Reports that an individual described Chief Lawani as a “mumu” in response to his political analysis raises a troubling question about the direction of our public conversations. When personal insults become substitutes for reasoned arguments, political engagement loses its intellectual value, and social media becomes less a platform for democratic participation than an arena for hostility, provocation and the public humiliation of others.
Chief Lawani’s political opinion for whatever reason may be challenged, but his dignity should never be the price of disagreement.
As a former Deputy Governor of Benue State, Chief Lawani occupies a place in the state’s political history. His experience in governance, business and public affairs provides a basis for engaging his views with seriousness, even when those views are considered controversial or pessimistic. His position does not make him infallible, nor does his status place his opinions beyond scrutiny. However, neither disagreement with his conclusions nor dissatisfaction with his political assessment justifies reducing the discussion to name-calling. Though, I am yet to watch or listen to the interview but stumble on the disturbing name calling on Facebook.
The proper response to a political argument is another argument supported by facts, electoral arithmetic, historical experience and a credible alternative perspective. If his assessment of the Idoma Nation’s prospects of producing a governor is considered inaccurate, those who disagree should demonstrate why. If his calculations of voting strength, political alliances or the distribution of electoral power are disputed, the appropriate response is to interrogate those assumptions and present better evidence.
That is the essence of political reasoning. Insults, by contrast, neither invalidate an argument nor strengthen the position of the person making them.
BEYOND THE INDIVIDUAL: A QUESTION OF POLITICAL CULTURE
This controversy goes beyond Chief Lawani as an individual. It speaks to a growing tendency in our political conversations to interpret every opinion through the narrow lenses of ethnic loyalty, partisan allegiance, personal ambition and emotional gratification.
Increasingly, public figures are applauded when their statements align with the expectations of particular groups and ridiculed when their views depart from prevailing sentiments. Under this mentality, political analysis is no longer evaluated primarily on its merits but on whether it reinforces what people already wish to believe.
Such a culture is dangerous to democratic development.
A mature political community must be able to distinguish between an individual’s assessment of political reality and that individual’s commitment to the collective aspirations of the people. A person who questions the feasibility of a political ambition is not necessarily opposed to that ambition. Sometimes, a difficult assessment may be an invitation to confront uncomfortable realities, reorganise political strategy and build the necessary alliances for future success.
The Idoma Nation, like every other political constituency, deserves honest conversations about its electoral strength, internal cohesion, leadership choices and relationships with other communities in Benue State. Such conversations should neither be suppressed by fear nor distorted by personal hostility.
Patriotism does not require everyone to share the same political opinion. It requires people to pursue their collective interests with wisdom, honesty and a sense of responsibility.
THE IDOMA GOVERNORSHIP QUESTION REQUIRES STRATEGY, NOT SENTIMENT
The question of whether an Idoma son can emerge as Governor of Benue State is a legitimate political subject that deserves sober analysis, strategic planning and sustained engagement.
Political aspirations are not achieved by emotional declarations alone. They require voter mobilisation, credible candidates, effective party structures, strategic alliances, internal consensus and an understanding of the electoral realities across the state.
For the Idoma people, the conversation should therefore extend beyond whether an Idoma candidate can become governor to the practical question of what must be done to make that aspiration achievable.
What electoral alliances are necessary? How can political divisions within the Idoma-speaking areas be addressed? What relationships must be cultivated with other ethnic and political constituencies in Benue? How can the people build a reputation for inclusive leadership, political reliability and effective participation in the state’s decision-making processes?
These are the questions that should dominate the discussion.
An elder statesman’s assessment, whether encouraging or cautionary, can provide a starting point for this conversation. It should stimulate further inquiry rather than provoke personal hostility.
If Chief Lawani’s position is considered overly pessimistic, younger political actors have an opportunity to demonstrate that a different political future is possible. They can present credible electoral data, articulate a practical roadmap and mobilise support around a convincing vision.
The strongest response to a discouraging political assessment is not abuse. It is the presentation of a better argument and a more effective strategy.
SOCIAL MEDIA FREEDOM MUST BE MATCHED BY SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Social media has democratised communication in unprecedented ways. It has given young people access to political conversations that were once dominated by established politicians, traditional institutions and conventional media organisations. This development is valuable and should be protected.
However, the democratisation of communication must not be confused with the abandonment of responsibility.
Freedom of expression protects the right to question authority, challenge established positions and demand accountability from public officials. It does not mean that every disagreement must be expressed through humiliation, vulgarity or personal attacks.
The digital space is not detached from the moral standards that govern society. Behind every profile is a human being, and behind every public statement is a responsibility to consider the consequences of one’s words.
Moreover, digital insults can travel far beyond their original context. They can inflame ethnic sensitivities, deepen political divisions, damage reputations and discourage thoughtful people from participating in public conversations. When such behaviour becomes normalised, the loudest and most provocative voices may begin to overshadow those who have facts, experience and constructive ideas to contribute.
Young people must understand that political visibility is not the same as political influence, just as the ability to attract attention is not evidence of intellectual depth.
A person may become popular online through provocation without acquiring the judgement, discipline or credibility required for leadership.
The future of Idoma politics cannot be built on the assumption that the most insulting voice is the most courageous, or that the most provocative statement is necessarily the most intelligent.
RESPECTING ELDERS WITHOUT ABANDONING CRITICAL THINKING
Respect for elders is an important social value, particularly in communities where experience, history and intergenerational relationships contribute to the transmission of knowledge and cultural identity.
Yet, respect should not be interpreted as a demand for unquestioning obedience. Elder statesmen, like every other participant in public life, must remain open to scrutiny, criticism and the possibility of being wrong.
The real issue is how that criticism is delivered.
There is a profound difference between telling an elder that his political calculations are inaccurate and describing him in derogatory terms. One approach invites debate; the other risks turning political disagreement into a contest of egos.
A society that respects its elders while encouraging younger generations to question ideas constructively creates the conditions for intellectual growth. Conversely, a society in which age is used to silence criticism, or youth is used to justify disrespect, risks losing the benefits of both experience and innovation.
The objective should be to establish a culture in which age does not exempt anyone from accountability and disagreement does not deprive anyone of dignity.
Chief Lawani should be free to express his political assessment. Those who disagree should equally be free to challenge it. What must be rejected is the notion that personal abuse is an acceptable substitute for substantive engagement.
A CHALLENGE TO THE YOUNGER GENERATION
The younger generation has an indispensable role to play in shaping the political future of Benue State and the Idoma nation in particular. Its energy, technological competence, creativity and capacity for mobilisation are vital assets.
However, these advantages must be accompanied by emotional intelligence, historical consciousness and an appreciation of the responsibilities that come with public participation.
Political leadership requires more than the ability to criticise those who came before. It demands the capacity to learn from experience, identify past mistakes, develop workable solutions and build relationships across differences.
Those who aspire to lead tomorrow must demonstrate the discipline expected of leaders today.
If younger people believe that established political figures have misread the aspirations of their communities, they should organise, research, mobilise and present a compelling alternative. They should show, through the quality of their arguments and the maturity of their conduct, that they are prepared to assume greater responsibilities.
The goal should not be to silence elder statesmen but to engage them, challenge their assumptions where necessary and contribute fresh perspectives to the continuing search for political progress.
History will not judge a generation solely by how loudly it criticised its predecessors, but also by the quality of the institutions, political culture and social values it helped to build.
THE GREATER INTEREST OF BENUE STATE
Benue State is a plural society whose political stability and development depend, in part, on the capacity of its diverse communities to engage one another with mutual respect.
Political competition is inevitable, and disagreements over representation, electoral strength and access to leadership positions are legitimate features of democratic life. Nevertheless, these disagreements must be managed in ways that strengthen rather than undermine social cohesion.
The aspirations of the Idoma Nation should be discussed with seriousness and respect. So should the political interests of every other community in the state.
No ethnic constituency benefits in the long term from a political culture in which disagreement becomes hostility and differences of opinion are interpreted as acts of betrayal. A more productive approach is one that encourages open debate, credible political organisation and strategic cooperation among all.
The pursuit of an Idoma governor, or any other legitimate political aspiration, must be anchored in a broader commitment to the collective progress of Benue State which in all standard, it does.
It is possible to advocate firmly for one’s community without diminishing another. It is equally possible to disagree with an elder statesman without questioning his dignity.
These are not signs of political weakness. They are evidence of political maturity.
CONCLUSION: LET ARGUMENTS BE ANSWERED WITH ARGUMENTS
The reported insult against Chief Steven Lawani should serve as a moment for reflection on the standards we are establishing in our political and social lives.
We cannot demand responsible leadership from public officials while celebrating irresponsibility among citizens. We cannot advocate political inclusion while tolerating the humiliation of people whose opinions we dislike. Nor can we build a strong democratic culture if every difficult conversation degenerates into personal attacks.
Chief Lawani’s political views are open to examination, criticism and rejection. No individual, regardless of status or experience, should be immune from robust public scrutiny. But the debate must be conducted with respect. reason, evidence and a basic recognition of human dignity.
As an Idoma son from Agila, I believe that the strength of our people lies not in uniformity of opinion but in our ability to disagree intelligently, pursue common interests and preserve the values that bind us together.
The Idoma Nation needs political vision, strategic organisation, courageous leadership and constructive debate. It does not need a culture in which insults replace ideas or online hostility becomes the measure of political commitment.
Chief Steven Lawani deserves the same fundamental dignity that every citizen deserves. His experience warrants serious engagement, his opinions deserve reasoned scrutiny, and his conclusions that f need be, may be challenged but without resorting to personal abuse.
Let those who disagree with him bring facts. Let those who believe his political assessment is wrong present a stronger argument. Let those who aspire to leadership demonstrate the intellectual discipline and maturity that leadership requires.
In the final analysis, political progress is not measured by the volume of insults exchanged on social media, but by the quality of ideas advanced, the strength of alliances built and the practical solutions offered to the people.
We must defend the right to disagree without defending the culture of disrespect. That is the foundation of responsible citizenship, democratic maturity and a more united Benue State.
Onwe Edwin Wisdom
I write from Agila, Ado Local Government Area
