The last time I was approached by a television reporter to comment on the life and times of Chief Ayo Adebanjo, my initial response was that I could not think of any aspect of his public life that has not been adequately covered in the interlude between his earthly passage and the burial rites. Besides, the deceased himself had written an autobiography on the occasion of his 90th birthday.

On further reflection I recalled his unlikely rapport with President Olusegun Obasanjo in his latter years. The open secret was the lifelong mutual antipathy between the two. Following the 1979 presidential election and the alleged bias of the former President against the candidacy of Chief Obafemi Awolowo (to whom Adebanjo was fanatically committed) a prior article of faith among the followers of Awolowo was the capacity to hold Obasanjo in virulent disdain.

To nonplussed inquiries about this improbable camaraderie, Adebanjo responded with the explanation that he had nothing personal against Obasanjo. He said the latter had transcended his anti-federalist status quo ideology to embrace the policy platform of the restoration of federalism aka restructuring.

I have recalled this antecedence to illustrate the concept of ‘Politics As A Vocation’ as propounded by the German sociologist, Max Weber. He proposed that the ‘pursuit of power often requires compromises and strategic decisions that may conflict with one’s moral beliefs. He restated this conflict as amounting to the distinction between the “ethics of conviction” (principle-driven, idealistic motives) and the “ethics of responsibility” (pragmatic, outcome-oriented consideration).

Weber argued that effective politicians must balance both ethical approaches; they should adhere to their convictions while also being mindful of the consequences of their actions.

In his response to the first World War and how it impacted the distressed German society, Weber characterised the effective politician as one who is capable of striking a judicious balance between the two ethics . Such politicians are generally located in the midstream of the ideological spectrum and are spatio temporal specific. As such they are commonsensical and non- doctrinaire. I have identified three historical statesmen whose careers have met the bar that Weber has erected, namely Abraham Lincoln, Nelson Mandela and Obafemi Awolowo. The first two, Lincoln and Mandela, are world historical figures. Localized to Nigeria, the third is of a less grandiose pedestal.

On his embrace of Democratic socialism, Awolowo, for instance,once argued. ‘In a country like Nigeria, the adoption of socialism had to be gradual. My belief in socialism as an ideal has not been based on the writings of Marx or Lenin. The methods of attaining socialism can differ from place to place. The mistake many people make is that they take the methods for the ideal itself. In Russia they had to use violence because there was no other way of supplanting those in power. Dictatorship was all right in Russia, because they had not known any democracy in all their history. The same thing evolved in China. China had these war-lords who had their own dominions and past emperors were ruthless in dealing with the masses. Now you cannot say the same of Nigeria. There are no homeless people in Nigeria.

The London Spectator said of his second Inaugural address. “We cannot read it without a renewed conviction that it is the noblest political document known to history, and should have for the nation and the statesmen he left behind something of a sacred and almost prophetic character”.

In its historical applicability, it is difficult not to suspect that Weber had Abraham Lincoln in mind when he penned the essay.

Abraham Lincoln

In the Lincoln archetype, we found a near perfect congruence between theory and practice. In his unique charismatic pedagogy, he pondered . “At this second appearing to take the oath of the presidential office, there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. Then a statement, somewhat in detail, of a course to be pursued, seemed fitting and proper. Now, at the expiration of four years, little that is new could be presented”.

“One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the Southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was, somehow, the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union, even by war; while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war, the magnitude, or the duration, which it has already attained”.

Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces; but let us judge not that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered; that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has his own purposes. “Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!”

“If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South, this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offence came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him?

Fondly do we hope–fervently do we pray–that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said “the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether”

Mandela

Of Nelson Mandela, Peter Pham of the New Atlanticist wrote :”It was the example he left with his broad vision and pragmatic approach that will perhaps be his lasting legacy to those who follow. In 1988, he secretly offered to open negotiations with the apartheid regime. In Mandela, the greatness of soul that dreamed large was matched by a wisdom of mind directed to political realism. That grandeur is a rare combination, one which those who would be his heirs in South Africa and elsewhere on the continent will need to aspire to if they are to ever realize the vision of Madiba. 

On the extreme right, Mandela was widely labelled a terrorist by prominent political figures in the Western world for his embrace of political violence. According to Thatcher, for instance, the ANC was “a typical terrorist organisation”.The US government’s State and Defense departments officially designated the ANC as a terrorist organisation, resulting in Mandela remaining on their terrorism watch-list until 2008.

On the left, some voices in the ANC accused him of selling out for agreeing to enter negotiations with the apartheid government and for not implementing the reforms of the Freedom Charter during his presidency.

Obafemi Awolowo

On the occasion of the 50th birthday anniversary of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, his deputy, Chief Ladoke Akintola had this to say. “To Chief Awolowo, passivity is a bane and inaction an anathema. How could it be otherwise to a life which thrives on industry and to a man with fanatical faith in hard work? That was why he made himself a terror to the demagogues and Mountebanks who, with neither a chart nor a rudder believed that they could steer the Nigerian ship of state to its destination….No pilot has a clearer vision and none a keener sense of mission than Chief Awolowo…In the political changes which took place in Nigeria from 1947 onwards, Dr. Azikiwe has been spasmodic and casual; Sir Ahmadu Bello has been leisurely and care-free; but Awolowo has been constant and calculating…

“To know Chief Awolowo as a man is to respect him. It has been my pride and pleasure to know him. He is by every standard a genius. His unimpeachable character, his faith in God, his confidence in his fellowmen, his personal devotion to duty and his

loyalty…have conspired together to make him a great pillar of strength. He never lets a friend down…As a political leader, Chief Awolowo is miles ahead of his colleagues. His sincerity of purpose, his democratic leadership and inspiring example are yet to be equaled by any of the leaders of other major political parties in the country…Awolowo is the nearest approximation to Mahatma Gandhi. He is a good blend of Gandhi’s philosophy and Nehru’s dynamism and the only hope for democracy in Africa”.

Although this eulogy was a mocking backdrop to the scorched earth intensity of the fractional struggle that ensued three years later between the two leaders. After making sufficient provision for the flattery and permissible exaggeration, there is the element of honesty and extenuating validity in Akintola’s eulogy.

In Weberian tradition, it is the case that the conception of the professional politician almost always overlaps with charismatic leadership (based on personal qualities and the ability to inspire) and can be used as cause and effect explanations of cultural and social changes.

There were also Prophet Mohammed, Buddha, Alexander, Ho chi minh, Winston Churchill, Nnamdi Azikiwe, J.F Kennedy, Barack Obama, Adolf Hitler, Martin Luther King, Oduduwa, Chairman Mao etc The greatest of them all is the Jesus archetype. who became man in order to partake of man’s imperfections and vulnerabilities. Who had to experience humanity in order to become a perfect vessel and bearer for the consequences of the fall of man.

But now you have been united with Christ Jesus. Once you were far away from God, but now you have been brought near to him through the blood of Christ. In Jesus Christ we found a perfect reconciliation of “the ethics of conviction with the ethics of responsibility”