IF ENGLISH, WHY NOT FULANI OR SHUWA ARAB OR VICE-VERSA! I saw a tribe-baiting post (attached) that got the sociologist in me thinking. Without being tribalistic or racist this is a very interesting intellectual issue that needs some social, cultural and historical analysis. The English invaded us from Britain led by Frederick Lugard and ruled us for just over100 years. We got rid of them and became independent. The Fulani invaded Northern Nigeria (originally from Guinea) led by Dan Fodio and ruled the North for over 150 years but we never got rid of them and claim our independence. They are full citizens and whenever we say Power back to the North its like its all Fulani lined up as the attachment indicates. In fact, they seem to have more power and residency rights than the original indigenes. The Arabs invaded Kanem-Borno Empire from Sudan, led by Rabih and dominated for only 7 years, before the British took over, yet they have remained here as citizens running for political office. Why? Why are they not treated as invaders just like the British? Or why were the British not treated as citizens that could remain and run for office? Was it our racism or their racism? Please I have tagged mostly those I believe are intellectuals that can discuss this dispassionately. There is a lot to learn about us and our motives. Even the way people analyse will provide lessons. Any aggressive or abusive comments will be removed. Thank you. .
Posted on: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 09:27:31 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015