.......Yes, there was a determined effort to fight corruption perpetuated by the civilian bourgeoisie but this too was not so much an expression of Buharis will as it was an expression of overriding objective conditions. What do I mean? Corruption is only partly for immediate personal consumption of the ruling classes. A large part of corruption is for political patronage meant to help members of ruling classes perpetuate themselves on power for further self-enrichment. In this sense, corruption follows the logic and laws of capitalism; of re-investing surplus back into production for further accumulation. Only that, capitalism had decayed and could no longer expand the productive capacity of humanity therefore ending in the pit of corruption and/or financial speculation. Corruption is thus the form of accumulation in the monopoly stage of capitalism. It is of note that the corruption of political elite in backward countries like Nigeria is in essence the same as the fraud and manipulations of financial overlords in New York and London; the difference in the forms is in the historical fact that Western capitalism was once progressive and build the foundations of a more refined mostly legal corruption whereas capitalism in backward countries emerged in the womb of decaying and rotten global capitalism (imperialism). Many have designated corruption a form of primitive accumulation, described by Marx as a necessary stage in the emergence of Western capitalism in 15th and 16th century England. This is true but corruption is a form of primitive accumulation that is qualitatively different from the one that gave birth to capitalism. The primitive accumulation of the era of imperialism is not a birth process but one of death; that of decay. It does not lead to investment in productive activities but to destruction of productive forces. But the level of acceptability of this corruption, whether the advanced/refined/Western type or the crude type in backward countries, depends on the level of development of productive forces. The society is more tolerant of corruption during periods of booms. But once crisis sets in, the mood will change rapidly. This is what we are currently witnessing in the advanced world with all the agitations for tighter financial regulation and cracking down on tax evasion and other financial crimes. It is not because of this or that anti-corruption crusader; it is the outcome of the crisis. Though the crisis may throw out in the open such anti-corruption crusaders. This was the same dialectical process that defines Buharis anti-corruption crusade. The Nigerian state in the 80s could no longer afford the patronage spendings of the 1970s thanks to the crisis in revenues triggered by oil glut. Even Shagari vowed to fight corruption with his ethical revolution. Buhari emerged to carry out what the class, as a collective, regarded as a necessary though painful measure. Whether Buhari personally aimed to carry this anti-corruption crusade to a higher level than the minimum required by his class is irrelevant because he was swept away by the same historical forces that brought him to power. As Marxists, however, we know that eliminating corruption is impossible without elimination of subjugation of man to man and abolition of monopoly capitalism..... From The Crisis of Buharism
Posted on: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 21:04:18 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015