Selection of the Independent Variables

The first question is how do we measure the political relationship between the three ethnic nationalities that we have chosen? The following list of criteria would be fairly comprehensive in that regard:

1. Location of ancestral homeland

2. Structure of the three ethnic societies (ranking or non-ranking) 3. Presence or absence of regional political parties

4. Use of local languages as campaign strategies

5. Level of political interaction and cooperation between the ethnic nationalities.

6. Degree of ethnic representation in the national political structure.

These cover most aspects of the political environment of Nigeria. Furthermore, the political development and administrative structures are connected to the geographic location and Vegetation belts of these three nationalities as discussed in the beginning of chapter three. Figure 2.1 below equally provides an inventory of these three nationalities that we selected according to their geographical regions. Their administrative systems, type of pre-colonial society and many more will be appraised in the next chapter.

Map 2.1: showing the homeland of the three ethnic nationalities of Igbo, Yoruba, and Hausa-Fulani (source www.grin.com 2006)

Effort was made to ensure that the selection accommodates the range of indigenous societies in the region, and that is, centralised society and decentralised society, trade-based society and conquest based society, as well as the plurality of administrative systems in the ethnic nationalities that inhabit the regions. The differences in traditional politics and the structure of human relations in the selected nationalities are thought of in terms of the issues that distinguish them from each other. The mode of present day political interaction in the country is derived also from the configuration of socio-political and administrative systems and structures of the three ethnic nationalities of Igbo, Yoruba, and Hausa-Fulani.

Furthermore, the categorisation of the Igbo and the specific types of polities that are associated with the groups in each category are reminiscent of the type of society that prevailed in Igboland. The disparities in the type of polities between the northern, western and north eastern Igbo groups who operate constitutional monarchies and the southern and eastern groups that operate village-based democracies are not hard and fast. Among the Igbo who are trade-based cultivators, authority is

democratically structured and dispensed. The centralisation of the structures of authority amongst some Igbo groups does not entail the employment of coercion in its practice.

The categorisation of the Yoruba into three groups is evidence of the absence of an over-arching political organisation in Yorubaland. The fact that there were fairly large political organisations in Yorubaland is not indicative of the fact that their centralised political system was undemocratic. Among the Hausa-Fulani, society and authority were evolved into huge monoliths of authoritarianism. It will be shown that all the aforementioned differences and unique features have some measure of impact on the issues this study intends to establish.

To measure the veracity of the rancorous politically influenced mindset that existed between the three nationalities and the struggle for political relevance within the national state, we decided to look within each nationality for answers, and as well as the heterogeneity in the administrative systems across the three ethnic nationalities of Yoruba, Igbo, and Hausa-Fulani. We adopted and applied a methodological construct or scheme that was developed by Horowitz (2000), Horowitz’s ranking theory, and supported by Geertz (1965) primordial properties analysis. The scholars emphasised that ranking and recognition of differences inherent in the primordial properties of tribal groups in a multi-ethnic society determine in large extent the ethnic relationship and the problem of equitable representation in governmental structures and their impact on political performance in a divided society. For the purpose of this study, we designated the construct as the Horowitz-Geertz scheme or H-G scheme.

The independent variables are conceptualised to correspond with four hypotheses.

The first set of variables comprises the differential patterns of inter-ethnic relationship and political development in the three selected nationalities. The other set of variables comprises their political philosophy and ethnic identity. The third variable comprises the general outlook of the Nigerian administrative structure. The fourth variable comprises the four state building policies and the preferential alliances that evolved between the political personalities in the three ethnic nationalities.

The dependent variable is the defect democratic politics measured in terms of such indicators as Campaigns by political parties during elections, use of ethnic languages in campaigns, indigenisation of candidacy right, cross-carpeting of politicians, in the country from 1999 to 2011. The four hypotheses that we presented and discussed earlier are meant to address and dispel any possible concern about vagueness in the study. The H-G scheme constitutes the set of tools for the inquiry. The scheme will aid our task of assessing the ranking system and the traditional structures in each of the three ethnic nationalities as well as between the three contending ethnic groups in the national government itself.

For the sake of clarity, there is the need at this point for a definition of what one means by ‘ranking system and political relation. I have elected to do that particularly for the additional reason that they are important features of our discourse. I have deduced from the argument of Horowitz (2000: 55-89) that ‘political cohesion’ and political tolerance connect specifically to the existence or non existence of ranking and the political relations between diverse ethnic nationalities” in any geographical entity or society (Horowitz 2000).

Furthermore, this author is of the opinion that the employment of ‘ranking’ as a concept in the description of the Nigerian political field, structure of tribal groups and their relations to other segmental units of the society provides an anthropological resource for this study. In that regard therefore, all the various agencies that perform roles in the realms of political socialisation, social control, party membership, and campaign messages in the society will qualify as segmental units in the description of this scheme. In most cases these are those units that are most contingent and proximate to political contestation in society. They include the family, the lineage, kindred, and channels of socialisation, social control, village and ethnic associations.

2.3. Tools for Inquiry into Ranked and Unranked Patterns: A Summary of the