The separatist group IPOB formed by the radical thinker Nnamdi Kanu has risen to become the most infuential group in the history of what we regard today as South East Nigeria and Nnamdi Kanu, it's founder is second only to the leader of the defunct Biafra Republic, Dim Odumegwu Ojukwu. But Ipob has peaked and is already in decline. The reason for this decline is it's false founding and message which is in variance with the history of the people the people claim to seek to liberate

Most of the defunct Biafra is in the Igbo
language speaking region of Nigeria with other minority tribes in today's South South region. Today, it is the Igbos of the South East that are far more desirous of an independent Biafra state. But the precolonial history of these people make me feel like a Biafra state is not achievable


Now, the one Igbo ethnic identity we have today is not real, it is a pseudo-nation just like Nigeria and indeed most African countries are pseudo-nations. There was nothing like Igbo nation before colonialism as the Igbos were organized into numerous clans that fought, killed and sold themselves. The region was so toxic in those times that the Igbos account for a very high percentage of people sold as slaves during the slave trade era.

Igbos have never been united in their history and it is their greatest undoing. For example, unlike in Yorubaland where Bola Tinubu, an Osun man could become Lagos governor and control the economy of Lagos state for over two decades because to them what matters is that he is Yoruba, a governor of Abia state once sacked Igbos from other states in that state's civil service

When the separatist leader Nnamdi Kanu accuses the white man for creating what he refers to as the contraption called Nigeria, he fails to realize that the Igbo nation in the same vain can be viewed as a western creation. He fails to realize that the same way Nigeria and Africa can hardly progress because of it's faulty foundation is the same way an Igbo nation can hardly thrive because of it's unnatural founding.

IPob for all it's popularity will eventually degenerate to a clannish rivalry in Igboland and it ia already happening.

To be continued.....

IgbuduMonkey:
The separatist group IPOB formed by the radical thinker Nnamdi Kanu has risen to become the most infuential group in the history of what we regard today as South East Nigeria and Nnamdi Kanu, it's founder is second only to the leader of the defunct Biafra Republic, Dim Odumegwu Ojukwu. But Ipob has peaked and is already in decline. The reason for this decline is it's false founding and message which is in variance with the history of the people the people claim to seek to liberate

Most of the defunct Biafra is in the Igbo
language speaking region of Nigeria with other minority tribes in today's South South region. Today, it is the Igbos of the South East that are far more desirous of an independent Biafra state. But the precolonial history of these people make me feel like a Biafra state is not achievable


Now, the one Igbo ethnic identity we have today is not real, it is a pseudo-nation just like Nigeria and indeed most African countries are pseudo-nations. There was nothing like Igbo nation before colonialism as the Igbos were organized into numerous clans that fought, killed and sold themselves. The region was so toxic in those times that the Igbos account for a very high percentage of people sold as slaves during the slave trade era.

Igbos have never been united in their history and it is their greatest undoing. For example, unlike in Yorubaland where Bola Tinubu, an Osun man could become Lagos governor and control the economy of Lagos state for over two decades because to them what matters is that he is Yoruba, a governor of Abia state once sacked Igbos from other states in that state's civil service

When the separatist leader Nnamdi Kanu accuses the white man for creating what he refers to as the contraption called Nigeria, he fails to realize that the Igbo nation in the same vain can be viewed as a western creation. He fails to realize that the same way Nigeria and Africa can hardly progress because of it's faulty foundation is the same way an Igbo nation can hardly thrive because of it's unnatural founding.

IPob for all it's popularity will eventually degenerate to a clannish rivalry in Igboland and it ia already happening.

To be continued.....

Disclaimer: I decided to reply to your post as a free-thinker, looking at the subject matter from two angles and I am not in support of the IPOB movement in any way.

There was no preponderance of in-fighting and killing within ancient Igboland as you claimed. Yes, there was slavery where the Arochukwu folks were heavily involved in capturing and selling slaves and Igbo slaves account for the highest sold from the Bight of Biafra region, however, Yorubaland experienced more pre-independence in-fighting (Ekiti-Parapo war of 1877, Osogbo war of 1840, Oyo vs Dahomey war etc.) and internal resistance compared to Igboland. Igboland, by far, was very peaceful (the lack of a central king as obtained in the Edo region which often came with periodic tyranny causing Edo people to flee Edoland and seek refuge in Igboland as refugee seekers), flourished in agriculture (attracted Igala migrants in droves to settle along the Northern fringes of Igboland and along the riverside - ndi Olu), etc.

I personally don't agree with IPOB especially the way Nnamdi Kanu is going about the movement - he has created enemies for himself, even unnecessary enmity with people he should have allied with. However, is the struggle for independence valid? Yes, absolutely. Any region has a right to clamor for independence. However, is his approach the best? I don't think so. I think that there are 43 or 44 petitions for independence with the UN and that of Biafra was pending acceptance as of a few months ago.

The lack of a common ethnic image was common to most ancient African tribes. It is not Igbo-specific. In the same vein, this should not be used as a predictive yardstick for future co-operative tendencies.

The Biafran region of 1967 excluded Delta Igboland not because they were not considered ethnic Igbo but because Delta Igbo was part of Bendel State, which was under Western Nigeria and not Eastern Nigeria which Ojukwu was the regional governor of. Ojukwu could legally only declare independence over the area which he had powers over - which was Eastern Nigeria. However, many great sons of Delta Igbo were proudly Igbo and sided with the movement as of then. If Biafra had succeeded, here are 4 likely outcomes:

1) it would have been a French speaking country or French/English bilingual country - Ojukwu had made plans with France to introduce French to Biafran schools. He had personal scores to settle with the British and had plans to sever all ties with Britain, including the English language.
2) developmental growth in terms of infrastructure especially could have been phenomenal, given the enterprising nature of the indigenes of the region. It could have been likened to the phenomenal growth of Israel within a few decades of its creation.
3) economic growth could probably have been stalled at some point, given that Anglophone countries in Africa tend to fare better than their francophone counterparts, especially if the cedis had been adopted by the country.
4) Igbo and Ijaw languages would have gained the status of international languages with Igbo being spoken in 3 countries - Nigeria, Biafra and Equatorial Guinea and Ijaw spoken in Nigeria (Delta State) and Biafra.

IgbuduMonkey:


Now, the one Igbo ethnic identity we have today is not real, it is a pseudo-nation just like Nigeria and indeed most African countries are pseudo-nations. There was nothing like Igbo nation before colonialism as the Igbos were organized into numerous clans that fought, killed and sold themselves. The region was so toxic in those times that the Igbos account for a very high percentage of people sold as slaves during the slave trade era.

This part I will strongly, very strongly, disagree with. In the 21st century, an Igbo ethnic identity is as real as the earth that you stand on. That something didn't exist yesterday doesn't mean it cannot exist today. Every ethnic group today arose from different groups who at some point in in the past didn't recognize a common identity.

The English? At one point, they were Jutes and Angles and Saxons and Frisians and even Danes. Disparate groups who in the course of their common history slowly evolved a common identity and took the name of one of the melding groups (Angles) as their common name.

The Zulus? Until the adventures of Shaka, Zulu was the name of a small clan. There were several clans in the area with their own names and identities, until fighting in Shaka's army instilled in them a common brotherhood which in time led to the development of a common Zulu identity.

It's the same story with practically every modern ethnic grouping of considerable size: Shona, Yoruba, Hausa, Lingala, Ijaw, etc.

In the course of the 20th century, the different Igbo-speaking groups of Southeastern Nigeria under colonial and early post-colonial pressures forged an Igbo ethnic identity, and that identity is as real as the gadget you are using to read this. Na person wey no know wetin ethnogenesis mean dey call am 'pseudo'. All that is needed for an ethnic group to exist is for the people involved to have a strong conviction that they are one people, with a common history (real or imagined) and a common destiny. No one will argue that the Igbo of the Southeast do not possess this.

And about different Igbo clans fighting and enslaving one another, please. In the 19th century, no group in this country was fighting and enslaving their brethren from other subgroups like the Yoruba. Nobody today argues that Yoruba ethnic identity is not real. Before Usman dan Fodio's jihad, the different Hausa city-states warred against one another: Gobir against Katsina, Kano against Zazzau, Zamfara against Kebbi, everyone against everyone else. Nobody argues that Hausa ethnic identity is not real.

These your 'hot takes' on the Igbo, while sometimes containing a kernel of a bright idea are always full of, excuse my language, nonsense.