Democracy vs. Military Rule: No contest
By Abdullahi Muhammad Yalwa
Sometimes, intellectual masturbation makes people say despicable things. That’s how they say foolish things without actually knowing. If not intellectual premature ejaculation, what else would possibly make an educated person compare democracy with military rule? You can’t compare the two at all. In fact, it’s an insult to real thinking to mix them up without a strong reason as to why and how.
Yes, Nigerians are frustrated with democracy because we’ve suffered under it. Presumably, every Gen Zer born from 1999 to date has suffered, or is suffering, from the discontents of democracy. Corruption, poverty, and bad leaders all strangulate our growth. As such, it’s easy for someone who never lived through military rule — or never thoroughly read about it — to think it was better. Nevertheless, it’s inexcusable to make that comparison in the 21st century. With all the history and information one click away. This is lazy thinking.
Nigeria’s story explains the tension between Democracy and Autocracy. Since independence in 1960, Nigerians have swung between dreams of democracy and military high-handedness. The First Republic, which started in 1963, collapsed into coups by 1966. Then came 30 years of mostly military rule, with a short democratic break from 1979 to 1983.
Within this duration, Gowon fought the Biafran war from 1967 to 1970, which resulted in millions of deaths and the fangs of deadly hunger almost flung Nigeria into an abyss. After Gowon, Buhari came in the 80s with his “War Against Indiscipline” rhetoric. Though some changes were recorded only minimally, his government, too, was a failed experiment. Then, Babangida followed his coup and ruled Nigeria through military rule for almost 10 years. His scandalous cancellation of the 1993 election brought General Abacha, who also killed activists in a cold-blooded manner, abducted critics, and censured opposition. Under Abacha, Nigeria became a global pariah, an outcast because of misrule, corruption, and human rights abuses. So, the soldiers promised order but delivered fear, theft, and failure. Beyond the Gun tirade, a lot of them proved to be nothing but unscrupulous, self-centred, and avaricious.
When democracy returned in 1999, it wasn’t perfect — but it was progress. From Obasanjo to Yar’Adua, Jonathan, Buhari, and now Tinubu, we’ve seen peaceful transitions. That alone is a miracle compared to the blood and chaos of coups, which are primarily scathing and scary.
Democracy works and is better than military rule because it gives people a voice. Under democracy, leaders are elected. The constitution limits their powers, and Citizens can question, join them, or change the government. Nigeria’s record is full of incidents in which the people removed the government despite its resistance. Elections since 1999 have been taking place, even though with low turnout and many flaws.
Furthermore, democracy still allows movements and protests like that of #EndSARS in 2020. As such, people can protest against abuse without the nation collapsing. That’s democracy in action.
Equally, in a democracy, the law stands above all. Rights like speech, movement, and association are still protected despite shortcomings. The media and civic groups expose scandals and corruption. Dan Bello is our standard example here. Leaders feel pressure because they can be voted out. They are still afraid of the people’s might. Similarly, growth comes from debate, not decree. Policies get tested and refined before execution. Sometimes they are reversed after execution because of pressure. All these are happening because of the grace of Democracy.
Now, compare that with military rule. Under soldiers, power is seized by guns, not ballots. A few officers give orders. No dialogue, no accountability, only decrees that replace laws. The constitution goes silent. Many of its parts got scraped and unscripted. Rights become suspended, or mere names on papers. Dissent under the military is punished with the barrels of guns. Abacha’s regime proved it — hidden trials, executions, silence. Thus, there is no right to protest, no matter the height of injustice.
Nevertheless, some people may say the military will bring discipline, build roads, and promote infrastructure. But all of that without justice is short-term. Order without fairness is not peace; it’s fear, which eventually erupts into chaos in disguise.
We have tested the military. And the reflex is there in history for the discerning minds. Under the generals, Nigeria’s economy sank, institutions died, and corruption deepened. Stability built on fear never lasts. Once soldiers take power, they rarely leave it peacefully. Hence, there is no rotation of government. You only get stuck with whatever you’ve got.
Although Democracy has its flaws, issues like bad elections, corruption, and insecurity remain rampant in our country; nevertheless, it is by far a better option. At least, it gives us freedom to protest, options for dialogue, and hope in change. By contrast, military rule gives us nothing but fear, silence, and graves.
The worst democracy is still better than the best dictatorship. Democracy lets us correct our mistakes. Military rule buries them.
So, all these comparisons and happiness over the aborted coup against Tinubu is nothing but nostalgia from frustrated people who refused to learn better. Democracy is not Nigeria’s problem. Nigeria’s main issue is bad leadership. If only we’d vote for responsible leaders, they’d fix the system, without destroying it. They’d strengthen our votes. Protect our rights. Hold leaders accountable. All these would happen only when democracy grows. Thus, democracy grows, Nigeria grows.
No gun can build what the people can build together.
Abdullahi Muhammad Yalwa, a Law graduate based in Azare, Bauchi State, can be reached at abdullahimuhammadyalwa02@gmail.com.
