Do the events in Ondo and Oyo states remind us of anything?

For me, it does. First, the gradual but sure erosion of the sovereignty of our nation-state. Note: I exaggerate the meaning of sovereignty here: that ultimate power of the state that resides in the people.

A thread

Our sovereignty is a fiction as it doesn't lie in the people; it lies in the cabal - a fiendish cohort, gang of criminals who have captured the nation - state.

Secondly, it highlights the Yugoslavia-tion of Nigeria. Or what my friend @ChidiOdinkalu describes as the
gradual restructuring of Nigeria. How can restructure happen without it being noticed? We've to look in the direction of Yugoslavia to understand how 6 ethnic nations - with same language (Serbio-Crotia) - were forced into a union and how centrifugal & centripetal forces worked
to destroy it or knolled the death's knell as someone described it earlier on my timeline.

Inspite of, three issues are emerging from the Ondo and Oyo saga:

1. The reassertion of the civic public - or what I call the civil activia - the active civic.
Here, there is a growing insistence by the people on the sovereignty of the people: the people have become the counterweight to forceful power and are resisting attempt by power to determine state protection. Sunday Igboho represents this
2. The devolution of power from the center to the states. Here, there is the insistence by the subnational state to own and resolves its local problem by deploying local state resources. Akeredolu and Makinde represent this!
3. The third is that of a single voice of Attahiru Jega; but it represents a gradual shift of the position of the intelligentsia of the north. To him, restructure is a reality ( not the ideal); and all we have to agree on, is the "how, where and when".
Is it a coincidence that the media organ of the north, Daily Trust, organised a conference on restructuring in which he spoke? I don't think it is, considering that paper's editor's ( Mahmud Jega) famous narrowing of restructuring to curbing northern advantages
Whatever direction the gradual erosion of the sovereignty of the state takes, whatever becomes of the restructuring already taking place that Chidi correctly observed, we have to learn from the balkans.

It is never late.

Good afternoon from the holy of hollies of the shrine

More from Society

A long thread on how an obsessive & violent antisemite & Holocaust denier has been embraced by the international “community of the good.”

Sarah Wilkinson has a history of Holocaust denial & anti-Jewish hatred dating back (in documented examples) to around 2015.


She is a self-proclaimed British activist for “Palestinian rights” but is more accurately a far Left neo-Nazi. Her son shares the same characteristics of violence, racism & Holocaust denial.

I first documented Sarah Wilkinson’s Holocaust denial back in July 2016. I believe I was the 1st person to do so.

Since then she has produced a long trail of written hate and abuse. See here for a good summary.


Wilkinson has recently been publicly celebrated by @XRebellionUK over her latest violent action against a Jewish owned business. Despite many people calling XR’s attention to her history, XR have chosen to remain in alliance with this neo-Nazi.

Former Labour Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell MP is among those who also chose to stand with Wilkinson via a tweet.

But McDonnell is not alone.

Neo-Nazi Sarah Wilkinson is supported and encouraged by thousands of those on the Left who consider themselves “anti-racists”.

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?