Friday 15 June 2012

WTO MOCK SUMMIT GROUPSTUDENTS OF DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

C/O M.M. YUSIF

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

BAYERO UNIVERSITY, KANO

The World Trade Organization (WTO) is responsible for monitoring and regulating international trade between countries. It operates through a series of agreements which specify how member countries are not only to trade in the global market but also how to operate their macro economic environments. These agreements have disastrous consequences on the economies of developing countries, including the failure of agriculture, collapse of Manufacturing, decline of public health etc.

In Nigeria, there is little awareness about the WTO and these agreements, even though we are feeling their impact. It is in the effort to generate critical awareness about the WTO that I have introduced among my students the WTO mock summit. The mock summit is playing the ministerial conference of the organization, the highest decision-making meeting, bringing trade representatives of all member countries. The mock summit brings out the real and true positions of the countries relationships with WTO, as the real summit.

The mock summit started in 2004/2005 academic session and since then it holds every academic year. In November, 2011, we staged the seventh performance.

The mock performance of the WTO, in Bayero University, Kano is now moving from campus educational programme to that of national importance. We have already formed WTO Mock Summit Alumni with many conceived programmes we wish to execute.

Thus, the objectives of the mock summit are broadened as:

  1. To expose the activities of the WTO and the way it impacts on the economies of the developing countries in general and Nigeria in particular, we have National Trade Monitor Group and some campuses are sending requests to join us.
  2. To educate Nigerian students and spread the concept of WTO and its impact, especially on the daily lives of marginalized people of society.
  3. Unaware by most Nigerians, the WTO policies are the greatest agents of poverty among, especially rural farmers. Therefore, an objective of the mock summit is also to campaign on these problems and the solutions.
  4. To promote ideas and alternative development policies for free and fair trade.
  5. To publish the proceedings of the mock summits for learning and research.
  6. The mock summit played in the last seven years has become a reality through research on trade policies of WTO member countries, and so whether still in the university or not, we will remain a research group to encourage research and documentation in issue concerning trade and development.
  7. To open a resource centre on trade issues and Nigeria's development.
  8. To open a website to access resources of the mock summit internationally.

In the long run we wish to go beyond mock summit to link up with similar global trade policy issues fora and take part in theiractivities as well as to organized lectures, debates, workshops, seminars and conferences.

We wish for your cooperation towards achieving these objectives.

M.M. Yusif

Director WTO Mock Summit

Bayero University, Kano

January, 2012

WTO MOCK SUMMIT 2011SPEECH OF THE DIRECTOR AT THE TRAINING OF THE PARTICIPANTS

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

BAYERO UNIVERSITY, KANO


 

Introduction:

I can see you – young volunteers of WTO-Mock Summit 2011 – your faces bright with zeal and happiness to get through the first round of training on the Mock Summit 2011.

Although I have known some of you as participants in 2009 and 2010, but when I look round I can see many new faces.

This gives me greater pleasure because it shows that there are always generations to carry on with the project.

So I welcome all of you both old and new, and wish you creative partnership like Japanese scientists, to create something which will be of talk every where in B.U.K, Kano and Nigeria at large.

Some of you know that what you are going to produce – both your speeches and the video film would be processed online to be tuned internationally.

However, it is also important to know that what you would produce is not only for talk and to be monitored internationally, but it has got a value. Yes! Not an exchange value. But many use values.

Last year when I opened the training of WTO-Mock Summit 2010 I listed the successes and the benefits we derive from this programme. I think there is no need to list them again.

Nevertheless, something worth to mention. At the opening of the training of the Mock Summit 2010, I said "wherever WTO-Mock Summit activists found themselves, they become distinct in team work; hard-work to attain the goal of their organization; efficient and effective; etc. Ahaa! Sadiq Tamimuddari found himself distinct in Bayelsa State, in Youth Service Corp. he was given an honour, widely televised and I hereby on behalf of all of you congratulate him.

Okay. It is better we go to the real issues.


 

Background

Those of you who are beginners in studies on trade, can cast your minds on trade in your local market. The bargaining between buyers and sellers, is it not conflict relationship? So, how do you think would be in international trade? It too is conflictual. A dangerous conflict interaction because it is between two independent nations.

In reality trade between nations had resulted in major wars, including First World War and Second World War.

Therefore, International Trade has to be regulated, otherwise the world would be in perpetual wars between nations. The first attempt to regulate international trade was after the First World War when International Trade Organisation was formed to remove barriers in trade between nations and to make trade brings development to weaker nations. The Congress of USA refused to ratify the charter which governed the principles of ITO, so it was left to die, a slow death. It was replaced by General Agreement on Tariff and Trade – at any rate the same ITO but with addition of provisions on principle of "Preferential Treatment" and exceptions, especially on agriculture, for USA and Europe, the major players in global trade.


 

However, from Tokyo Round of Trade Negotiations it became clear that GATT too could not manage global trade effectively and so needed renewal. Consultation started since 1986 and was not completed until December, 1994 – as Uruguay Round, which delivered World Trade Organisation.

The World Trade Organisation too is GATT with some additions. These are:

  1. Developing countries to liberalise their agricultural sectors and industrial services.
  2. Curtailed developing countries space to provide subsidies for local industries and agriculture;
  3. Liberalisation of wide range of services;
  4. Intellectual Property Right becomes part of trade.

So from January 1995, WTO replaced GATT and became a global trade monitor. Its structure of governance include – Minesterial Conference; General Council; Panels, Committees and Commissions on major trade issues and concerns. There is a Director General as Head of the Organisation. Its work is governed by Agreements which regulate trade between nations.


 

GATS

GATS i.e. General Agreement on Trade in Services is one of about 30 different Trade Agreements which govern the global administration of trade under WTO multilateral trade regime.

The history of International Trade in Services before the Uruguay Round and under the Uruguay Round will soon come in the Round Table discussion which we are going to commence – so there is no need to talk about it now.

Meanwhile, the growth of service sector in USA, Japan and European Union had come to a peak that there must be international regulation on trade in services.

Thirdly, the logic of capitalism in the Twenty-First Century is to capture and control the lives and means of living of the people across the globe. This can best be facilitated through trade in services, because these are the means of living by the people.

The GATS is indeed, the lifewire of neo-liberal globalisation and the mover of WTO-regime, yet it is obscured, by both students and researchers.

However, that is not our making. It is a calculated design by corporate interest to cover their agenda and confuse scientific analysis about trade in services, trade with our lives.

This is the reason why in the document of Agreement on trade in services there is no very clear definition of services. So this could give them a space to put anything they want to be services so let it be and anything they don't want to be services, let it not be services.

There are many problems in the working of GATS:

  1. Developing countries are not ready for commercialisation of public services but got themselves just to do that;
  2. The National Treatment clause is not fair to any member country of WTO with a relatively weak economic base.
  3. Liberalisation of financial services is inconsistent with efforts for development.
  4. What about migration of skilled persons?


 

These and many other problems caused GATS to be infested by Doha Demands. The Doha Agenda would be fully addressed during the working Groups Discussion. Any way the DDA is still the cause of the crisis of the WTO. One expression of the crisis is that since 2007 there has not been any Minestarial conference of the great organisation. Only Mini-Minesterial conferences and consultative meetings.

But still the deadlock continues. That is why the Mock Summit 2010 was a Mini-Minesterial conference held in Mock Geneva. The subject then was how is the global financial crisis of the time affects DDA negotiations.

In 2010 we imagined three scenarios:

  1. That the Mock Summit would end with an understanding between the parties to break the deadlock and push forward for a final resolution of the crisis.
  2. That consultation will breakdown as delegates would not find a meeting point of resolving the crisis.
  3. That delegates would make progress but consultations are to continue.

The last option emerged, so in 2011 consultation continues; on a new subject i.e. GATS. I want you to be mindful that in the real WTO the negotiations on GATS is not completed. Don't move into quarrelling to repeal the Agreement now. That will terminate our analysis of the situation very easily. But situate yourselves to negotiate to get some benefits. That will make it more interesting.

Okay now let us divide into Working Groups discussion.

M.M. Yusif

Director WTO Mock Summit

26-06-2011

WTO MOCK SUMMIT: 2005 - 2011C/O M.M. YUSIF

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

BAYERO UNIVERSITY, KANO

The WTO Mock Summit started in 2005 and since then it became the most important annual event which students on the campuses of Bayero University, Kano and other interest groups around Kano and beyond are waiting to see. The Freedom Radio Youths parley with media group of the Summit 2011 revealed the interests of the larger Kano Youth Community on the programme.

The Mock Summit is not only a theatre display of ideas about WTO but also of research output by young promising students being trained in leadership and management of complex relations in human society.

In trade relations which the Mock Summit projects, the first three Rounds brought to surface the imbalance in power relations in favour of USA, European Union, Japan and Canada in control of global trade, who manipulate the rules of WTO against the developing nations.

One of their strategies is bureaucratisation of the administration of the organization, lack of democracy in decision-making, etc. Thus, the first three Rounds were crowned with a title "Militarisation of Global Trade Relations".

By the Fourth Round tagged "Senegal 2008" the Mock Summit Group had penetrated into the complex politics under WTO regime and found that there are groupings, re-groupings, and alliances which gradually are building and empowering member countries from the developing world, against domination by the developing countries. So, the outcome of this Round was a challenge of a decision by consensus and demands to review specific provisions of the Uruguay Round Agreement. This Round stands like the Doha Round of the real WTO.

The Fifth Round was tagged "Brazil 2009". The subject was on Agricultural Trade. The WTO Agreement on Agriculture was dissected, examined and debated by all the parties concerned with global agricultural trade. Issues about hunger, starvation, food production as well as subsidies and domestic support given to farmers in Europe and United State of America which negatively affected market for agricultural products from developing countries were discussed and brought to surface, pointing what provisions of the Agreement to be reviewed. It was ended without agreement. Only understanding to carry on with consultation.

Thus, the Sixth Round, a Mini-Ministerial Summit was called Geneva 2010. It was a consultative forum. In middle of global economic recession it addressed the crisis and the Doha Rounds including the possibilities of tackling the Doha issues in face of the global financial crunch. Also the major obstacles to what seems fair trade, and other issues governing international trade under WTO regime were placed on the table and renegotiated, but still the deadlock was never broken. There was understanding to carry on, and consultation to continue.

As another round came – The Seventh Round – Gevena 2011, the General Agreement on Trade in Services came to focus. There is general fear that liberalisation of trade in services is causing difficulties in lives of the people of developing countries. There was open anger of member countries from the developing world to the extent that the Summit stopped in chaos and banging of desk that there was no agreement on anything.

Arrangement has already started for the Eighth Round. We are still looking for which member country will host it. Since Doha, the issues which keep coming is how to make trade to bring development. So, in 2012 we are going to be concerned with "Multilateral Trade and Development: the role of Special and Differential Treatment".

Equally important in the package of the Mock Summit performance is a cultural display to entertain the audience. Started in 2009, was a Samba dance, in 2010 was a drama play on climate change, and 2011 was another cultural play. Also WTO sports competition and M. M. Yusif debate which are expected to continue as annual events are introduced in 2011.

M.M. Yusif

Director WTO Mock Summit

January, 2012

THE RADICAL LEFT IN ELECTORAL COMPETITION IN NIGERIA

MA'AZU MOHAMMED YUSIF

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

BAYERO UNIVERSITY, KANO

Introduction

What lessons have we documented and subjected to critical analysis about left politics in Nigeria since colonial period? A comprehensive history showing the diverse and sectarian tendencies of the left formations and their politics is yet to be placed for serious discourse by academics on Nigeria's politics, economy and society.

A series of workshops on social movements in Nigeria, by former activists have not generated debates and responses from outside that small circle. Also, the February, 2003 Third All-Nigeria Socialist Conference. Of course, a thorough scrutiny will reveal diverse programmes and strategies, many uncoordinated political activities on the same issues, including in participation in bourgeoisie electoral process.

A very serious limitation which any casual observer of the documents of this history since colonial period will note is that in Nigeria there has not been a lasting unity which keeps these political parties or movements together for long.

This constriction does not mean there had never been broad-based consultative alliances on pressing political problems. But these had never succeeded in solidifying and cementing a tradition of cooperation to achieve a common goal.

On electoral competition the numerous radical groups would not agree to join their agenda against their common enemy. These groups have found their differences from tradition of Marxian thinking on transition to socialism in developing societies. Some, especially the smaller ones insisted that there is no peaceful way against the ruling-class. In consideration of Lenins debate with Kautsky they think that democracy is a class phenomenon so electoral competition is a bourgeoisie democracy, deviced by the bourgeoisie to remain in control (Lenin, 1977: 36). Others might seem working on Marx's declaration at the Hague conference of the First International where he noted that in some countries where there is a strong representative institution, the working-class could achieve their ends by peaceful means (Marx, K. 1976: 293).

The purpose of this paper is to put forward the idea that left formations and or individuals known as part of one of these formations also took the option of promoting working-class politics through electoral competition. This requires asking another question. That is, what does that bring for build up of the working-class politics in Nigeria? Again, if there are limitations what could be done?

From what theoretical perspective

The radical left is seen as a collection of socialist parties or movements, social democratic and populist parties, or of individuals who are patriotic and nationalist popularly identified with the interest of the working-class or nationalist project, generally defined by the common characteristics of nationalism, anti-imperialism and socialism. In view of radical academic contributions on political and economic changes in Nigeria, the orientation and mission of the Radical left is to mobilise resources to defend the interest of the common man, the working-class and petty owners against colonial and neo-colonial domination and ultimately for socialism (Yusuf, B.U.: 1979; Ola O. and Onimode, B.: 1975: Ehiedu E. G. I.: 1996).

With regard to politics of the Radical Left this paper attempts to apply and develop Gramsci's conceptualisation of state and working-class politics. In Marxian tradition modern capitalist state is a class plot. Built on the same principle Gramsci's Praxis shows that the state is a class institution which establishes control and hegemony over the people by political, ideological and other means to get their obedience (Gramsci, A. 1971:258).

There are many views of what Gramsci meant by the state.

  1. State as a class instrument
  2. State as a primary instrument for the expansion of dominant class power.
  3. State is a political machine to keep the subordinate groups weak and disorganised.
  4. State encompasses civil society, each pulling the other to be in control (Gramsci, A. 1971268).

The importance of state for Gramsci is rooted in politics. In this the state is an extension of the hegemonic apparatus of the ruling-class to perpetuate and expand its control of society in the context of class struggle. Hegemony in the more generic sense meant by Gramsci is the way in which a ruling group establishes and maintains its rule (Gramsci, 1971:267). This comes by consent, or by cultural and intellectual as well as political leadership achieved by a particular class, class fraction, stratum or social group as part of a larger project of class rule or domination (Ibid: 268).

Seen this way, hegemony involves attempts of the dominant class to use its moral, social, political and intellectual leadership to establish its view of the whole as all-inclusive and universal (Carnoy, M. 1984:70). This is not by use of only violence or the coercive power of the state apparatus, but in the acceptance by the dominated of a "conception of the world", which belongs to the dominant class (Fiori; 1970: 238).

Thus, working-class politics is naturally counter-hegemonic. How do the changes come? How do the dominated classes overcome the hegemony of the dominant classes? For Marx and Lenin (Lenin, 1976: 242), the state is the coercive arm of the dominant class, from Gramsci the state is also an instrument of the dominant class ideology, of the legitimation of the social need of the ruling-class. Thus, Gramsci would reason that the working-class could use every non-violent resource including the bourgeoisie way in order to counter the hegemony of the state.

Perhaps the "Left" formations are very weak with many sectarian divisions that it cannot control society; not capable of establishing an alternative proletarian hegemony. Hence, the dominant class has to be approached in electoral contest.

It is in accordance with these positions that the argument goes that the "Left" in Nigeria could use electoral competition to defend the course of the working-class. This would probably mean the surrounding of the state apparatus with a counter hegemony by developing working-class institutions and culture, norms and values of the working-class. These, working side by side with dominant class culture confronting the hegemony of the ruling-class. Gramsci called this a "war of position". (Carnoy, Op. cit:72).

The Emergence of Left Parties/Moverments

Between the world wars, communism was virtually unknown in Nigeria, and conditions were not favourable to its growth. Both objective and subjective conditions did not mature. However, by late 1930's, boiling of a general political awakening were observed due to rising climate of war, rise of nationalism and most of all pro-soviet propaganda created an interest in communism in Nigeria (KOP, ND:8).

In 1945 Bankole Timothy, the president of the Trade Union Congress of Nigeria visited the United Kingdom and while there made contacts with British communist party, other socialist groups, and opened channels of communication – exchange of information, books and pamphlets, etc between Nigeria and those groups in Europe. When the T.U.C. affiliated itself to the World Federation of Trade Unions, communist dominated labour organisations in Eastern Europe and ideas on communism became widely spread in Nigeria (Ibid).

This development received internal push by growth of workers and their Labour organisations. The "nationalist press of Dr. Azikiwe and even the University College, Ibadan became centres of propagation of communist ideas in Nigeria (Ibid).

The first and most important movement during this early history of formation of socialist organisations or movements was called the "League". The building and strengthening of the movement had been in the hands of what might be called the field workers, men of very moderate educational attainments. Although, the movement was called the "League", but it was a party and communist in its ideology. In a circular from the office of the Assistant Commissioner of Police Kano, it was called Communist Party of Nigeria (Ibid.).

From the colonial period through the end of the first Republic many worker-oriented and socialist political groups including United Working Proples Party which was the left arm of the Action Group, Socialist Workers and Farmers Party founded by Tunji Otegbeye, Nigerian Labour party set up by Eskor Toyo and Imoudo, etc. had formed.

In the 1970s through the mid-80s Nigeria experienced rapid development with nationalist-oriented economic development. The military regimes of General Olusegun Obasanjo and Muhammadu Buhari Policies on industrialisation and agricultural development were to reduce control by foreign capital. Large-scale farming and industrial projects which produced mass agrarian and industrial workers. Other sectors of the economy experienced similar boom. The universities multiplied many times. (Kirk-Greene A. and Rimmer D. 1981, Tom, F. 1993)

However, the Nigerian economy, then as now, is being controlled by multinational corporate enterprises. The indigenisation policy started under Gowon did not change the balance. The Federal Government of Nigeria depended on revenues from the oil foreign companies who exported Nigeria's petroleum resources. (Ibid.).

The expanding middle class categories were facing the risk of lack of political freedom to push their agenda. Industrial relations shifted from liberal to corporatist system. Whereas, students had become strong political force, the bargaining space .remained tight. The military Governments did not want make compromise.

For these and many other reasons, the answer was underground left formations and or Movements Scattered every where across the country, especially in the University, Urban poor communities, theatre groups in the urban centres, rural co-operative societies, etc. There were so many to be accurately counted. In any way, they have underground names such as "the Iron-grinders"; "the socialist forum"; the parrots; etc.

There were stronger political groups with working class and socialist orientation across the country. They were big political groups because they were political parties and or Movements with widespread network, and their influences reached many states in the federation. Secondly, some of them were afflicted with International Communist Organisations like the "Third International". Thirdly, one of them had a branch in London, with a publication of a magazine which was distributed in Nigeria by a name "Workers Party of Nigeria". These socialist formations although they were operating underground were identified as:

  1. The Socialist Workers Party
  2. The Socialist Workers and Peoples Party
  3. The Labour Militant
  4. The Socialist Congress of Nigeria
  5. The Mass Line

The Left formations remained very active and militant during the early period of transition to the economy of Structural Adjustment Programme. They had directed and or inflenced the three phases – 1986; 1989; 1992; - of anti-SAP riots in Nigeria. Also many other anti-SAP actions by students and workers. The experience of "campaign for Democracy" against military dictatorship had perhaps caused exhaustion and forced them to reconsider their tactics. They continue to exist but they are in disarray (Yusif, M. M. 2010).

Alternative platforms are various types of non-governmental organisations and the existing "Right-wing" Political Parties. Subsequently, may be as a tactical manoeuvre there is no longer acceptance of socialism as an ideology in interpretation of reality. So there is no analysis of social, political and economic phenomena based on class struggle or the class character of the state and the need for socialist order.

Left Parties and Electoral Competition

Between 1960 to date Nigeria experienced eight different General Elections viz. 1964; 1979; 1983; 1993; 1999; 2003; 2007; and 2011. The Nigerian state has been a subject of fierce contestation between different factions of the ruling-class and sometimes other groups with alternative programmes.

The existence of "radical" parties or groups either with social democratic or socialist visions have always been important in the history of elections in Nigeria. But a single most important point is that inspite of the adoption of International Communist Movement strategy of a broad-based popular fronts to bring all supporters of democracy together, by some of these socialist groups as noted above, there has not been a lasting unity which keeps these movements or political parties to achieve and retain a single political programme until it is no longer politically wise to remain together.

However, one cannot approach the history of Left formations in Nigeria without referring to their relationships through consultative meetings and alliances as well as broad-based and popular fronts to achieve a minimum political goal. But these had never succeeded in solidifying a tradition of cooperation to achieve a long-term common objective.

On electoral competition the numerous radical groups would not agree to join their agenda against their common enemy like the "popular front" which turned as "popular unity" in Chile in early 1970s. It is not surprising as these parties and movements have diverse programmes and manifestoes which though have captured the roots of the social, political and economic problems of Nigeria but have different strategies and tactics to tackle these problems.

We can now perhaps suggest that these Left formations are all communist oriented and tend to follow three basic models. One is typified by the iron-grinders in Ilorin, and of course many such smaller movements in some university campuses. It is the model which there is no any suitable tendency to capture their strategy, except simply to characterise them as anarcho-syndicalists. This did not become an independent movement in Nigeria but they could be associated with it by their radical exuberance, by tactical measures of only use of force and violence to attain a goal. In this case there should be no business to do with state and ruling class by electoral competition. Only to destroy them. The second model is exemplified by the Moscow-oriented Socialist Workers Party (also called Socialist Party of Workers, Farmers and Youth) based in Ibadan, with network in Kano, Lagos and many other cities in Nigeria. This party eschewed violence and accepted mobilisation of the Nigerian people to establish Peoples Democratic State under the leadership of the working class. It did not come out openly against front building or for broad-based alliance, but insisted on state power supervised by the people. The party did not seem to oppose electoral competition as its activists stated that "the working people must insist on electing people among themselves to represent them in all organs of state power" (Ola, O. and Bade, O. 1975:227). In the Third model, characterised by an organisational and ideological principles of Marxism-Leninism is found the socialist congress of Nigeria and the Mass Line. According to these Movements, the ultimate goal is to liberate Nigeria from imperialist domination to be followed by socialist revolution and that these could be pursued by every possible means as determined by balance of class forces, including transforming into a socialist party to contest elections.

There were two particularly noteworth tendencies of radical politics which may be separated from the above three models. One of these was the position of Socialist workers and peoples party (S.W.P.P) with Chinese-oriented communism it claimed "an opposition against capitalism and in defence of the interests of the working people". (Fatogun, 1983:71). The S.W.P.P reasoned that differences should not be magnified out of proportion if is to defend the interest of the masses (Ibid: 71). The party urged for defence of the land and the peasantry, of labour against capital and of democracy (Ibid: 71). This could be started by forming a united front of the Left Forces as well as Democratic Forces including mass organisations and even ruling-class political parties that cherish democracy. The party called the United People's Party (UNP) of late Obafemi Awolowo and Peoples' Redemption Party (P.R.P) of late Malam Aminu Kano to join in a front to achieve the said defined objective of the party. Secondly, was the Bala Mohammed Memorial Committee (B.M.M.C). The B.M.M.C was never a political party, but of course a movement, which did not claim socialism, but with a nationalist thinking and programme to change the economy of Nigeria from dependency on multinational corporations and their local lackeys. The B.M.M.C. had no any illusion to bring any change by any means other than by election.

Thus, all the major socialist parties and the B.M.M.C. accepted both in principle and by action either directly or indirectly electoral competition to control state power or cause challenge to the ruling class.

What political influence these parties have had in bourgeoisie electoral contest for power and in defence of workers interest is not clear. Their winning of election in various parliamentary seats contested is not encouraging. The Socialist workers and farmers party for example was contesting every election up to the general election of 1979 but was not able to won any parliamentary seat talkless of threatening the power of the state. In 1964 elections it obtained only 2,206 out of 1,848,270 votes cast in December, 1964 (Cohen, R. 1974: 175). Similarly, the Nigerian Labour Party which fielded Imoudu to contest Lagos North had to boycott distorted results in the 1964 polls (Ibid: 175). What about the Left in the PRP in 1979-1983 party politics? The party had indeed combined the political skills and connections of all forces in Nigeria and strategic manoeuvre of the Left in particular, to had won Governorship seat of Kano and Kaduna States and many seats in both National and some state Assemblies, but petty bourgeoisie squabbles and the threats to marginalise the Left political forces had resulted in factions which killed the capacity of radical groups to pose any serious threat to the power and interest of the ruling-class (Bako, S. 1983). The factionalisation and crisis in the PRP in which one faction had entered into alliance by signing a pact with the dominant political party i.e. National Party of Nigeria (NPN) revealed this fear and the differences in P.R.P.

Inspite of everything all the Left groups in different party formations set aside their differences and struggled against the incursion of neo-liberal economy through SAP. The three major anti-SAP riots united them in planning and mobilisation for action. Moreover, the economic and political aspects of Nigeria took a different form when neo-liberal forces overpowered the radical groups and other nationalist interest, to consolidate Structural Adjustment Programme.

The politics of the groups fizzed out and individuals without any group support turned for electoral contest when democratic opening was won against the military dictatorship. The rules of the competition became difficult without united agenda, so many of them joined forces to form another Nigeria Labour Party and some other smaller political party organisations like Nigeria Liberation Party, Social Democratic Party, etc. There was strong indication of the emergence of counter hegemony when the Federal Government of Nigeria accused all the new parties of "extremism" and dissolved all of them and formed Government Sponsored National Republican Convention and Social Democratic Party. In order to capture and neutralise the ideological fire of both the Rights and the lefts, the federal Government of Nigeria called these parties a "little to the right" and a "little to the left" respectively.

The strategy for power struggle involved different positions. The more revolutionary radical groups regarded the SDP as a bourgeoisie reformist calculation. Others formed popular Democratic Alliances and joined the SDP in blocs. Despite working in the SDP it was not clear neither any record is kept as to what revolutionary dynamic was intended to produce and or reproduced. The only thing we could see was that when the June 12, 1993 election was annulled as the SDP presidential candidate was winning the election, these groups in the SDP and others who did not join the SDP ignored their differences and campaigned tirelessly against the annulment.

As events unfolded after annulment of June 12 elections, inspite of the divisions and contradictions within the Nigerian ruling classes, the state played off and disorganised the radical groups, such that by the time the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), All-Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) and the rest of them were formed, the Left had not collectively joined or formed any party to contest elections. Except those who joined them on individual capacity.

From "practical politics" point of view, then, it looks that there is one problem of the Left in the politics of Nigeria today. That is that neo-liberalism has produced democracy with empowerment of the civil society, seized by the left to play their politics there, and so the neo-liberal order must not be opposed from outside neo-liberal conception of the development of human society.

The Crisis of Left Electoral Politics

The roots of the Left in electoral contest with ruling-class political parties go back to colonial period when in 1948 Imoudu, Coker and other radicals in the Nigeria Trade Union Movement decided to set up Labour party to win electoral support (Cohen, R. 1975:174). From then, both electoral mobilisation and successes of the left politics continues to grow at decreasing rate.

In general, what one may observe today is a total decline of the Radical left below what it were before. It is unable to profit from the new political space by capitalising on anti-neoliberalism, even if is within the framework of neo-liberal agenda. From theoretical angle and the available diverse practices of Asian and Latin American countries, neo-liberal globalisation has two faces – one built on free market fundamentalism and the other on managed free market system (Stiglitz 2006:3). A Left project and political responses pushing for social market system may continue to mobilise the people, and reproduce the left and new dimensions, orientation, agenda, and organisation of left politics.

Therefore, a fundamental question to raise is whether the "Left" participation in bourgeoisie electoral machinery promotes working class agenda. The fact is that the history of Nigeria's Trade Union Movement had shown the influences of Left organisation in working class actions. But what is really happening today? Is it to say, from theoretical perspective that the politics of workers have come to an end as is now the claim among pro-globalist theories? (Bruce, E. K. 2004). It seems that in Nigeria that working-class politics has not disappeared. A new politics of industrial relations is evolved by the Nigeria Labour Congress through alliance of labour and civil society organisations. However, for a long-term and maximum benefits of the workers, the strategy of alliance politics in Nigeria must be critically re-examined.

Accepting the importance of electoral process as part of the strategy of creating condition of counter hegemony means that the Left if at all it is to remain alive must organisationally regain more support and even notoriety to contest for power with other electoral forces.

Furthermore, if the Left would have to remain in existence as an organised political force, it is imperative to review their ideological and political position, in view of very powerful coalition of neo-liberal forces, so that they can clearly redefine what is to be achieved, the limits and the choices, instead of individuals sticking to ideology of communism and or getting into parliaments and become more important than the party or the movement, or even more important than the workers and the people.

It needs pointing out again that in a country of violent ethnic sentiment in political relationships, what would "The Left" do? First, whatever would be the case, "The Left" must build opposite strategy, not the usual saying and practice of lets do what they are doing better in order to defeat them. Secondly, in Nigeria of the fourth republic, political parties are like cartels. What kind of party organisation are the left going to run? The same kind of businessmen/politicians type of political parties? As a reminder, Gramsci once noted that "there are periods of history in which social classes become detached from their political parties; the class no longer recognises the men who lead the parties as its expression" (Gramsci, A. 1971:211). From the time of National Republican Convention (NRC) and Social Democratic Party (SDP) to present set of political parties i.e. PDP, ANPP and others the observation made by Gramsci seems to characterise political parties in Nigeria. A big challenge against politics of the ruling-class is to form "New Political Parties to contest against the parties of the ruling-classes. Or would the left parties be frightened by rules, regulations and conditions of registration of political parties? This would not have mattered so much as building counter-hegemony is a process of series of counter tactics against state power to weaken its capacity to govern.

Conclusion

There are endless necessary conditions to bring out and structure the "left" into electoral politics, but it will be difficult to draw definitive conclusions about when the overall impact of the electoral game will show positive. It may take long-time. It may be temporary as seen by the failure of the experiment of Chile in 1973.

It may be possible to achieve something significant if properly thought out and managed within the organisational thinking of the parties, or the groups directly or indirectly contesting elections.

References

  1. Ananaba, W. (1969). The Trade Union Movement in Nigeria. London C. Hirst and Company
  2. Bruce, E. K. (2006) The Global Evolution of Industrial Relations. International and Labour Relations Review Vol. 59 No.3
  3. Carnoy, M. (1984). The State and Political Theory. New Jersey. Princeton University Press
  4. Cohen, R. (1974). Labour and Politics in Nigeria 1945 – 71, London. Heinemann
  5. Eddie, M. (1980). The Tragedy of the Nigerian Socialist Movement and other Essays. Calabar, Centuar, Press Limited
  6. Eddie, M. (1981). Human Progress and its Enemies. The Struggle for a more Human Social Order in Nigeria. Ibadan, ACID Books.
  7. Ehredu E. G. I. (1996). Radical Politics in Nigeria, 1945 – 1950: The significance of the Zikist Movement. Zaria, Ahmadu Bello University Press.
  8. Eno, E.T. (1982). Realist, Trotskyites and Anarchist: An Open Letter to Alhaji Balarabe Musa. National PRP Secretariat
  9. Eskor, T. (n.d). The Third Republic and the Working-Class: Reflections on the question of power
  10. Fatogun, A. (1983)."A United Front of Left and Democratic Forces". In Asikpo, E. (ed) A Tribute to the Late Dr. Bala Mohammed, Kano, Research Unit Governor's Office.
  11. Fiori, G. (1970). Antonio Gramsci. Life of a Revolutionary. London, New Left Books
  12. Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from Prison Notebooks. London, Lawrence and Wishart.
  13. Kano Provincial Office (n.d). Communism in Nigeria
  14. Kirk-Greene, A. and Rimmer, D. (1981). Nigeria Since 1970: A Political and Economic Outline. London. Hodder and Stoughton.
  15. Lenin. V. I. (1976), "The State and Revolution: The Marxist Theory of the State and the Tasks of the Proletariat in the Revolution". In selected works, Volume 2.
  16. Lenin, V. I. (1977). "The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky". In selected works, Volume 3.
  17. Marx, K. (1976) "The Hague Congress; Reporters Record of the Speech made at the meeting, held in Amsterdam on September 8, 1872. selected works, Volume 2
  18. Ola,O. (1986). Towards a Socialist Political System for Nigeria: The Programme for the working people. Ibadan, Council for Public Education
  19. Sabo, B. (1987). "Nigerian Left-Wing Politics in 1990; Some Lessons from the P.R.P". In Stephen, O. O. (ed) Alternative Political Futures for Nigeria. Lagos, NPSA
  20. SPWFY (n.d) The Tasks of the People's Revolution in Nigeria: The Programme of Struggle
  21. Stephen, G. (2003). "Gramsci, Modernity and globalisation". International Gramsci Soceity Online Article
  22. Tyoden, S. G. (1982). The Dilemma of the Nigerian Left. Paper presented at a Seminar on the theme "Towards a Progressive Nigeria". Bagauda Lake Hotel Kano, December 16 – 18 1982
  23. Stiglitz, J. (2006). Globalisation and its discontents; Making gloablisation work. London Penguin Books
  24. Tom, F. (1993). Politics and Economic Development in Nigeria Oxford, West View Press
  25. Yusuf, B. U. (1979). For the Liberation of Nigeria. London, New Beacom Books Ltd
  26. Yusif, M. M. (2006). The Social Democratic Party; Reform or Revolution, Mimco
  27. Yusif, M. M. (2007). Buhari Organisation Programme is a paper Tiger. Mimco

Yusif, M. M. (2010). "Human Rights Movement in Nigeria: Old and New". In Jibrin Ibrahim and Y. Z. Yau (ed). The Left and the Human Rights Struggle in Nigeria. CRD, Kano

SYLLABUS OF POSTGRADUATECOURSE ON THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF AFRICA

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

BAYERO UNIVERSITY, KANO

KANO – NIGERIA

M.M. YUSIF

2011/2012 ACADEMIC SESSION

INSTRUCTOR

M.M. YUSIF

mmyusif@yohoo.com

mmyusif07@gmail.com

polbuk@yahoo.com

http://www.mmyusif.blogspot.com

INTRODUCTION

This is the syllabus of the course on the Political Economy of Africa, which is part of the Masters Degree Programme of the Department of Political Science, Bayero University, Kano – Nigeria during 2011/2012 Academic year. The course is taught during the first semester.

It is intended to expose students for a research work which centers on an analysis of state, society and economy in contemporary Africa.

The issues for treatment are deliberately selected to give a background on the controversy about state theory, perspectives on state – society relations and debates on current topical issues in Africa.

It is expected that the course will be covered in fifteen (15) weeks. Weekly meetings of three hours each will be divided into three track display of ideas: first is 40 minutes of talks or lecture by the course instructor – followed by two working sessions – one is discussion of a selected text relevant on the topic of the week and two, either a discussion of a specific research work or any other programme the lecturer may come up with. There are going to be working groups discussions.

The texts selected for reading are meant to give theoretical and methodological guide to students on analysis of the issues. There are many other materials as literature which have covered the themes, rather narrowly or broadly, or as case studies. Texts on Nigeria are abundant and can be obtained. Students are expected to read widely. Online sources are relevant. Become independent researcher and learner now!

DESCRIPTION OF THE COURSE

Globalisation of the World Economy refers to the ability of capital to move freely across national boundaries. As a result of this, the world, especially the African continent, is going through rapid transformation, whose social, political and economic characters posed many critical questions on theory and practice of the state. For instance, if state represents class interest what is the logic of characterizing it weak or strong? Again, if it is said that globalisation has weakened the state, one may ask, is it not the state which has generated globalisation? Or is it globalisation which has necessarily shaped the power of the state? Many similar questions depicting the relation between state and society will be raised.

Yes! The "end of geography" thesis has pushed the idea that globalized form of economic activity has undermined the ability of nation-state to control the national economy. On the other hand, as an expression of class power the state must project the interest of the nation. Other wise wouldn't it be irrelevant?

The central focus of this course, in this academic year is state-society relations in contemporary economy of Africa. The teaching programme is divided into four parts of a single process of development of knowledge. First is conceptualizing political economy of Africa. Secondly, paradigms of state-society relationship. Thirdly, is state theory in Political Economy. The fourth will treat issues in political economy of Africa.

COURSE SYLLABUS

Week 1: GENERAL INTRODUCTION:

Introducing the course and what it is about; course requirements; methods for students of political science; contribution of the students on the teaching programme.

Readings

  1. M. M. Yusif. Principles of Teaching and Learning in Classes of M. M. Yusif. (online).
  2. Mauro C. and Rosanna D. "E. Research: An Introduction to Online Political Science for Beginners and Skeptics". IPSR Vol. 28 No. 2.
  3. Stephen V. F. Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science. (Online).
  4. Margaret Stacey (1977). Methods of Social Research.

IN PLACE OF DISCUSSION:

A supervised test to determine capacity of the students on political economy.

Week 2: CONCEPTUALISING POLITICAL ECONOMY OF AFRICA

Readings

  1. Caparaso and Levine (1994), Theories of Political Economy. Cambridge, University Press.
  2. Bruno S. Frey (1978). Modern Political Economy. Western Printing Services, Bristol
  3. Eskor Toyo (1983), "The return of Political Economy". JPE Vol. 1 No.1.
  4. James Petras, "Liberal, Structural and Radical Approaches to Political Economy: an assessment and an alternative.
  5. Antonio Merlo, "Whither Political Economy? Theories, Facts and Issues". (Online).
  6. Claude A. "The Political Economy Approach". Explanatory Notes on Marxian Theory in Africa.
  7. Claude A. (1978). A Political Economy of Africa. Heinemann. London.
  8. Swai B. "Marx, Marxism and the Third World". Conference Paper.
  9. Swai B. "Observation Regarding Some Recent Trends in African Historiography" Conference Paper.
  10. Bade O. "Marx, Africa and the World System". Conference Paper.
  11. Yusufu B. U. "Karl Marx and the Analysis of the Politics of Contemporary Africa. Conference Paper.
  12. Online, "The Political Economy of Africa in the Global System".
  13. Paul Collier (2006). International Political Economy: Some African Applications". Online.
  14. Walter Rodney ( ). How Europe Underdeveloped Africa.
  15. Ernest Mandel (1962). Marxist Economic Theory. Merlin Press London Chapter 18.

    DISCUSSION QUESTION:

The Relevance of Marxian Theory in Analysis and Explanations of State and Society in Contemporary Africa

Week 3:
STATE AND SOCIETY: PARADIGMS OF THE RELATIONSHIP

Readings

  1. Richard B. (1923) "Liberalism" in Roger E and Anthony W. Contemporary Political Ideologies.
  2. Beckman, B. (1993). "The Liberation of Civil Society: Neo-Liberal Ideology and Political Theory. ROAPE No. 58.
  3. Filip D. B. (1998). Democracy and the State – Society Paradigm: Reflections on Adelman's Paper. Online.
  4. Hamdy A. and Rahman H. (2009) "The State and Civil Society in Africa: North African Perspective". Online.
  5. Colin Crouch (1979), "The State Capital and Liberal Democracy". In Colin Crouch (ed.) State and Economy in Contemporary Capitalism. Croom Helm London.
  6. Pierre D. T. (1995). State Building and Democracy in Southern Africa. USIP Washington.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

  1. What factors could determine the relationship between state and society?
  2. What could you say from any African country to show the nature of changing state – society relations.

    Week 4: THEORETICAL FOUNDATION: STATE IN MARXIST THEORY – FROM LENIN TO GROMSCI

Readings

  1. Lenin V. I. State and Revolution
  2. Marx K. (1977). The Eighteenth Brumaire in of Loius Bonasparte. Progress Publishers Moscow
  3. Marx, K. (1977). The Class Struggle in France. Progress Publishers Moscow.
  4. Gramsci, A. (1972). Selections from Prison Notebooks. Lawrence and Wisharl London.
  5. Carnoy M. (1984). The State and Political Theory. Princeton University Press Now Jersy, Chapters, 2 and 3.
  6. Andreas B. and Adam D. M. (2003). "Globalisation, the State and Class Struggle: A Critical Economy engagement with Open Marxism". British Journal of Politics and International Relations Vol. 5 No. 4.
  7. Fred B. (198). "Beyond Relative Autonomy" in Socialist Register.
  8. Berch B. (1983). "The Class Nature of the State in peripheral formations". JCA Vol. 3 No. 3.
  9. James Peters (1978). "Aspects of Class formation in the periphery: Power Structures and Strategies. In Critical Perspectives on Imperialism and Social Classes in Third World. Monthly Review Press. New York and London.

DISCUSSION QUESTION

  1. There are varied perspectives of State: Pluralist; Institutionalist; Historical Humanist and Marxian class Perspectives. Bring out and observe Marx's Class Perspective of State.
  2. How does Gramscis fits class perspective Approach
  3. What are the differences if there are between Marx's classical and the Gramscian. Give a basis of these for understanding social change and control in Africa.

Week 5:    STATE THEORY: PARADIGM IN CHAOS

Readings

  1. Jessop B. (1990). "Putting States in their Place: Once more on Capitalist States and Capitalist Societies". (Online)
  2. Carnoy M. (1984). The State and Political Theory. Ibid.
  3. John Holloway and Sol Picciotto (1978). State and Capital. A Marxist Debate. Edward trnold. London.
  4. Werner B. "The Capitalist State: Illusion and Critique".
  5. Poulantzas N. (1975). Classes in Contemporary Capitalism. Verso London.
  6. Poulantzas N. (1968). Political Power and Social Classes. Francois Maspero London.
  7. Clarks S. (1978). "Capital, Fractions of Capital and the State: Neo-Marxist Analysis of the South African State". In Capital and Class No. 5.
  8. Davies R. and others (1976). "Class Struggle and the periodisation of the State in South Africa". In ROAPE No. 7.
  9. Innes D. and Plaut B. (1978). "Class Struggle and the State". In ROAPE No.11
  10. Kaplan D. (1979). "Relations of Production, Class Struggle and the State, in South Africa in the interwan period". ROAPE Nos. 15/16.
  11. Othman S. (1984). "Classes, Crises and Coup: the demise of shagari's regime". In African Affairs Vol. 83 No. 333.
  12. M. M. Yusif (1985). The rise of Industrial Bourgeosie: the 1983 coup and Prospects of Dependents Industrialisation in Nigeria. Proceedings of 1985 NPSA Conference Ilorin.
  13. M. M. Yusif (1985). "Economic Crisis, Accumulation and Class Confrontation in Nigeria: 1979-1983". (Online).
  14. Saul J. S. (1981). "The Unsteady State: Uganda, Obote and General Amin. ROAPE No. 5.
  15. Hamza A. (1979). "The State in Post-Colonial Societies: Pakistan and Bangladesh in Goulbourn H. Politics and State in the Third World. Macmillan London.
  16. Miliband R. (1973). The State in Capitalist Society. Quartel Books London
  17. Poulantzas N. and Ralph Miliband "The Problems of the Capitalist State.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

  1. State Theory is in Chaos as Theories of State are also Theories of Politics. Assess any one Theory of State with Reality of Politics in any African Country.
  2. Examine the relevance of poulantzas – Miliband Controversy on State to any African Society.

    Week 6: STATE THEORY IN GLOBALISATION: PARADIGM LOST

Readings

  1. Alessandro B. and others. "Global Post-Fordism and Concepts of the State.
  2. William I. R. (1998). "Capitalist Globalisation and the Transnationalisation of the State".
  3. William I. R. (2000). "Towards a Global Ruling Class? Globalisation and the Transnational Capitalist Class.
  4. Leslie S. "The Transnational Capitalist Class and the Discourse of Globalisation".
  5. Jan A. S. (1997). "Global Capitalism and the State". International Affairs Vol. 73 No. 3.

DISCUSSION QUESTION

Is a State Located in African Territories Irrelevant in the Logic of Capital in the Era of Neo-Liberal Globalisation?

Working Group Discussion

The Growth/Development of State is Accompanied by Diverse Analysis of New Social Role in the Society. Discuss and Report this Case with Reference to any Society in Africa.

Week 7: AFRICA IN A GLOBALISING ECONOMY: THE ROLE OF STATE

Readings

  1. Samir A. (2002). "Africa: Living on the Fringe". Monthly Review Vol. 53 (10)
  2. No name, "The Political Economy of Africa in the Global System".
  3. Loxley J. (1987). "The IMF, the World Bank and Sub-Saharan Africa: Policies and Politics". Kjell I. J. The IMF and the World Bank in Africa: Conditionality, Impact and Alternatives.
  4. Lipietz A. (1984). "How Monetarism has Chocked Third World Industrialisation". New Left Review No. 145.
  5. Bjoin B. "State and Capitalist Development in Nigeria". ROAPE No. 23
  6. …………., "Neo-Colonialism, Capitalism and the State in Nigeria".
  7. Ishrat Hussain and Rashid Faruquee (eds.). Adjustment in Africa: Lessons from Country Case Studies. The World Bank. Washington.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

  1. Is it Correct to Say that Globalisation has Made the African State Weak?
  2. Capital moved to stage final conquest of Africa through structural adjustment programme. Examine the different role of the state on this project.
  3. The beneficiaries of neo-liberal economic programs are not african communities but rather the thin layer of elites who sponsor such programmes. Do you agree?

    Week 8: GLOBALISATION, STATE AND DEMOCRACY DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA

Readings

  1. Alan H. (1980). Marxism and Democracy. Lawrence and Wishart London.
  2. Barry H. (ed.) (2000). Global Democracy. Key Debates. Routledge. London.
  3. Svetozar S. (1981). "Marxism and Democracy. The Ruling Class or the Dominant Class? (Online).
  4. William Z. (2008). "Sub-Saharan Africa: Implosion or Take-off"? (Online).
  5. Omano E. (2005). A Democratic Developmental State in Africa? A Concept Paper. (Online).
  6. Richard J. ( ). State, Conflict and Democracy in Africa. Parts I and II
  7. Michael, B. and Nicolas V. W. (1997). Democratic Experiment in Africa. Cambridge University Press.
  8. Mamadoes D. (1998). Political Liberalisation or Democratic Transition: African Perspectives Codescia.
  9. Eshetu, C. and Jibrin, I. (eds.) (1995) Democratisation Processes in Africa: Problems and Prospects. Codesria Book Series.
  10. Larry D. (1999). Developing Democracy Toward Consolidation – John Hopkins University Press.
  11. Nnoli O. (2000). "Globalisation and Democracy in Africa". D. W. Nabudere (ed.) Globalisation and the Post-Colonial African State. AAPS Books Zimbabwe.
  12. Ake C. (2001). Democracy and Development in Africa. Sepctrum Books Ibadan.
  13. Larry, D. and Mark K. P. (1979). Democratisation in Africa. The Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore and London.
  14. Peter, G., Yusuf, B. and Arve, O. (1992). Authoritarianism Democracy and Adjustment: The Politics of Economic Reform in Africa. The SIAS Uppsala Chapters 1 and 2
  15. Lars Rudebeck (ed.) (1992). When Democracy Makes Sense. AKUT Uppsala.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

  1. Neo-Liberal Globalisation has Made Sense in Creating Liberalisation out of Dictatorship but from Democracy Point of View is Nonsense.
  2. Democracy Manages State Power but Since the Local Power Base in the Era of Globalisation is Weak Democracy too Becomes Weak and Superficial.
  3. Democracy and Development in Africa? Assess the Relationship.
  4. Examine the Sense of the Argument that Since the Ruling-Class has Become Transnational the State too is Transnational and Democracy ought to be Global.

Week 9: CAPITALISM, STATE AND LABOUR IN AFRICA

Readings

  1. Richard Hyman (1975). Industrial Relations: A Marxist Introduction. The Macmillan Press Ltd – London
  2. Dominie Strinati (1979). "The State and Industrial Relation". Colin Crouch (ed.). The Economy in Contemporary Capitalism Croom Helm London
  3. Leo-Panitch (1986). Working Class Politics in Crisis: Essays on Labour and the State. Chapters 6 and 7.
  4. Beckman, B. and Sachikonye L. M. (eds.) (2001) Labour Regime and Liberalisation: The Restructuring of State and Society Relations in Africa. AAPS Books Zimbabwe.
  5. Yusuf Bangura and Bjorn Beckman (1988) "African Workers and Structural Adjustment: The Nigerian Case". Dharam Ghai (ed.). The IMF and the South: the Social Impact of Crisis and Adjustment.
  6. Bjorn Beckman, "Trade Unions and Institutional Reform: Nigerian Experiences with South African and Ugandan Comparison".
  7. Bjorn Beckman. "The Politics of Reform: Responses of African Trade Unions with a South African Case.
  8. Bjorn Beckman, "African Trade Unions and the Politics of Reform".
  9. Eskor Toyo. "Deregulation, Collective Bargaining and the Settlement of Industrial Disputes".
  10. Ismel Akca. "Globalisation, State and Labour: Towards a Social Movement Unionism.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

  1. Fordist state in Nigeria became a reality in labour control but post-fordist is as if the concept is a myth.
  2. Globalisation Restructured Capital-Labour Relations Making the Politics of Labour Simpler to Control.
  3. Regulation Theory and Labour Relation. Comment.

    Week 10: GLOBALISATION THE STATE AND URBAN YOUTH IN AFRICA

Readings

  1. Richard Sandbrook (1982). The Politics of Basic Needs: Urban Aspects of Assalting Poverty in Africa. Heinemann London.
  2. M. M. Yusif (2011). The Dilemma of Neo-Liberal Youths in Nigeria: The Post April 16th Violence. (Online).
  3. M. M. Yusif (2012). Social Violence Called Boko Haram in Northern Nigeria: Some Thoughts. (Online).
  4. Mike Davis (2004). "Planet of Slums: Urban Involution and the Informal Proletariat". NLR No. 26.
  5. Asef Bayat (1997). Uncivil Society: The Politics of the Informal People". Third World Quarterly Vol. 18 No.1.
  6. Frank Longstreth (1979). "The City, Industry and the State". Colin Crouch (ed.). The Economy in Contemporary Capitalism.
  7. Kaplan, Robert (1994). "The Coming Anarchy". The Atlantic Monthly No. 273 No.2.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

  1. Construct a Model of Understanding the Character of Neo-Liberal Youths.
  2. The State and the Neo-Liberal Youths are the Strongest Forces in African Cities Today. Analyse their Organisations and Politics in any City of your choice.
  3. Neo-Liberal Youths Violence is Anti-Politics. Discuss.

Week 11: GLOBALISATION, STATE AND CLASSES IN AFRICA

Readings

  1. Werner Bonefeld. "Notes on Competition, Capitalist Crisis, and Class" (Online).
  2. Werner Bonefeld. "Marx Critique of Economics on Lebowitz
  3. Alejandro Colas. "The Class Politics of Globalisation".
  4. Harry Cleaver. "The Inversion of Class Perspective in Marxian Theory: From Valorisation to Self-Valorisation".
  5. William K. Tabb. (2006). "Capital, Class and the State in the Global Political Economy".
  6. Karl Max (1977). Wage Labour and Capital". Selected Works Vol. 1

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

  1. Globalisation has raised theorizing about class divisions to global. Is that theorizing a reality? If yes, what is the interface between the local and the global? If not make a concrete analysis of class formation in any African Country.
  2. How is the local state, inspite of local divisions and differences towards neo-liberal agenda negotiates with global power and imposed the same to the whole society.

    Week 12: THE STATE AND NEW SOCIAL MOVEMENTS IN AFRICA

Readings

  1. Cyrus E. Z. "Crossing Frontiers: Theoretical Innovations in the Study of Social Movements IPSR Vol. 29 No.5
  2. A. G. Frank and M. Fuentes. Nine thesis on Social Movements Internationally.
  1. Peter Waterman (1991). Social Movement Unionism. A New Model for a new world.
  2. …………..(1993). Globalisation, Civil Society, Solidarity: The Politics and Ethics of a World both Real and Universal.
  3. …………..(2001). Labour and Social Movements Confront a Globalised, Informatised, Capitalism.
  4. HBF. (ND). State and (UN) Civil Society Debate. Lagos.
  5. Jibrin Ibrahim and Y. Z. Ya'u (2010). The Left and the Human Rights Struggle in Nigeria. Chapters 1, 3, 7, and 8.
  6. Lloyd Sachikonye (ed.) (1991). Democracy, Civil Society and the State. Social Movements in Southern Africa.
  7. Monoranja, M. Partha, N. M. and Olle T. (eds.) (1998). Peoples Rights: Social Movements and the State in the Third World. Sage Publications London.
  8. Mahmood Mamdani and Ernest Wamba dia-Wamba (eds.) (1995). African Studies in Social Movements and Democracy. Codesria Book Series

DISCUSSION QUESTION

Literature Review Contains many theories on the subject of study. On the other hand theoretical framework is constructed with many related ideas. Form any Theoretical assumption and use not less than ten different texts to construct a theoretical framework.

Week 13: ALTERNATIVE ECONOMY, STATE AND BEYOND

Readings

  1. Andreas Pickel (ND). "Can Keynessianism Save the Neo-Liberal World Order? Trent University, Ontario, Canada.
  2. Charles Gore (2000). "The Rise and Fall of the Washington Consensus as a Paradigm for developing Countries". World Development Vol. 28 No. 5.
  3. Nansjorg Hear and Jan Priewe (2005). "Beyond the Washington Consensus: Macro-economic Politics for Development IPS No. 2.
  4. David Held (2006), Global Covenant: The Social Democratic Alternative to the Washington Consensus. Polity Press Cambridge.
  5. Christine, B. N. and James, H. M. (2000). "Conceptualising Resistance to Globalisation". Barry, K. G. (ed.) Globalisation and the Politics of Resistance. Palgrave London.
  6. Alex C. (2006). "Alternatives to Neo-Liberalism".
  7. David M. K. "Socialism and Global Neo-Liberalism".
  8. Elma Altvater. "Post Neo-Liberalism or Post-Capitalism? The Failure of Neo-Liberalism in the Financial Market Crisis".
  9. Learning from Asian Continent on bringing the State Back and from Latin America on Resisting Neo-Liberalism (set of readings will be provided for these).

DISCUSSION QUESTION

This week too is abnormal. Each student is expected to make selection of any text on African studies, but of significant theoretical contribution, to review in not more than two (2) pages computer-processed.

Week 14: CONCLUSION: CLOSING UP; DISCUSSION OF CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE INCLUDING CRITICISM – SELF CRITICISM; EATING AND CHATTING;

Additional Readings

*1. Niels S. C. Hahn (2008), "Neo-Liberal Imperialism and Pan African Resistance. Journal of World Systems Research". Vol. XIII No. 2.

*2. Simutary N. "Neo-Liberalism and the Relevance of Marxism to Africa: The Case of Zambia".

*3. Ray Kiely and Phil Marfleet (eds.) (1998). Globalisation and the Third World. Chapter one.

*4. Ash Narain Roy (1999). The Third World in the Age of Globalisation. Zed Books. London and New York. Chapters 5 and 6.

*5.    Joo H. (ND). Globalisation and the Nation-State: Dialectical and Contradictory Internationalisation.

6.    David Fasenfest. "Neo-Liberalism and the Capitalist World Order". (Online).

7.    Joachim Hirsch. "Globalisation and the Question of Democracy (Online).


8.    Christopher P. ( ). "Democracy, Markets and Capital: Are there Necessary Economic Limits to Democracy"? In David Held (ed.). Prospects for Democracy.


*9.    Arne T. T. and Meriken V. (eds.) (2001). Associational Life in African Cities: Popular Responses to the Urban Crisis. Nordiska African Institute.

*10.    Bjorn Beckman, Eva Hansson, Anders Sjogren (2001). Civil Society and Authoritarianism in the Third World. PODSU Stockhom University.


11.    Joe Howell and Jerry Pecrce (2001). Civil Society and Development: A Critical Explanations. Lynne and Rienner. United Kingdom.

12.    John Ehrenberg. "Beyond Civil Society".

13.    Bjorn Beckman. " Interest Groups and the Construction of Democratic Space".

14.    Chris Allen (1997). "Who Needs Civil Society". ROAPE No. 73.

*15.    Claude Ake (2001). Democracy and Development in Africa. Spectrum Books Ibadan.

*16.    Claude Ake (1994). Democratisation of Disempowerment in Africa. CASS Occasional Monograph No. 1.


17.    Chris Harman. "The State and Capitalism Today". (Online).

18.    Ron Tabor. "The Marxist Theory of State (Online).

19.    John Braithwaite (1981). "The Myth of Social Class and Criminality Reconsidered". American Sociological Review Vol. 45 No. 1.

20.    Franz V. (1996). "From Violence to Justice and Security in Cities". Environment and Urbanisation". Vol. 8 No. 1.

21.    Peter Anyang Nyongo (ed.) (1987). Popular Struggles for Democracy in Africa. Zeb Books London and New Jersy.

Requirements

  • Readings that are underlined are required texts to be read and reviewed by students for class discussion.
  • Those marked with star under the additional readings are also important.
  • Questions that are raised at the end of each topic are guide for study by students. They are also for discussion.
  • The teaching of the course is by a seminar form. However, the weekly readings of the relevant texts is as important as the final written examination.
  • Therefore, students are expected to read all assigned materials, attend all classes and participate actively in discussions.
  • If you are not going to attend any class tell me before the time. But when you return must submit work for that week.
  • Assessment of students is based on end of Semester examination (60%) and Continues Assessment (40%).
  • The CA grades:
    • Attendance/class work/participation        -    20%
    • Course Research Paper                -    10%
    • Review of any text on African studies        -    5%
    • Working Group Discussion/Literature

    Review – Theoretical Framework Nexus    -    5%

In order to purify learning and research I have to take strict disciplinary action against any student who is found on plagiarism. In our work we will be analyzing the thoughts, arguments and evidence of others, to reformulate them to develop our own ideas. So, you must not copy or paraphrase some one's work and present it as your own. Don't come across idea of one writer in another text by another writer and claim you got it from the original text. Finally, all texts consulted should be properly acknowledged. These are elements of integrity of a scholar.