Conceptual Review of Colonial Beliefs and Attitudes in “Othering” During Postcolonial Africa: Lessons for Nigeria

Conceptual Review of Colonial Beliefs and Attitudes in “Othering” During Postcolonial Africa: Lessons for Nigeria

AWA John Obogo 

Department of International Relations and Diplomacy, Faculty of Administrative Science and Policy Studies, Universiti Teknologi Mara, Malaysia

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.804015

Received: 15 March 2024; Revised: 23 March 2024; Accepted: 28 March 2024; Published: 27 April 2024

ABSTRACT

There has been a growing concern regarding post colonialism and its relative role of colonial beliefs and attitudes in “othering”, and this has, also consequently, been a subject of keen inquiries amongst scholars in contemporary international politics. Most of such inquiries have emerged from a wide range of scholarly disciplines including international relations. The primary aim of this research was to examine the role of colonial beliefs and attitudes in “othering” in postcolonial Africa with reference to Nigerian settings. The specific objectives include investigating colonialism in postcolonial Africa and Nigeria in contemporary international politics. It also examined the association between colonialism and othering in postcolonial Africa and Nigeria within the international politics. The central notion of this study was to present the role of colonial beliefs and attitudes in othering in postcolonial Africa. Efforts were made through conceptual orientations with emphasis on colonialism (that is, colonial beliefs and attitudes, othering) and post colonialism. The paper recommended that there should be a growing call among scholars and practitioners to conceptualise race using more complex historical foundations capturing nuances of gender, ethnicity, and skin tone rather than simplifying race as binary. Postcolonial theory should be carefully studied to provide a strong theoretical foundation to understand race and intersectional identity and also to provide a firm capacity to understand race relationships.

Key Words: Colonial beliefs and attitudes, colonial, othering, postcolonial Africa

INTRODUCTION

Prejudice toward Africa and Nigeria in particular, postcolonialism, and its relative influence of colonial ideas and attitudes in “othering” have all received increasing attention. As a result, this has also previously been a topic of intense research for researchers of current international politics (Aziz, Anila & Sidrah, 2015).  The majority of these biases or inequalities in postcolonial Africa/Nigeria have been discovered in a variety of academic fields, such as international relations (Krishna, 2006; Nkiwane, 2001; Halperin, 2006), politics (Mgonja & Iddi, 2009; Jensen, 2011), political science (Quan, 2013; Sharma & Gupta, 2015), sociology (Howard, 2000; Simpson, 2007), and of course (Achebe, 2012; Stanley, 2012). The “othering” (Jensen, 2011; Ocheni & Nwankwo, 2012), or in the common terminology of third world economies or nations, or the dynamic dynamics of class struggles inside the framework of underdeveloped economies, have been the main focus of most of these works (Ashcroft, Griffiths & Tiffin, 2006).

“Othering” is a process of forming negative characteristics about the colonized who are the dual opposition of Western ideals (Akman, 2019). The concept of the ‘Other’ is used to describe how colonial understanding decorations formed the colonized territories as the opposites to Westerners (Ashcroft, Griffiths, & Tiffin, 2003). The creation of ‘the Other’ in colonial theory was in several aspects fundamental in legitimizing that the colonial powers robbed, dominated and controlled the colonies including some African States and Nigeria is no exception (Ocheni & Nwankwo, 2012). By describing “the other” as their counterpart to European (that is, Western), using expressions such as wild men, or animals, barbarians or savages could strengthen the colonial powers and its manipulation of its colonized region including the people while turning them into slaves (Ocheni & Nwankwo, 2012; Loomba, 2005).

Kothari (2006) submits that postcolonial analysis designate colonialism and its developmental projects including modernism and growth which reaffirm the classification of ‘other’ and ‘difference’ to validate their connections. It uses stereotyping to preserve this artificial departure (Lefebvre, 2011; Loomba, 2005). For instance, Said (1978) affirm that the concept of “othering” is explained that such idea was defined as a kind of other to the so-called ‘West’. In fact, the East remains the West’s colonized of Other, having the features of the West. The “Other” is often referred to as backward and irrational, while the West is described as progressive and rational.

By framing the “Other”, it generates a positive Western self-image (Akman, 2019). No wonder, Said (1978) submits that this self-image was key to the domination and control of the “Other” as the colonization of the “othering” was equipped to be for “their own good” (Loomba, 2005). Othering in colonialism therefore stresses negativity in that they are isolated from Western peoples or from ‘the rest’ in an offensive sense (Chinweizu, 1978). Though, the positive part of colonial qualities also exists. This include sharing of technology, and good education policies (this is not the main subject of this study) (Esaiasson, 2007).

Postcolonial idea and practices have become both a general phenomenon and a theory about how diverse globally incidences recount the outcome of colonialism. Postcolonial practices aim to brighten the explanation that colonialism does not belong in the past but it shapes the world (Anamuah-Mensah, 2007). Postcolonialism could be seen as a reproach of what is happening culturally, economically and politically outside and of course, beyond the historical background of colonialism. On the other hand, it emphasizes that contemporary societies are predisposed by their colonial legacy and elucidates that there is a nexus between the West and the “othering” (Bodomo, Anderson & Dzahene-Quarshie, 2009).

In the words of Imoh, Luke and Roger (2016),

“the postcolonial constructions, whether it was deployed positively or otherwise, the fact still remains that it undermines the fact that Nigeria has a rich cultural legacy or heritage, including values, norms and ethics, with which all constitute a shared socio-cultural legacy handed down to generations. This is often, always deployed as guiding philosophy and means of behaviourally articulating morality within the society. However, the symbolic relationship between culture and historical identity is a striking character of rich cultural heritage. Colonial history neither upholds nor draws from narratives of past Nigerian historical depictions, rather attempts to destroy the African culture and foster alien orientation”. (p.10).

Ake (1996), in his submission on colonialism in Africa was markedly different from the colonial experiences of the Americas, Europe, and Asia. Ake argues that, it was unusually statist, stating that the colonial state redistributed land and determined who should produce what and how. That it often deployed forced labour, imposed taxes and a break up of traditional authority and social relations of production resulting in proletarianization. In a nutshell, postcolonialism is a way or means with which the advanced economies preserve power over (Jalata, 2015), and perpetuate an ideology of superiority and dominance over marginalized third world countries or the “othering” (Jensen, 2011), which is often labelled within the theory of postcolonialism. Postcolonialism is simply described as the period when those colonies earlier colonized by European territories turn out to be independent or sovereign States (Gilley, 2017).

Nevertheless, for several decades now, specifically since the end of colonialism, colonial beliefs and attitudes still play a major role in international politics. This aspect is often ignored by mainstream theorists in international relations/politics and only became common in the recent past (Fletcher, 2017). Postcolonialism in international relations, for instance, is based on the idea that the West or western countries, western enlightenment and thinking are progressive, superior, and therefore, universally applicable, while other parts of the world, including the East, Africa, and the Caribbean, and their way of thinking are considered as the “other.” (Freud, 2014). The “other” or “othering” in this respect is referred to as backward and irrational in nature (Akman, 2019; Bruce, 2017). Additionally, international policies, treaties, customs, rules, and relationships among states are implemented from a western perspective. This way, the west tends to impose its way of thinking on the other to the extent of defining local politics. However, all of these aspects in contemporary international politics have their origins in the colonial years, where the West significantly imposed its way of thinking, attitudes, and beliefs as superior to other countries of the world.

In 1914, the Southern and Northern regions of Nigeria were amalgamated into the unitary state of Nigeria under the colonial administration of a British soldier, Sir Frederick Lugard, who at the time, had served his second year of a two-year appointment, as the last Governor-General of Northern Nigeria. Nigeria became an independent sovereign state and assumed membership to the British Commonwealth on the 1st October 1960, following years of political-nationalist struggle for independence from the 59 years of British colonial rule. While Nigeria remained a Commonwealth Realm with Elizabeth II as titular head, the adoption of a new constitution on 1st October 1963, exactly three years after gaining sovereignty, declared it a republic. This constitutional development saw Igbo, Nigerian nationalist Nnamdi Azikiwe, as Nigeria’s first president, while Fulani-Muslim politician Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, assumed the position of first Prime Minister and Head of Parliament.

Subsequently, Abuja (the Federal Territory Capital – a planned city) become the federal capital territory, which is conveniently centred at the heart of Nigeria’s 36 states (Figure 1). While Lagos, a smart or megacity in the Nigerian state of the same name, and largest within Sub-Saharan Africa, remained the commercial capital. Often designated as the “Giant of Africa” (Adejumoke, 2009), Nigeria is the most populous African nation, and seventh globally, boasting approximately 192 million inhabitants, many of who reside in Lagos (United Nations (UN), 2017). However, innumerable social, political-nationalist and economic issues within Nigeria, have led to varied conspiracies, secessionist movements and military coups, following independence.

Figure 1: Nigerian Map Showing 36 State and the Federal Capital Territory

Figure 2: African Map Showing Map of Nigeria

Considered a multinational sovereign state, Nigeria is inhabited by over 500 ethnic communities, of which the largest are the Hausa-Fulani in the Northern area; the Igbo in the South-central/eastern parts; and the Yoruba in the Southwestern region. These ethnic communities reflect a multiplicity of cultures and speak over 500 different languages, however English, Nigeria’s official language, is a unifying ground (Osaghae & Suberu, 2005). In terms of religious affiliation, Muslims comprise almost 50% of the population and practiced predominantly by the Northern-bound Hausa-Fulani, while the Igbo and Yoruba Southerners, constitute approximately 40% of the Christian population. A minority population, roughly 10%, observe religions and spiritualisms indigenous to their specific ethnicities. The distribution of the Nigerian diaspora within the UK reflects a different mix.

Interestingly, Carling (2004) argued that ethno-cultural identities are often stronger and prioritised over the Nigerian national identity among diaspora Nigerians. Although a substantial number of Nigerian’s are distributed all over the world, it is nonetheless home to many immigrants driven by employment opportunities amidst the oil boom of Nigeria’s 1970 s petroleum industry. If not, those from Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Sierra Leone and Liberia, uprooted by civil war. Similarly, Nigerians themselves were, in 2000-2004, the fifth largest asylum-seeking community in Europe and, specifically the UK and Germany (Heron, 2007). A partial implication of these movements has seen Nigeria experience a ‘brain drain’, with highly educated and specialist-skilled professionals comprising a disproportionate number of emigrants.

Hernandez-Coss and Bun (2007) for instance, observes that annually between 500-700 Nigeria-trained doctors and other allied medical clinicians, are emigrating to “developed countries”, with a substantial number practicing in the UK and to a lesser extent Canada. Better salaries, work-life balance and national-government provided health care systems in these places, are key determinants of their decisions to migrate. However, Larkin (2004) notes that Nigerian emigration does not wholly reflect the skilled and educated, but also those involved in organised criminal activities, including “sex/human trafficking, contemporary slavery and the smugglers, drug carriers and fraudsters”.

Many years ago, European powerful states dominated the world, with a view to conquer more territories in the competition for the conquest of Nigeria, the British, French, German, Portuguese and others were in competitions. Significantly, the colonial experience Africa had (and by extension Nigeria) was different from what the Americas, Asia and Europe experienced (Akman, 2019). Although. Western scholars have argued that colonialism have brought development and progress to Africa but many African scholars in recent time, have counter argued and repudiated such claims and continuously query the objectives and intent of the colonial enterprise. As claimed by Ake (1996), the colonial experience in Africa was unusually statist and what was obtainable was the redistribution of land, the determination of how to produce what and by who, the deployment of forced labour, the imposition of taxes and finally, the systematic breaking of traditional authority as well as social relations of production resulting in proletarianization (Ake, 1982).

Africa colonialism bifurcates into two camps; on the one hand, those who see colonialism as having had a negative impact on the development of Africa and the psyche of Africans, and Nigeria in particular because the country has more than what it takes in terms of human capacity and natural resources to be at an enviable height in relation to development but the reverse is the case. On the other hand, those that contend that the invasion of colonial powers paved way for modernization, civilization, social transformation and hence development of Africa. Many scholars have conducted series of studies on colonialism and its linkage on development globally and in African states (Adeyeri & Adejuwon, 2012).

Within the contemporary international politics, it is worrisome, when one tries to find the causes of this “othering” concept as it is mostly linked to underdeveloped economies of the Third World (Abertini, 2017). Seemingly, the role played by the colonial era may be checked and this can only meaningfully be approached in a broader range of underdevelopment with, of course, specific problems of the “Third World”. The studies of Akman (2019), Aziz, Anila and Sidrah (2015), Freiman (2013), Gandhi (1998), Gilley (2016), Levy and Young (2011), Ypi (2013) have examined the issues of postcolonialism (Bruce, 2017; Fletcher, 2013). However, there is scarcity of research on the role of colonial beliefs and attitudes in “othering” especially in contemporary international politics (Juan & Pierskalla, 2017; Kaplan, 2014), including Nigeria (Okolie, 2003). Wu (2016) suggested that further studies on the interaction between colonialism, post colonialism and othering to enhance generaliz ability of empirical findings.

The third world continent (including Africa and Nigeria in particular, being the “giant of Africa” and focus of the study) where development and impoverishment exist, is also traceable to the coinage of “othering” is often, always characterized by powerlessness, dictatorship, illiteracy, joblessness and its relative famine, hunger and untimely deaths (Jalata, 2015). There are also issues of military dictatorship, coups and counter coups, civil war, ethnic mistrust and crisis, religious fundamentalism and terrorism, structural inequality, corruption, false identity and false consciousness, perverse rise of civil society agitation to date (Imoh, Luke & Roger, 2016). Explaining these multifaceted problems, Escobar (1995) also traced it to the failed development models of the West which has also translated into underdevelopment, poverty and exploitation in othering.

Overall, it is important to note that not much has been written on the concept of “othering” in this part of the continent (i.e., Africa) and its colonial beliefs and attitudes could not also be measured as well. Existing work on the subject matter include Abertini (2017), Gilley (2017), Jalata (2015), Amone and Muura (2014), and Lefebvre (2011) etc. Notwithstanding, the findings of these scholars, the problem associated with the study has not been concretely addressed. This has created a gap-in-knowledge.

COLONIALISM, OTHERING AND POSTCOLONIALISM

The concept of colonialism needs clarification for better explanation. The concept is not new tracing the African history in Africa. Notably, almost all African nations were under one form of foreign rule or the other between 1900s through early 1960s. The concept of colonialism, therefore is a concept that explains one nation’s authority of another nation or between people (Darian Smith, 2021). The essence is typically achieved through aggressive, habitually military actions (Gilley, 2017). According to Hornby (2006) via the Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary, the concept of colonialism is the practice through which a powerful nation controls another country(ies).

As Njoku (2005) puts it, the concept of colonialism was imposed on Nigeria by force with which Nigeria continually resisted, all through the 20th century and today, the Western powers decided to impose on the people coercive administrative tools intended to extract their submission and obedience and submission. So, describing the concept is not an easy task. Several forms of historic, contemporary interactions amongst different individuals have been labelled as colonial or in some cases neo-colonial in character which poses hitches.

McClintock (1992) described the concept of colonialism involving the direct territorial seizure of another geo-political body entity, which is combined with direct exploitation of its labour, human and material resources with systematic interfering in the capability of the appropriated culture. This is necessarily a standardized entity to organize its indulgences of power. Similarly, Okazaki, David and Abelmann (2008):

“affirmed that colonialism remains a specific form of oppression. This is increasingly explored via through elaborate systems which compare, explain and measure human difference. Such processes that justify radical imposition of the Western Powers on ‘othering’ in need of relative intervention. Colonial rules are explained by discriminating between the colonizer’s ‘authority’ or ‘more civilized’ culture and the colonized othering’s evidently ‘inferior’ (Anderson, 2006; Mitchell, 1991)”, as in the case of Nigeria.

A conceptual advantage is important in understanding the dynamics of colonialism. Colonialism remains imperative in Nigerian discourse as the historical, conceptual, and empirical arguments provide robust connection with colonialism, as well as development to creating reasonable insights in understanding the nature of development for underdevelopment (Imoh, Itah, Amadi and Akpan, 2016). These authors assert that colonialism can be likened to underdevelopment. They however inform the need for alternative development policy. No wonder, Frank (1968) stressed that “a radical anti-colonial development framework may address the economic catastrophes and disconnect from the Western strategies. Though, the amount of text books and journal articles on colonialism bloomed since the 20th century, this review is an elucidation of the postcolonial discussion in era of neo-liberal order, post developmentalism, and globalization.

In postcolonial discussions, Ake (1996) confirms some changes on the structure of the state administrators due to political independence but affirmed that the character of the state remained the same since the colonial period. The author opposes that it remained total, with a tool of violence and narrow social base which relied on coercion rather than on authority.

Onimode (1983) locates postcolonial conceptual links within the crisis of underdevelopment of Africa and contends that such crisis is basically structural and historical. Amadi (2012) reinforces this “structural and historical” conceptualization of underdevelopment and follows Topik (2002) who contends that many social scientists have argued that, ultimately, causal links between colonial plunder and exploitation are replete in conceptual structures of underdevelopment particularly in the Third World intellectual tradition. One account situates the conceptual basis of colonialism in modernization (Rostow, 1960; Amadi, 2012). Such discussions have attracted increasing reproach from the Third World researchers and scholars. Particularly among the post-modernization the theorists and the post structural perspectives (Ferguson, 2006; Wesintein, 2008).

Some discussions in the relevant literature had tried to discredit accusing imperialism and colonialism as totally responsible for the underdevelopment experienced in African nations. This is the reason, why Ferguson (2006) accusing the colonialists as:

“an emotional balm but does not help us at all. Why are we having competent, development conscious leaders in, for example, South East Asia where American and Japanese imperialism are concentrated”?

In Nigeria, several literatures are traceable to the histories, and of course, causal connections of colonialism to economic imperialism with a dominant pattern of making underdevelopment feasible (Nnoli, 1978; Ake, 1996). Ekeh (1975), in his book, for shadows the historical role which is played by rationalism with important conceptual dualisms.

Edward Said’s assessment of the binary rhetoric of power that developed as part of the West’s imperialist and orientalist ideologies, explains the nature of colonialist thinking during the so-called ‘Age of Enlightenment’ (Said, 1996). That is, it was measured appropriately in the 18^th-19th centuries for art objects which were, in the past considered as territories, colonies and dominions of imperial powers that can be taken from their communities and places of origin, that relocated to the cultural capitals of Western Europe (Said, 1993).

Within the framework of the expansive empires during such period of history; Paris and London, which were respectively repositioned as centres for the classification display, consumption and reception of American, Asian, African, and Oceanic artefacts in such a way that are not considered as acts of cultural assumption and theft, but rather taken as repositioning what already accrued to the Great Britain, as well as France to the most scientific and cultural foundations sited within heart of the empire (Aldrich, 2014). As Said submits:

“If you were British or French in the 1860s, you saw, you felt; India and North Africa with a combination of familiarity with distance, but never with a sense of their separate sovereignties. In your histories, narratives, travel tales and explorations, your consciousness was represented as the principal authority, an active point of energy that made sense not just of colonizing activities but of exotic geographies and peoples (Said 1993).”

Such beliefs and attitudes were also confirmed far beyond references to inorganic objects so that, from a much broader consumption angle, that is aligned to colonial systems of domination, which is not only artefacts were served up to satisfy European appetites for ‘exotic’ and ‘distant’ stuffs, but the communities of individuals connected to the making of such items as perceived as ‘othering’ or ‘other’ were subjected to the assertion as being “offered up as new dishes to enhance the white palette” (Hooks, 1992). Colonial attitudes and beliefs are therefore, the notions that the West are superior to the rest of the world due to the fact that the West colonized the so-called third world or underdeveloped countries in either Africa or Asia and others.

It is important to state that the resultant effects of colonialism should bring about development. By this, Colonialism involves the establishment and maintenance of foreign rule over a set of people for the purpose of getting maximum economic benefit by the colonizing power (Fadeiye, 2005). To Aderibigbe (2006), colonialism is the extension of political control by one powerful nation over a weaker nation. These foreign immigrants dominated the countries where they settled not only politically, but also socially and economically. In order to sustain their domination, they seized the lands of people, settled there and imposed various forms of taxes. In another way, colonialism referred to as the rule of a group of people by a foreign power. The people and their land make up a colony. The foreign power sends people to live in the colony to govern it and to use the colony as a source of wealth (Word Book Encyclopaedia 1992).

In the view of Akorede (2010), colonialism can be seen as one country’s domination of another country or people. This is often achieved through aggressive military actions. Colonialism means the control or domination of the political, social, economic and cultural aspects of one group of the people or nation by another. This is manifested in colonial rule which is guided by the colonial policy of colonizing nation (Akpan, 2003). It is of great importance to identify the point that colonialism implies “formal political control” involving territorial annexation and loss of sovereignty.

The concept of colonial exploitation has been a terrain of vigorous debate. It has become a retrospective designation for a range of practices that colonial powers across Africa engaged in. However, such “exploitative” practices were part of missions that were authorized by political doctrines that deny or rationalize exploitation. Most scholars of colonial Africa, especially those who seek to write colonial African history from an African perspective, flatten a variety of ideological and practical colonial projects into the concept of colonial exploitation. To read exploitation backward into the economic policies of colonial states is to sidestep the discursive formations and ideologies of rule that authorized some of these policies. It also refuses to acknowledge the mutual coexistence of what we call exploitation and what colonial powers saw as a civilizing mission (Brown, 2009).

“Othering” is a phrase that refers to a widely encompassing conceptual framework that encompasses displays of prejudice and behaviours like atavism and tribalism, but it also denotes deeper processes at play that are only partially covered by those terms. For instance, it is typical for pundits to refer to Islamophobia or ethnocentrism as “racist,” despite the fact that these are not racial categories (Amone & Muura, 2014). Similarly, anti-gay and anti-lesbian marriage laws and discriminatory gender norms are examples of othering, although the people who are affected by them are not identified by their heritage, nationality, religion, or tribe (Grant-Thomas, 2016). It is clear that there is a dearth of an easily understandable language or frame that captures the full range of intended meanings when so many leaders and authors stumble while explaining these manifestations of bias while searching for ill-defined comparisons. Although “othering” is a phrase that encompasses a wide range of behaviours, it is crisp enough to allude to a deeper set of dynamics and imply something fundamental or important about the nature of exclusion based on group membership. In a similar vein, the concept of “belonging” denotes a fundamental aspect of how various groups are positioned within society as well as how these groups are viewed and perceived (Freud, 2014). It reflects both the intersubjective character of group-based identities as well as an objective position of power and resources.

The term post colonialism was first used in the years following the Second World War, when decolonisation resulted in the emergence of newly independent nation-states. Since then, the term has expanded well beyond this temporal marker and is commonly used to denote all aspects of the heterogeneous colonial process, from the beginning of colonial contact to the present day (Young, 2001; Loomba, 2007). However, understandings of Post colonialism as a field of inquiry are as diverse as they are contested (Ahluwalia, 2001). For instance, some scholars argue that if the term “post” in postcolonial designates temporality, thereby signifying the conclusion of the colonial era, it is “prematurely celebratory” in declaring that end (Mc Clintock, 1992).

Announcing the move of societies from one historical phase to another, such an understanding may unwittingly subscribe to the very framework it is trying to challenge. It may suppress differences between the so-called postcolonial societies by assuming that all colonial experiences were alike and, in doing so, itself subscribe to the very binary of the colonial/postcolonial that it seeks to challenge. The term post colonialism is also closely associated with post structuralism and incorporates a nebulous range of discursive practices, such as slavery, dispossession, settlement, migration, multiculturalism, suppression, resistance, representation, difference, race, gender and sexuality, class, otherness, place, diaspora, hybridity, ethnicity, identity and specific genres of literary activity (Goldberg & Quayson, 2002).

Challenges to Development in Postcolonial Nigeria

Assessing challenges of development in Nigeria after independence entails a systematic review of what and why repeatedly impedes development and initiatives brought by successive administrations in Nigeria. When Nigeria got her independence in 1960 from Britain, citizens were optimistic and expected a good turn around for the country, they were hopeful that those who stepped in the shoes of the colonial administrators being locals will pilot the country towards the proper directions. However, decolonization allowed the bunch of local leaders that pitch tents with colonial administrators assume offices of responsibilities and took over Nigeria with the intent of sustaining a neo-colonial economy. In essence, although Nigeria may have achieved political independence but in the true sense, colonial powers still had a firm grip of the country through the locals enthroned as leaders. These leaders, however, on resuming office immediately adopted the same repressive style or even worse, of the colonial powers when it was expected that they dismantle such styles and systems.

Significantly, they lacked a developmental vision to follow through a very strong and effective repressive repression inherited. What really mattered and of concern was control and access to power and other privileges associated with the office and development was not a priority. Osita-Njoku (2016), observed that although, regionally, Nigeria experienced financial boom up till almost the end of 1960 from agricultural production and export of produce cultivated under colonialism, the focus on the exploitation and export of crude oil led to the abandonment of agricultural activities and consequently, substituted by the exploitation and exportation of crude oil. Eventually, crude oil became the main stay of the Nigerian economy.

lmhonopi, Urim and Iruonagbe (2013) on their part saw the challenges to development from another angle and contended that colonial powers and their administration promoted class consciousness among Nigerians and this situation helped in the creation of class structure in the national fabrics. The introduction of the concept of Government Reserved Area (GRA) and city into the consciousness of the Nigerian people and by extension other African states was one of the ways class consciousness and structure was achieved, is important to note that this concept of GRA was not in use in Nigeria before the invasion of colonial powers. Also, the effect of having urban centres gave rise to rural-urban drift which have created huge gaps in development.

In summary, major development problems with specific reference to Nigeria occur due to poor policy implementation coupled with subsequent lack of adequate and reliable human resources. It further maintained that since most policies in developing nations are imposed on the masses, it is not a thing of surprise if such policy fails because from inception, such policies are made by the government without considering the masses, invariably, there is a mismatch in policy formulations because the expected beneficiaries of such policies were not given the chance to contribute from the onset. In addition, the quality of the human development index in the underdeveloped countries is the reason why there are constraints in implementing good policies or plans.

Postcolonial Change and Variation

On the long-term effects of the colonial intrusion on the capacity of the State in Africa for facilitating and promoting economic development. Notoriously, output per head in Sub-Saharan Africa is the lowest of any major world region and has, on average, expanded slowly and haltingly since 1960. But there have been important changes, and variations over space, in policy and performance. In policy, structural adjustment in the 1980 s marked a watershed: a fundamental shift from administrative to market means of resource allocation. The change, however, was less dramatic in most of the former French colonies, where (except in Guinea) the maintenance of a convertible currency had enabled governments to avoid some of the supplementary price and quantity controls which had increasingly been imposed in the mostly former British colonies outside the franc zone.

In performance, aggregate economic growth rates in the region were pretty respectable until 1973-75. Ironically, in the decade or so following the adoption of structural adjustment they were stagnant or negative, before the Chinese-led boom in world commodity prices eased the region into 12 years of gross domestic product (GDP) growth at an average of 5% a year before the crises of 2007 (rising fuel and food prices, then the beginning of the international financial crisis) and 2008 brought about a “great recession” in 2009 (IMF, 2009).

There were notable exceptions to the general growth trends, both before and after the turning-point in the early to mid-1970s. Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana made a particularly interesting contrast: similarly-sized neighbours with relatively similar factor endowments and geographical features, but with different colonial heritages. Côte d’Ivoire underwent what might loosely be described as a magnified version of the standard growth trajectory.

It averaged an annual GDP growth of 9.5% from 1960 to 1978 but then had several years of stagnation followed by civil war. Meanwhile, Ghana did almost the opposite. Ghanaian GDP per capita was barely higher in 1983, when it began structural adjustment, than at independence in 1957. However, as one of the two most successful cases of structural adjustment in Africa (the other being Uganda), Ghana averaged nearly 5% annual growth during the quarter-century after 1983. Thus, roughly, while Côte d’Ivoire was rising Ghana was falling, and vice versa. Only one Sub-Saharan economy, Botswana, sustained growth over three, indeed four, decades since its independence, which was in 1966. Botswana averaged 9.3% annual growth.

The Role of Colonial Beliefs and Attitudes in Othering in Post colonialism Africa and in Nigeria

European’s scramble for Africa was basically motivated by some factors (Akman, 2019; Amadi, 2012). First was to market their economic process and trade facilitation, low-cost resource extraction and exploitation of the indigenous community. It had been also to discover‖ Africa which that they had viewed because the Dark Continent. Second is European ethnocentric nature, which viewed their culture as superior to others. As a consequence, there was the necessity to assimilate Africans into European civilization. Colonialism as an idea therefore has its roots in European expansionism and therefore the founding of the so-called New World (Wolfe, 2006).

At the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885, all the European powers particularly, Germany, France, Great Britain, Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal, and Spain met to legitimize their colonization of Africa by partitioning the continents’ territory. This division was avoided reference to ethnic, cultural, linguistic peculiarities of African societies. The conference was called to avoid war among European nations over African territory following the defeat of Germany within the World War I (WW1) (Gerald, 2009).

The wave of decolonization started within the 1940s following World War II (WW 2) as many of Europe’s colonies began to fight wars of resistance against colonial domination and to agitate for independence within the late 1950s and early 1960s, most African states achieved their independence with great expectations for a bright future (Wolfe, 2006). The consequences of colonialism on the sphere of life in African societies did not end with decolonization.

Colonialism affects political, economic and social lifetime of the colonized. Pre-colonial societies relied on social norms rooted within the shared culture in the organization of their social, political and economic life (North, 2005). However, the arrival of colonialism has affected these activities. Colonialism caused infiltration of the Western civilisation and culture, and therefore the relegation of African culture to the background (Arowolo, 2010). Colonial policies forcibly denied Africa from continuing with its traditional cultural activities (Gerald, 2009). During the amount of colonialism, traditional African culture and values were seriously threatened and, in some cases, African subjects were forcefully assimilated into the cultures of their colonial masters. In extreme cases, the colonialists categorically denied the existence of African cultural values and worse still, taught the African themselves to despise them. the last word effect of colonialism is that the disintegration of African culture and distortion and retardation of the pace and tempo of cultural growth and trend of civilisation in Africa (Moti, 2011).

Colonial Beliefs and Attitudes in “Othering” in Nigerian Settings

Discourses regarding the African colonies that the United Kingdom ruled over from the beginning were dominated by ideas of difference of ethno-religious issues. Writing about Africans was influenced by the concept of othering, but it also had an impact on the Britons who chose to settle in the colonies. It was assumed that the conditions these men (and soon women) had to meet were different from what was required for a “successful” existence in the metropole. Therefore, colonial pressure groups and the colonial authority in the United Kingdom were seeking the “ideal settler”, who was seeking better chances than the crowded metropolis could provide. However, contemporary people were curious about what could be expected from such a “ideal settler.”

Agriculture was often seen as the most advisable and preferable undertaking for settlers. The reason for this was that it would allow men from all walks of life to develop their own homesteads, using their own two hands, in the “primitive” conditions of the colonies. However, given the imaginary task to create not only but a different, a “better United Kingdom” overseas, free from the “vices of modernity” (Go, 2016). How and where were they supposed to gain the knowledge needed for their colonial ventures? (Okafor, 2000). In short, questions of knowledge accumulation with regard to the colonies and “colonial education” for (future) economic actors were paramount to the entire United Kingdom colonial project and the settlement schemes that served to justify associated public expense. This is particularly relevant for contemporary debates about the United Kingdom colonies and their intended futures. Colonial activities by law makers, administrators, and last but not least settler communities were not only meant to “initiate the beginning of state formation (Barnabas, 2018). In the words of Schoenbrun and Johnson (2018) other work engagements, including those induced by industrial work, expansionist statecraft, and other kinds of colonial activity, shifted the presence of other-than-human life forms in the past. That suggests that the variety of ways in which people and other-than-human beings made groups in the past was contingent and complex.

From the perspective of policy makers, colonial education, as one form of colonial activity by officials and missionaries, was thus a process that concerned both the colonizers and colonized in the colonies and the metropolis. Its aim was to contribute to an improved, economically viable future for the colonies. Typically, there was a generational aspect of transferring agrarian knowledge. In the case of agrarian knowledge to be applied successfully by settlers in the colonies, this generational aspect of knowledge transfer, however, differed from other educational efforts in schools and universities in the metropole. The knowledge about the colonies often had to be gained at almost the same time as it was supposed to be already available for dissemination to future farmers and others in the colonies.

The Prevalence of Othering during the Postcolonial Period in Nigeria

When the “post” is interpreted literally, the term “postcolonial” might be ambiguous. It is ambiguous because of the way in which colonizer and colonized regard one another.  The colonizer often regards the colonized as both inferior yet exotically other, while the colonized regards the colonizer as both enviable yet corrupt.  Postcolonial theory is frequently misunderstood in terms of this temporality. This is because the phrase was first used in the 1970s, the “post” in postcolonial philosophy has been a source of confusion. The word “postcolonial” was adopted by scholars like Hamza Alavi and John Saul to describe and categorise the time following decolonization; as such, it was “a historical and not an ideological concept” (Lazarus, 2011: 6). This is because post-colonialism has to do with the effects of colonialism on cultures and societies. It is concerned with both how European nations conquered and controlled “Third World” cultures and how these groups have since responded to and resisted those encroachments. Although, it can be considered as both a body of theory and a study of political and cultural change, has gone and continues to go through three broad stages: an initial awareness of the social, psychological, and cultural inferiority enforced by being in a colonized state the struggle for ethnic, cultural, and political autonomy a growing awareness of cultural overlap and hybridity.

However, since the 1980s, the term “postcolonial” has acquired a new connotation. According to Go (2016), the term ‘postcolonial’ has a different connotation when used in terms like ‘postcolonial thought,’ ‘postcolonial theory,’ and “postcolonial studies. It refers to a broad collection of writing and ideas that aims to go beyond the epistemic limitations and modern colonialism’s legacies. It alludes to a relational stance that is beyond and opposed to colonialism, including that culture itself. Further stating that post-colonialism is concerned with the worlds that colonialism in its numerous incarnations, confounded, disfigured and distorted, reconfigured and finally reshaped, Chennells (1999). The impacts of colonisation are felt as soon as the first colonists arrive, and the subject of post-colonialism is how colonised civilizations have adjusted to and are still adjusting to the colonial presence.

Prior to the birth, and consolidation, of postcolonial thought in the academy, particularly in the cultural and literary departments, it had intellectual antecedents (Ahluwalia, 2001; Go, 2016). Nowadays, postcolonial thought is often associated with the trinity of Edward Said, Homi Bhabba, and Gayatri Spivak (Werbner, 1996) while intellectuals such as Leopold Sedar Senghor, Amilcar Cabral, Kwame Nkrumah, Albert Memmi, Gamal Abdul Nasser, W. E. B. Du Bois, Aimé Césaire, C. L. R. James, and Franz Fanon are not directly associated with it. Such thinkers and activists “emphasized colonial exploitation and the racist and racialized foundations of imperialism. They highlighted the costly psychological impact of colonialism upon the colonized and the colonizer. The postcolonial thought they spawned was a critical engagement with empire’s very culture its modes of seeing, being and knowing” (Go, 2016).

CONCLUSION

The gaze of the Western world towards the conception of “othering” is one that no doubt affects the culture and identity of a nation like Nigeria. Nigeria’s democracy remains fragile and still is deeply flawed by a colonial and, or postcolonial inheritance. An inheritance that implicitly justifies authoritarianism and concomitant abuse of public office and state resources. This study emphasizes the impact of colonial beliefs and attitudes in “othering” during postcolonial Africa with reference to Nigeria.

Nigeria’s colonial history alongside the expansive “othering” of Africa makes postcolonial approaches relevant to African studies. However, the use of these postcolonial approaches can also produce contradictions and the tendency to over-romanticize precolonial structures and identities. This study has shown the importance of moving away from European-dominant frameworks and the need to value and affirm African histories, identities, and epistemologies. Despite these moves to deconstruct the orientalist discourses about Nigeria, Africa remains “entangled and trapped within the snares of the colonial matrix of power,” because colonial hegemony persists (Ndlovu-Gatsheni & Chambati, 2013).

RECOMMENDATIONS

Further studies on colonial beliefs and attitudes in othering during postcolonial reconciliation in Africa would benefit from analysing obstacles to these spontaneous narratives, to better understand possible paths forward. In addition, the understanding of ontological insecurity could be advanced through research on issues of “othering”, possibly connecting this to different levels of multicultural encounters.

There should be a growing call among scholars and practitioners to conceptualise race using more complex historical foundations capturing nuances of gender, ethnicity, and skin tone rather than simplifying race as binary.

Postcolonial theory should be carefully studied to provide a strong theoretical foundation to understand race and intersectional identity and also to provide a firm capacity to understand race relationships. This postcolonial theory should provide insights into the exploitation and subjugation of colonial subjects as their identity is a kind of forever moulded by the slave trade and exploitation of natural resources of country in Africa.

Finally, the postcolonial theory should be carried out to provide a strong parallel between the colonial representation of the colonized subjects as the “Other” or “Othering” and the portrayal of poor people as stereotypical, helpless, refugees and immigrants as dangerous or “bad hombres.”

REFERENCES

1. Abertini, R. V. (2017). Colonialism and underdevelopment: Critical remarks on the theory of dependency. Retrieved 16^th July 2021 from https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0165115300017666.
2. Achebe, C. (2012). There was a country: A personal history of Biafra. New York: Penguin Press.
3. Adejumoke, A. (2009). Migration in Nigeria: A country profile’ global migration perspective no 50. Geneva: Global Commission on International Migration. Available: http://www.gcim.org.
4. Aderibigbe, S (2006). Basic Approach to Government, Lagos: Joja Educational
   Research and Publishers Ltd.
5. Adeyeri, O. & Adejuwon, K. D. (2012). The implications of British colonial economic policies on Nigeria’s development. International Journal of Advanced Research in Management and Social Sciences, 1 & 2. Retrieved 12^th March, 2022 from www.garph.co.uk.
6. Ahluwalia, P. (2001). Politics and post-colonial theory: African inflections. London & New York: Routledge.
7. Ake, C. (1982). The political economy of Africa. Washington DC. Brooking Institute.
8. Ake, C. (1996). Democracy and development in Africa. Washington DC: Brookings Institution. Washington, DC.
9. Akman, F. B. (2019). The others in Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre: A postcolonial-orientalist and feminist reading.  SEFAD, 2019 (41), 31-48.
10. Akorede, E l. (2010). Colonial experience in Africa: How it affects the formation of a United States of Africa. International Journal of Issues on African Development, 2(4), 34-45.
11. Akpan, N.E (2003), “Colonial Administration in Nigeria” in Osuntokun, A et al (eds)
    Issues in Nigeria Government and Politics, Ibadan: Rex Charles Publications.
12. Aldrich, R. (2014). “The difficult art of exhibiting the colonies.” In Colonial culture in France since the Revolution, edited by Pascal Blanchard, Sandrine Lemaire, Nicolas Bancel and Dominic Richard David Thomas, 438-454. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
13. Amadi, L. (2012). Africa: Beyond the “new” dependency: A political Economy. African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, 6(8), pp. 191-203.
14. Amone, C., & Muura, O. (2014). British colonialism and the creation of Acholi ethnic identity in Uganda, 1894 to 1962. The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 42(2), 239-257. doi:10.1080/03086534.2013.851844.
15. Anamuah-Mensah, J. A. A. (2007). Bridging the gap: Linking school and the world of work in Ghana. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 23(1), 133-152.
16. Anderson, W. (2006). Colonial pathologies: American tropical medicine, race, and hygiene in the Philippines. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
17. Arowolo, D. (2010). The effects of western civilization on Africa‖, Afro Asian Journal of Social Sciences, 1(1), pp. 1-13.
18. Ashcroft, B., Griffiths, G. & Tiffin, H. (2003). The post-colonial studies reader. USA and Canada: Routledge Publication.
19. Ashcroft, B., Griffiths, G., & Tiffin, H. (2006). Introduction to part one. In B. Ashcroft, G. Griffiths, & H. Tiffin (Eds.), The post-colonial studies reader. New York: Routledge.
20. Aziz, F., Anila, J. & Sidrah, H. (2015). Othering of Africans in European literature: A postcolonial analysis of Conrad’s “Heart of Darkness”. European Journal of English Language and Literature Studies, 3(5), pp. 40-45.
21. Barnabas, V. (2018). The Untold Story of Britain’s Gulag in Kenya. 1st ed. New York: Henry Holt.
22. Bodomo, A., Anderson, J. A., & Dzahene-Quarshie, J. (2009). A Kente of many colors: Multilingualism as a complex ecology of language shift in Ghana. Sociolinguistic Studies, 3(3), 357-379.
23. Brown, G. (2009). Crisis, Colonial Failure, and Subaltern Suffering, speech to joint
    session of U.S. Congress, March 4,
24. Bruce, G. (2017). The case for colonialism: Third world. Quarterly DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2017.1369037. Retrieved 16^th July 2021 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2017.1369037.
25. Carling, J. (2004) ‘Migration, Human Smuggling and Trafficking from Nigeria to Europe’, International Organisation for Migration, Oslo: International Peace Research Institute.
26. Change Institutes (2009) ‘The Nigerian Muslim Community in England: Understanding Muslim Ethnic Communities’ Communities and Local Government.
27. Chennells, A. (1999). Essential diversity: Post-colonial theory and African literature. Brno Studies in English, 5, 109–126.
28. Chinweizu, C. A. (1978). The east and the rest of us. Lagos: Nok Publishers (Nigeria) Limited.
29. Darian-Smith, E. ((2021). Post-colonial attitudes and the relevance of incommensurability. International Journal of Law in Context, 17(2), 19-23,
30. Ekeh, P. (1975). Colonialism and the two publics in Africa: A theoretical statement Comparative Studies in Society and History, 17(1)., Pp. 91-112.
31. Esaiasson, P. (2007). Metodpraktikan: konsten att studera samhälle, individ och marknad. 3., [rev.] uppl. Stockholm: Norstedts juridik.
32. Escobar, A. (1995). Encountering development: the making and unmaking of the third world. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
33. Fadeiye, J.O (2005), A Social Studies Textbook for Colleges and Universities, Vol 2,
    Ibadan: Akin- Johnson Press and Publishers.
34. Ferguson, J (2006). Decomposing Modernity: History and Hierarchy after Development. Department of Anthropology University of California, Irvine.
35. Fletcher, K. (2017). Impact of colonialism on education development among the Se (Shai) people of Ghana West Africa. University of Amherst, MD: Unpublished.
36. Fletcher, K. A. (2013). Perceptions of contemporary effects of colonialism among educational professionals in Ghana (2013). Open Access Dissertations. 732. Retrieved 18^th July 2021 https://doi.org/10.7275/68zj-cz25 https://scholarworks.umass.edu/open_access_dissertations/732.
37. Frank, A. W. (1968). Guide to the Christy Collection of prehistoric antiquities and ethnography. London: British Museum Department of British and Mediaeval Antiquities. British Museum: London.
38. Freiman, C. (2013). Cosmopolitanism within borders: On behalf of Charter Cities. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 30(1), 40-52.
39. Freud, B. (2014). Organizing Autarky: Governor general decoux’s development of a substitution economy in Indochina as a means of promoting colonial legitimacy. SOJOURN: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast. Asia, 29(1), .96-131.
40. Gandhi, L. (1998). Postcolonial theory: A critical introduction. New York: Columbia UP Publications.
41. Gerald, T. A. (2009). Colonialism and state dependency. Journal of Aboriginal Health, 6(4), Pp.43-60.
42. Gilley, B. (2015). The challenge of the creative third world. Third World Quarterly, 36(8), 1405-1420.
43. Gilley, B. (2016). Chinua Achebe on the Positive Legacies of Colonialism. African Affairs, 115(461), 646-663.
44. Gilley, B. (2017). The case for colonialism, Third World Quarterly, DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2017.1369037.
45. Go, J. (2016). Postcolonial thought and social theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
46. Goldberg, D. T. & Quayson, A. (2002). Relocating postcolonialism. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
47. Grant-Thomas, A. (2016). Othering and belonging: Expanding the circle of human concern. Berkeley: Haas Institute.
48. Halperin, S. (2006).  International relations theory and the hegemony of western conceptions of modernity. In Branwen Gruffydd Jones (Ed.), Decolonizing International Relations, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., Lanham, 2006,43-63.
49. Hechter, M. (2013). Alien rule. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781107337084.
50. Hernandez-Coss, R. & Bun, C. (2007). The UK-Nigeria remittance corridor: challenges of embracing formal transfer systems in a dual financial environment. World Bank Working Paper. No.92, DFID –Department for International Development, Washington, D.C: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank.
51. Heron, B. (2007) Desire for Development. Whiteness, Gender, and the Helping Imperative. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
52. Hooks, Bell. (1992). Black looks: race and representation. Boston, MA: South End Press.
53. Hornby, A. S., (2006), Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary of current English, New York, Oxford University Press.
54. Howard, J. A. (2000). Social psychology of identities. Annual review of sociology, 26(2), 367-393.
55. Imoh, I. I., Luke, A. & Roger, A. (2016). Colonialism and the post-colonial Nigeria: Complexities and contradictions 1960-2015: A post-development perspective. International Journal of Political Science, 2(3), 9-21.
56. Imoh, I., Itah, I. I., Amadi, L. & Akpan, R. (2016). Colonialism and the post-colonial Nigeria: Complexities and contradictions 1960-2015: A post-development perspectives. International Journal of Political Science, 2 (3), 9-21.
57. Jalata, A. (2015). The triple causes of African underdevelopment: Colonial capitalism, state terrorism and racism. International Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, 7(3), 75-91.
58. Jensen, S. Q. (2011). Othering, identity formation and agency. Qualitative Studies, 2(2), 63-78.
59. Juan, A. D., & Pierskalla. J. H. (2017). The comparative politics of colonialism and its legacies: An introduction. Politics & Society 45(2), 159-172.
60. Kaplan, R. (2014). In defense of empire. The Atlantic (2014). Lake, D. A., & C. J. Fariss. “Why international trusteeship fails: The politics of external authority in areas of limited statehood. Governance, 27(4), 569–587.
61. Kothari, U. (2006). From colonialism to development: Reflections of former colonial officers. In Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 44(1), 93-107.
62. Krishna, S. (2006). Race, amnesia, and the education of international relations. In Branwen Gruffydd Jones (Ed.), Decolonizing International Relations, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., Lanham, 89-108.
63. Larkin, B. (2004). Degraded images, distorted sounds: Nigerian video and the infrastructure of piracy. Public Culture, 16(2), 289-314.
64. Lazarus, N. (2011). What postcolonial theory doesn’t say. Race & Class, 53(1), 3–27.
65. Lefebvre, C. (2011). We have tailored Africa: French colonialism and the ‘artificiality’ of Africa’s borders in the interwar period. Journal of Historical Geography, 37(2), 191-202.
66. Lemay-Hebert, N. (2013). Critical debates on liberal peacebuilding. Civil Wars, 15(2), 242-252. doi:10.1080/13698249.2013.817856.
67. Levy, J. T., & Young, I. M. (2011). Colonialism and its legacies. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
68. lmhonopi, C., Urim, C. & Iruonagbe, M. (2013). Race and the enlightenment:
    A reader. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
69. Loomba, A. (2005). Colonialism/postcolonialism. (2nd. Ed.). London: Routledge.
70. Loomba, A. (2007). Periodization, race, and global contact. Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies, 37(3), 595-620.
71. Matanock, A. (2014). Governance delegation agreements: shared sovereignty as a substitute for limited statehood. Governance, 27(4), 589-612.
72. McClintock, A. (1992). The angel of progress: Pitfalls of the term “post-colonialism”. Social Text, 31/32, 84-98.
73. Mgonja, B. & Iddi, A. M. (2009). Debating international relations and its relevance to the third world. African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, 3(1), 27-37.
74. Mitchell, T. (1991). Colonising Egypt. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
75. Moti, U. G. (2011). Culture and Development Nexus: The Interaction of the African Culture with the Western Culture and the Relevance to Development in the African Continent Culture Heritage and Legacy. In Otto F. Von Feingenblatt (Ed), Second International Conference of Alternative Perspectives in the Humanities, and Social Sciences. San Jose, Costa Rica, August 6-8). Volume, pp.31- 44.
76. Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S. J., & Chambati, W. (2013). Coloniality of power in postcolonial africa: Myths of decolonization. Oxford, UK: African Books Collective.
77. Njoku, O. N. (2005). Economic history of Nigeria 19th and 20th Centuries. Enugu: Magnet Business Enterprises.
78. Nkiwane, T. C. (2001). The end of history? African challenges to liberalism in international relations. In Kevin C. Dunn and Timothy M. Shaw, Africa’s Challenge to International Relations Theory, Palgrave, 2001, 103-111.
79. Nnoli, O. (1978). Ethnic politics in Nigeria. Enugu: Fourth dimension Ochonu M. (2008). Colonialism within Colonialism: The Hausa-Caliphate Imaginary and the British Colonial Administration of the Nigerian Middle Belt African Studies Quarterly, 10(2), 113-119.
80. North, D. (2005). Understanding the process of economic change. New Jersey: Princeton Publication.
81. Ocheni, S. & Nwankwo, B. C. (2012). Analysis of colonialism and its impact in Africa. Cross-Cultural Communication, 8(3), 46-54.
82. Okafor, F. O. E. (2000). The economic development of Guinea-Bissau: Ideology and reality. The Developing Economies, 26(2), 125-140.
83. Okazaki, S., David, E. J. R. & Abelmann, N. (2008). Colonialism and psychology of culture. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(1), 90-106.
84. Okolie, A. C. (2003). Development hegemony and the development crisis in Africa: The importance of indigenous knowledges and practices in the making of food policy. The Journal of African American History, 88(9), 429-448.
85. Onimode, B. (1983). A political economy of African Crisis. Zed Publishers Rodney.
86. Osaghae, E. & Suberu, T. (2005). A history of identities, violence, and stability in Nigeria. Crises Working Paper, Oxford: Centre for Research on Inequality, Human Security and Ethnicity UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) (2017). Work for Human Development’.
87. Osita-Njoku, A. (2016). The challenge of ethnicity and conflicts in Africa: The need for a new paradigm. Emergency Response Division, United Nations Development Program
88. Quan, H. L. T. (2013). Growth against democracy: Savage developmentalism in the modern world. Lanham: MD, Lexington Books.
89. Rostow, Walt Whitman (1960). The stages of economic growth: a non-communist manifesto. Cambridge: Cambridge at the University Press.
90. Sagar, R. (2016). Are charter cities legitimate? Journal of Political Philosophy, 24(4), 509-529.
91. Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Pantheon.
92. Said, E. (1993). Culture and imperialism. London: Vintage.
93. Said, E. (1996). Orientalism and after. In Osborne, P. (Ed.). A critical sense: Interviews with Intellectuals. London: Routledge, pp. 65-88.
94. Schoenbrun, D. L. and Johnson, J.  (2018). Introduction: Ethnic formation with other-than-human beings. African Studies Association, 45 (201*), 307-345.2018 doi:10.1017/hia.2018.11.
95. Sharma, A. & Gupta, T. (2015). The making of third world: The impact of colonization. Research Journal of English Language and Literature (RJELAL) A Peer Reviewed (Refereed) International Journal, 3(2), pp.141-144.
96. Simpson, M. K. (2007). From savage to citizen: Education, colonialism and idiocy. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 28(5), 561-574.
97. Stanley, T. (2012). History is never black and white. History today, 62(12), 44-52.
98. Stilwell, S. (2011). Constructing colonial power: Tradition, legitimacy and government in Kano, 1903-63. The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 39(2), 195-225.
99. Topik S (2002). Dependency Revisited: Saving the Baby from the Bathwater. Latin American Perspectives, 25(6), 95-99.
100. Werbner, R. P. (1996). Introduction: Multiple identities, plural arenas. In R. P. Werbner & T. O. Ranger (Eds.), Postcolonial identities in Africa (pp. 1-25). London, UK: Zed Books.
101. Wesintein, S. (2008). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2008), 82-111.
102. Wolfe, E. (2006). Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native. Journal of Genocide Research, 8(4), Pp. 387-409.
103. Wu, T. M. (2016). A re-valuation of the management of Dutch Taiwan. Taiwan Economic Review, 44(3), 379-412.
104. Young, C. (2016). The heritage of colonialism. In Africa in world politics: Constructing political and economic order, edited by J. W. Harbeson and D. S. Rothchild, 9–26. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
105. Young, R. C. (2001). Postcolonialism: An historical introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
106. Ypi, L. E. A. (2013). What’s wrong with colonialism. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 41(2), 158-191.