It is rare to find a student of economics not fascinated by politics; so naturally, I am hooked on politics and how it interacts with economics. And the interaction between both fields in Nigeria today is becoming more and more interesting.
When Boko Haram bombs Kano, the act alone cuts across politics and economics. If you also look at what I have discussed in the past as the most basic underlying phenomenon in the Boko Haram crisis in the North – unemployment- it also cuts through politics and economics.
And I must argue right away that my conclusions regarding unemployment do not relegate the issue of religion and power play in the crisis. But the role of unemployment must be seen in the context that many are willing to commit such enormous crimes because they are idle, and see everyone else’s life as worthless as theirs. And truth is, this problem will not go away until its political and economic dimensions are addressed.
I would like to comment on a critical piece of news that had come out in the last week, which has not yet been dismissed. It is the news that some governors had been paying Boko Haram so the group would not attack their states. Apparently, the present Kano State government had discontinued the arrangement, thus the reason for the attack.
It would be very easy to blame the former governors for paying in the first place, but I think this line of enquiries should be pursued very vigorously before any more comments are made. But what I can say for now is that a simple economic understanding would have suggested that once you start to pay, you must continue to do so. Second, the payments made to Boko Haram, if that was actually the case, did not diminish the power of the terrorist group, but strengthened same. If it is true, then it is the most misguided economic and political decision thinkable.
Now, the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom popularised a course known as PPE for many years. Since establishing the course in the 1920s, many universities have followed suit. Philosophy, Politics and Economics have always been very popular in the UK, and either because of it or as a consequence of what many graduates in the field have become, they dominate public life and institutions. As a civil servant in the UK, it is impossible to miss the graduates of this fascinating combination, and it is no surprise that they dominate, or at least, significantly influence political thought in the country.
So, in theory, subject or practical, politics is very important. I consider it very much so to the extent that i think it is erroneous to think that it is only those that vie for elections or their fanatical supporters that are politicians. So when asked what their political views are, they say they have none. But that is impossible. As I mentioned in my piece last week, politics will always shape economics, and it is often after this realisation, that oftentimes, students of economics get attracted to politics.
In the context, the main, and some may argue that the only difference between stable and prosperous societies and unstable and poor ones is their politics. In one case, the politics is right and in the other, the politics is treacherous. Indeed, this argument is in relation to the one I made two weeks ago: in the long run, economics and politics are aligned. It can even be taken deeper to say that in the long run, an economy resembles the nature and practice of its politics. I also made the argument last week that politics is never rational. So you can be begin to understand the nature of good or damage that politics can do to the economic well being of a group of people.
So, politics is very important, and understanding the nature and the dynamics of such politics is crucial to our own well being and future. But the context here is that there are some problems, and very critical ones, that can only be solved by established political and authoritative structures, because these are the structures that govern society and it is through them that the former can solve their collective problems. But what students of economics even find very interesting about politics is that it is not an end in itself. Nobody wants a political office for the sake of just occupying the office. The whole purpose of politics is often therefore to decide and shape economic decisions. All that we see, especially the economic and social situations that flow from it, draw from political situations and decisions.
So, as a writer, I have always understood the potency of politics. While a writer can influence change, it is politics that directs change. While economists can seek to persuade change, it is politics that directs change. And despite sometimes bearing my frustrations on this page in the last four and half years, I also understand that our politics today is better than it was 20 years ago, and even 10 years ago. And I also think the changes that we see in politics reflect in economics.
On this note, and by reason of wanting a different experience in the political and economic spaces, I have accepted the invitation by the Chief Economic Adviser (CEA) to President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, Dr. Nwanze Okidegbe, to join his team. This will be my last column for I do not know how long. But I surely will miss this space, especially the responses, even from those that disagree with my opinions. I thank you so much for your companionship in the last few years, and I really do hope to be back!
