the shoes that know where the shoes pinches. If former President Obasanjo, who was part of the Supreme Military Council that imposed on us this presidential system of government is part of those complaining today about liberal democracy, we have to note that something is wrong. You may not like the messenger but you must examine the message. 

Except for the president, the governors, legislators and their aides, including ministers and commissioners and probably friends, no one is benefitting from the liberal democracy. The people are getting impoverished everyday. It is no exaggeration that there is extreme poverty in the land irrespective of who is leading us. I wonder why we are sticking to this type of democracy that is not yielding results and making us more miserable. Is there no alternative? And why must we recite every script on liberal democracy? Can’t we adopt another system of government that will be beneficial to us all? We have to admit that liberal democracy is not working in our interest at all. 

Nigerians are of the few people in the world who have never had a say in how they are being governed. What has happened in Nigeria and what is presently happening is enough to bring a revolution in other parts of the world. Everything has been imposed on us. There are other alternatives to liberal democracy. We have Noocracy- a democracy in which only the wise and competent are allowed to stand and vote; Sociocracy- a democratic system of governance based on consent decision making, circle organisation, subsidiarity and double-linked representation; New Democracy- Maoist concept based on Mao Zedong’s “Bloc of Four Classes theory in post-revolutionary China; Market democracy– another name for democratic capitalism, an economic ideology based on a tripartite arrangement of a market-based economy based predominantly on economic incentives through free markets, a democratic polity and a liberal moral-cultural system which encourages pluralism.

Others are Participatory democracy – which involves more lay citizen participation in decision making and offers greater political representation than traditional representative democracy, e.g., wider control of proxies given to representatives by those who get directly involved and actually participate; Semi-direct democracy – representative democracy with instruments, elements, and/or features of  direct democracy and; Grassroots democracy – emphasizes trust in small decentralised units at the municipal government level, possibly using urban secession to establish the formal legal authority to make decisions made at this local level binding.

Let us look at what liberal democracy means. According to Wikipedia: “Liberal democracy, substantive democracy or Western democracy is a form of government that combines the structure of a representative democracy with the principles of liberal political philosophy. It is characterised by elections between multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society, a market economy with private property, universal suffrage, and the equal protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties and political freedoms for all people.

 To define the system in practice, liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution, either codified or uncodified, to delineate the powers of government and enshrine the social contract. The purpose of a constitution is often seen as a limit on the authority of the government. A liberal democracy may take various and mixed constitutional forms: it may be a constitutional monarchy (Australia, Belgium, Canada, Japan, Norway, Spain, the United Kingdom) or a republic (France, India, Ireland, the United States). It may have a parliamentary system (Australia, Canada, India, Ireland, the United Kingdom), a presidential system (Indonesia, the United States), or a semi-presidential system (France). Liberal democracies are contrasted with illiberal democracies and with dictatorships.