Since independence, ample evidence suggests that Nigeria’s political space is populated by individuals with psychopathological tendencies—people who call themselves leaders but, in reality, exhibit questionable mental states that make them unfit for leadership. The bloodthirstiness that characterised the military’s intervention in the nation’s politics further indicates that some of the infamous officers harboured varying degrees of psychopathological conditions, ranging from authoritarianism to paranoia.
During the Nigerian Civil War, a certain military officer ordered his troops to massacre defenceless men by the thousands in what is now known as the Asaba Massacre. Unlike the reasons typically cited by coup plotters for eliminating their perceived enemies, the Asaba Massacre can never—and should never—be justified. In revisiting that tragic event, historians and researchers of the Nigerian Civil War should analyse the roles of all actors involved from a psychopathological perspective.
It is my sincere belief that many of those involved in the needless killings of that era suffered from underlying mental health issues, which were downplayed because they were in the military. How do we rationalise the killing of a friend by one of his best friends, who was also his best man at his wedding, all in the name of martial law?
Let us fast-forward to Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999. Since then, events in our political space appear to be even worse than those of the military era. Have the needless killings stopped? The answer is no. Political opponents still target each other for assassination in a bid to seize power and perpetuate themselves in office. This is where the problem of narcissism comes in.
The hullabaloo surrounding the scramble for power and political relevance is not driven by the common good but by selfish ambitions. Politicians manipulate the electoral process through monetary inducements to secure positions of power. Once in office, they forget those who helped them achieve their goals. Instead, they begin to install family members and close friends in key government positions to safeguard their ever-growing ambitions.
In pursuit of these narcissistic goals, psychopathic politicians become ruthlessly authoritarian, ensuring that nothing and no one stands in their way. This is why they go to great lengths to manipulate key institutions, such as the police, the judiciary, student unions, and, most importantly, the electoral commission. They populate these institutions with loyalists, friends, and family members. So confident are they that the judiciary is on their side that they often mockingly instruct political opponents to “go to court” whenever they steal their mandates.
Whether we acknowledge it or not, the existence of psychopathology in Nigerian politics is an underreported issue. A nation run by rational, well-balanced individuals cannot continue to descend into lawlessness, as Nigeria is currently doing. Our politicians have lost all sense of shame. Some who once swore it would be over their dead bodies before they joined the APC are today loudmouthed members of the same party. What has changed? Nothing—except that money has changed hands.
Despite its vast natural endowments, Nigeria remains one of the poorest countries on earth. This reality is a direct consequence of the quality of leadership we have had over the past twenty-six years. While it was once easy to accuse the military, particularly Abacha, of gruesomely looting the treasury, the level of corruption today is arguably unprecedented and baffling. It has reached the point where crude oil is being stolen and transported through our high seas by untouchable figures, all amid embarrassing levels of national poverty that have become a global spectacle.
The concept of “stomach infrastructure”, which has gained dangerous traction in Nigerian politics, has only worsened the situation. It has allowed politicians to drift further from real infrastructural development, focusing instead on transactional politics, where vulnerable citizens are manipulated into trading their votes for mere plates of pottage due to crippling hunger. No sane leader would deliberately weaponise hunger for selfish political purposes. Those who engage in this behaviour claim to operate with a Machiavellian mindset, which, when critically examined, bears clear psychopathological traits.
Ascending to political power at the cost of another man’s life is not the hallmark of a well-intentioned, mentally stable politician. Instead, it serves as a warning to the people that even worse days lie ahead. Can we then safely conclude that we are being led by madmen? This may not be far from the truth, considering the excessive narcissism exhibited by our politicians.
