EXAMINING THE POLITICS OF IDENTITY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF ANYIAM-OSIGWE’S GROUP MIND PRINCIPLE
The final part of a scholarly examination by Tetsekela Michelle Anyiam-Osigwe of the Igbo condition in Nigeria from the perspective of her grandfather’s (Sage Philosopher Chief Emmanuel Onyechere Osigwe Anyiam-Osigwe) Group Mind Principle.
On Biafra
The feasibility of Biafra is questionable and the analogy of the Nigerian state with a zoo is still debatable. Nevertheless, it remains that by driving Igbos out of their homes, businesses and compromising the livelihood of the Igbo indigene, those who were initially reluctant to the Biafra project would feel compelled to intuit into the Igbo Group Mind.
Crucially, Anyiam-Osigwe in fact draws reference from the Igbo cosmology, and the concept of Umunna in his Group Mind formulations. The atomisation of the family into segmental relationships like uncles, aunts, nieces and nephews or any other label that represents a fundamental gap in familial relationship is void in the Igbo familial structure. There was and still is recognition within the family unit that coexistence with truthfulness, honesty and cooperation at the helm of the totality of our existence with the collectiveness of attributes and potentialities is key.
This cultural depth of the Group Mind establishes the existence of the other as fundamental to the sustenance of the existence of the self. It is this depth of corelationship that integrates every member of the community into an uncommon bond of brotherhood. Therefore, all members of the same community will not simply just see one another as brothers and sisters or define themselves as such, but truly function in the spirit of oneness and mutuality.
Rather than a National Group mind evolving, it is possible that the smaller Biafran Group mind manifests as a consciousness of the people at large, who will willingly pool their attributes together through a synergy in which every member is guided by the vision and interest of the Group, which is the Biafran state or some form of autonomy, convinced that the collective effort will yield higher satisfaction than the individual effort.
Failure to convince the Igbos and smaller ethnic groups in the South of an all-inclusive Nigeria, regardless of Biafran sentiments, will inevitably lead to further instability and disunity. This instability and disunity, rather than being a frictional period, a circumstanced event in our present history, will instead be institutionalised, jeopardising any effort to correct the fragmentation that characterises the present history of Nigeria’s immediate future.
Michael Anyiam-Osigwe posited that one of the most important lessons he learnt from his father, Osigwe Anyiam-Osigwe, is that the past must never be allowed to impair the present nor the present be allowed to imperil the future. Presenting a Civil War narrative in a way that only blames one side and instigating anti-Igbo sentiments will not be beneficial for any region. In the same way, pro-Biafra sentiments must consider the immediate aftermath of any action to secede out of the country. The present socio-political and economic environment might be hostile and frictional, but it is far from permanent. It therefore cannot overwhelm pro-Biafra arguments; otherwise any possible Biafra would be built on faulty foundations. The Biafra being demanded might be an independent state, but perhaps the one needed is much more abstract: a consciousness of Igbos to ensure that they get a seat at a table; a policy lobby that ensures the development of the South-East; a deeper sense of brotherhood and even communitarians among Igbos, especially those that are living in other regions.
In reconciling this Biafra with Anyiam-Osigwe’s National Group mind, perhaps it could be said that even with this “Biafran state of mind,” we should recognise that the existence of Nigeria is best assured by the existence and survival of the Igbos. Also, that the existence and survival of Igbos is integrated in the existence, survival and preservation of the whole country. When this perspective constitutes the nexus of the mindset of each person, it establishes the Group Mind. Where this materialises, people, regardless of ethnicity, will willingly resolve to coexist in a Nigerian community in which individuals pool together their various attributes, through a synergy in which every participant is guided by the vision and interest of the nation as a whole.
In this regard, Anyiam-Osigwe therefore argues that, “we must all strive to converge at the enlightened understanding of a new narrative that enables the synthesis of a new vision of the present history of our beloved country and the immediate future it would yield for the good of all.”