Opinion

Rebuilding the intellectual community on the continent’-Zubair A Zubair

Published

3 years ago

October 20, 2022

Zubair A Zubair

Neo-liberalism has devastated African universities, turning them from vibrant centres of new thinking and academic comradeship into factories churning out marketable academic products and “saleable” students, according to leading Tanzanian scholar-activist Issa Shivji.

African scholars have become mere data “hunter-gatherers” instead of producers of theory; while the nascent radical intellectual community that emerged on the continent in the wake of independence has been decimated, says Shivji, who occupies the Mwalimu Julius Nyerere Research Chair in Pan-African Studies at the University of Dar es Salaam.

In the meantime, the Global North has retained control over the upper reaches of knowledge production since the 1970s, when higher education on the continent was devalorised and starved of public resources as African governments embraced neo-liberal prescriptions and austerity programmes.

“The very idea of the university was undermined,” says Shivji.

“The World Bank and its associates said that Africa did not need thinkers; rather, it needed only implementers of policies,” he says. “The ‘luxury’ of theorising could be left to the developed North, which would do the thinking, while Africa did the acting.”

Under the “long shadow” of neoliberalism, he says, “the market determined the form, content and depth [of] courses. Theory was eschewed; and action and a skills-oriented approach were privileged.”

“Instead of being centres of thinking and basic research, African universities were turned into sort of factories, with the academics being told to package and brand their products, including the students, to make them ‘saleable’.”

One consequence has been a devaluation of the quest for original knowledge on the continent and, in particular, theory, which Shivji views as the “highest form of knowledge”.

Quality of African scholarship has deteriorated

The trend has been made manifest, he says, in a number of ways: the content of PhDs has become increasingly descriptive rather than theoretical; the academic vocation to produce new knowledge has been undermined by scholars’ increasing dependence on consultancy work; university courses have become vocationalised, with increasing numbers of “executive evening courses” being taught; the younger generation of academics unquestioningly imbibe intellectual fads with little regard for existing scholarship; and the task of mentoring young faculty is undertaken by visiting scholars on a jaunt.

Shivji identifies a lack of seriousness among “today’s neo-liberal generation of young faculty members who neither care about nor have any sense of the traditions of their own alma mater”.

In particular, he notes that young African academics educated “outside”, in the North, tend to return as adherents of new intellectual fashions: “It is as if they want to re-invent the wheel and start all over again.”

Meanwhile, as the quality of the African scholarship on offer has deteriorated, international financial institutions have “jumped on the bandwagon”, providing funding for foreign scholars to come from the North with the goal of upgrading local scholarly standards, according to Shivji.

“These visiting academics … come for a few weeks or a couple of months; rush through a couple of courses; take time off to visit local tourist resorts; and off they go, leaving behind no sense of academic collegiality and camaraderie, which should be the stuff of university life,” he says.

However, “this is not what universities were meant to be”, he argues.

‘A site for thinking’

“Neo-liberalisation, in my view, devastated the fundamental rationale of a university just as it devastated the social fabric in Africa. The very idea of the university was undermined.”

Shivji describes his idea of the university as “rather orthodox”.

“I think a university is a site for thinking, a site for the production of knowledge, and, of course, a site where ideas clash and knowledge is developed.”

“The idea of the university should be of a kind of comradeship which is established among the faculty but also between the students and the whole academic community. The aim is not simply to produce people with certificates but rather to cultivate deep scholarship and, if possible, some societal commitment.”

In pursuit of this goal, Shivji advocates a pan-African approach under which academics across the continent collaborate to rejuvenate the African intellectual community and seek to produce a new breed of ideas.

He notes the scale of the rejuvenation effort given that “a whole generation of deep, committed scholarship” was lost under the neo-liberalisation of universities from the late 1970s.

“The few faculty members who stuck to their guns found themselves abandoned both by colleagues and students,” he notes. As a result, “the radical and nationalist faculty staff failed to reproduce itself”.

“What remained was not an intellectual community propounding, advocating and debating the idea of the university and its ethos, but only a few individuals,” he says.

A need for collective purpose

In this context, Shivji advocates for a restoration of comradeship and a sense of collective purpose among academics in order to help rebuild the intellectual community on the continent.

“Such work can only be a collective effort, not an individual task,” he explains.

“Although individuals may manage to spark debates, they cannot easily sustain them. They soon get demoralised for lack of support; and there is always a limit to how much an individual can withstand in terms of derision and ridicule from an ignorant young faculty and a hostile university administration.”

Shivji also envisages the university’s restoration as a pan-African project although, at the same time, he stresses that national governments “must be persuaded that [higher] education is a priority on the basis that, like health, it is a strategic productive sector rather than just a service sector”.

Shivji’s argument for a continent-wide pan-African approach is based on what he terms “the fragility of the idea of nationalism based on the nation-state” and separate territorial domains; and also on what he views as the strength of regionalism in the African context.

“Unlike in other continents, regionalism in Africa – that is, pan-Africanism – gave birth to territorial nationalism, not the other way around,” he says.

Accordingly, he proposes that the effort to reclaim the idea of the university and build an African intellectual community “should take place as a pan-African endeavour at the continental level”.

Reclaim the ability to theorise

Adopting such an approach, Shivji contends, the present nature of African knowledge production can be transformed and African academia can reclaim its credibility and capacity to theorise.

“I think a new breed of ideas is required, which depends on many discussions, and debates being held at every opportunity … among African intellectuals.

“So, there is a need to engage in a double process: the process of building a pan-African intellectual community; and the process of raising these important questions.”

Shivji cites the collegial nature of the former University of East Africa, which had campuses in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, as an example of the kind of pan-African collaboration that could be fostered.

“There were annual meetings bringing together the subject teachers from the different disciplines at the three sister colleges [in Dar es Salaam, Kampala and Nairobi]. Views were exchanged on the content of the courses; on the work being undertaken; on the pedagogy, and so on,” he recalls.

“These discussions were very fruitful, indicating how the task of changing orientation cannot be an individual endeavour; if it is to be effective, it must always be a collective enterprise.”

Shivji contrasts this collaboration with the present academic climate, in which, for example, “few intellectuals in universities in other African countries know about or keep track of the debates taking place in South Africa”, and vice versa.

However, such is the kind of pan-African interaction that he would like to see as “a starting point” for the restoration of African academic endeavour, although he emphasises that this “cannot be left to happen spontaneously”.

“It should be undertaken in a conscious and conscientious way.”

This is imperative, says Shivji, particularly since “the continent cannot continue to depend on the North to revive its universities”.

“The North is not interested and understandably so. Higher education has become a major export for some countries in the North. Why, then, should they invest in reviving African universities?”

From a practical point of view, Shivji advises that South Africa, which became a destination for many academics leaving other African countries as their universities were starved of resources, has the potential to provide the leadership required to rebuild the African intellectual community.

“I would hope that greater energy and thinking in the South African academy may be directed at supporting and building relations with universities in other African countries, not in a predatory fashion but in the spirit of genuine pan-African collegiality,” he says.

“In this regard, the South African academy should plug into African debates, and not be constantly overawed by European debates.”

This article is based on an interview conducted by Professor Crain Soudien for ‘The Imprint of Education’ project, which is being implemented by the Human Sciences Research Council, South Africa, in partnership with the Mastercard Foundation. This project, which includes a series of critical engagements with experienced scholars and thought leaders on their reimaginings of higher education in Africa, investigates current and future challenges facing the sector, including best practices and innovations. Mark Paterson and Thierry M Luescher edited the transcript for focus and length.

Related Topics:Community Intellectual Rebuilding

Up Next

My Vision for Jigawa State (VII)

Don't Miss

The Progress Needed For Connecting The Unconnected-Y.Z Ya’u

Opinion

2027 Election : Kano Speaks, As DSP Barau Promises Victory For Tinubu, Gov Abba

Published

2 days ago

February 15, 2026

Nigerian Tracker

By Abba Anwar

In Kano politics, definitive statements can only be made by individuals with high caliber, political sophistication, quality skills, strategic positioning, and genuine intentions, who can forecast outcomes. These qualities are visibly evident in the political arithmetic of the Deputy Senate President, His Excellency, Distinguished Senator Barau I Jibrin, CFR, who also doubles as the First Deputy Speaker of the ECOWAS Parliament, asserting his global relevance and influence.

As a show of solidarity and unwavering support for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR, and the Governor of Kano State, Abba Kabir Yusuf, ahead 2027 general election, Distinguished Senator said it publicly that, “We are united and focused. Kano… will stand firmly behind President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf. Our structure is intact, and we will work tirelessly to ensure their victories.”

At a stakeholders meeting held at his constituency, Kano North, it was glaring to all, as he mentioned that, “Stakeholders of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Kano North Senatorial District have reaffirmed their total commitment to delivering overwhelming votes for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf and the Deputy President of the Senate, Senator Barau I. Jibrin, in the 2027 general elections.”

As stated during the meeting, His Excellency, DSP, appears to be in total support for internal cohesion and mutual understanding between the traditional All Progressives Congress (APC) and Governor Yusuf with his people who recently joined the party. He practically believes that, democracy should first be strengthen within the party structure.

Hence, the need for tolerance, commitment to party’s survival and development, and above all supporting the state government to reach the promised land.

All indications, from DSP’s recent political engagements in the state, are geared towards politics without bitterness, strong internal structures, promotion of good governance, full blown support for Governor Yusuf and protection of Kano’s interest through the state structures. From state to federal
Bottom to up. And vice versa. In other words, the Distinguished Senator is well positioned to be the flagship of the Governor and the government of Kano State. No two ways about it.

What happened during the event, is a clear indication that, Senator Jibrin is not only a bridge builder between old APC members and the newly recruited ones, into its fold, but a messiah at the same time. To him, all the many years APC members and the newly joined ones, are the same in terms of enjoying political goodies, proper care and management.

He donated 26 cars, 141 motorcycles to 13 Local government Chairmen, Vice Chairmen, Councillors and Secretaries of his Kano North Senatorial District. The donation was witnessed by party leaders, elected officials, and grassroots politicians. Who unanimously put heads together to startle the consolidated unity. While strategizing party survival and continuous dominance as build-up to 2027 elections.

Justifying his donations, he emphasized to the hearing of all that, “Our Chairmen, Vice Chairmen, Councillors, and Secretaries are the engine room of our political structure. Supporting them means strengthening our base. With unity and proper mobilisation, Kano North will deliver landslide votes in 2027.” Assuring same for other two Senatorial Districts, Kano Central and Kano South.

What interests many at the event was when he assured that, “By God’s grace, we will deliver landslide votes for President Tinubu, Governor Abba and all other candidates of our party, APC

Unity, unity and unity, is the slogan of the DSP these days. The slogan was there evidently heard in the past. But in recent time, the slogan becomes more amplified and musically echoed. He always believes that, unity of purpose remains the hardest corridor to electoral victory.

An overwhelming standing ovation filled the air when he appealed all party members, from all sides of the pentagon to crush aside past differences. Urging that, “We need to work collectively, in fact we must work collectively towards a common goal.”

His passion for securing victories for the state and federal governments in 2027 drives him to tirelessly campaign and strengthen support for Governor Yusuf and President Tinubu. He continually promotes, refines, and solidifies this agenda.

Anwar writes from Kano
Sunday, 15th February, 2026

Opinion

Murtala Ramat Mohammed: Power with a Conscience

Published

2 days ago

February 14, 2026

Nigerian Tracker

By Lamara Garba Azare,

There are men who pass through power and there are men who redefine it. Murtala Ramat Mohammed belonged to that rare breed who carried authority lightly and carried conscience heavily. He was a comrade in uniform, a patriot in spirit, a true son of Africa whose love for this nation was not performed for applause but proven through action.

He rose to lead the most populous Black nation on earth, yet power never altered his posture or polluted his character. He remained simple in conduct, measured in speech and humble in lifestyle. He never allowed the office to swallow the man. While others would have embraced sirens and spectacle, he chose restraint. His convoy moved without blaring horns. He obeyed traffic lights like every other citizen. He respected traffic wardens as custodians of public order.

There is that unforgettable moment when a traffic officer, having recognized his car, stopped other motorists to allow him pass. The General was displeased. The warden was punished for denying other road users their right of way, and his driver was sternly warned for attempting to move against traffic. In that simple but powerful incident, he taught a nation that no one is above the law, not even the Head of State. Leadership for him was not exemption from rules but submission to them.

His humility went even deeper. Often, dressed in private attire, he would visit markets quietly, blending into the crowd to ask about the prices of food and daily commodities. He wanted to feel the pulse of ordinary Nigerians. He wanted to understand how families were coping. He believed policies should not be crafted from distant offices alone but from lived realities. That simple habit revealed a leader who listened before he acted and who measured governance by the condition of the common man.

When he assumed power in 1975, he did so without plunging the country into bloodshed. In a continent where coups often left painful scars, his intervention was swift and calculated, aimed at correcting a drift rather than destroying the state. It reflected firmness guided by restraint. He was a soldier, yes, but one who understood that strength without humanity is weakness in disguise.

In barely six months, he moved with urgency that startled the establishment. Files that once gathered dust began to move. Decisions were taken with clarity. He restructured the civil service in a bold attempt to restore efficiency and discipline. He initiated the process that led to the relocation of the capital to Abuja, a decision born of foresight and national balance. He confronted corruption without apology and made it clear that public office was a trust to be guarded, not an opportunity to be exploited.

His voice on the continental stage was equally resolute. When he declared that Africa has come of age, he was not uttering rhetoric. He was announcing a shift in posture. Nigeria under his watch stood firm in support of liberation movements and insisted on African dignity in global affairs. He believed that this continent deserved respect earned through courage and self confidence.

Then, just as the nation began to feel the rhythm of disciplined governance, tragedy struck on February 13, 1976. Bullets interrupted a vision. A country stood still in shock. Africa mourned one of its brightest sons. He had ruled for only a short season, yet the weight of his impact surpassed the length of his tenure.

Perhaps if he had remained longer, Nigeria would have charted a different course. Perhaps institutions would have grown around principle rather than convenience. Perhaps accountability would have become culture rather than campaign language. We can only imagine. But what cannot be imagined away is the moral clarity he represented.

Today, when citizens speak about abandoned ideals and weakened standards, his memory returns like a measuring rod. When convoys roar past traffic lights with entitlement, his quiet obedience becomes a silent rebuke. When policies lose touch with the marketplace realities of ordinary people, we remember the Head of State who walked into markets in simple clothes to ask the price of garri and rice.

He was not perfect, but he was purposeful. He did not govern to decorate history books. He governed to correct a nation. He detested corruption because he understood the damage it inflicts on the weakest citizens. He valued humility because he knew that power is fleeting but accountability before Almighty Allah is eternal.

Nigeria lost more than a leader. Africa lost a rare gem whose patriotism was sincere and whose heart beat for the dignity of his people. We pray that Allah grants Murtala Ramat Mohammed Aljannatul Firdaus and illuminates his resting place. We pray that his sacrifices count for him in the hereafter. And we pray that Nigeria rediscovers the discipline, courage and sincerity that defined his brief but remarkable stewardship.

Some leaders occupy office. Others transform it. Murtala Ramat Mohammed transformed it. His six months continue to echo across five decades because they were anchored in conviction and service.

Until Nigeria fully embraces integrity in leadership, until Africa truly stands in the maturity he proclaimed, his story will remain both our inspiration and our challenge. His life reminds us that greatness is not measured by duration in power but by depth of impact, not by noise but by noble action, not by privilege but by principle.

He came, he led, and though he left too soon, he still speaks through the standard he set.

Lamara Garba Azare, a veteran journalist writes from Kano

Opinion

Kwankwaso/US Congress And The Jow Jow With Jungle Justice-Bala Ibrahim

Published

4 days ago

February 12, 2026

Nigerian Tracker

Head Of Kwankwasiyya Movement and former Governor of Kano,Engineer Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso

By Bala Ibrahim.

The ambition of the justice system, as highlighted in the law books I read, is to maintain social order and public safety by enforcing laws, upholding the rule of law, and resolving conflicts fairly. It acts to protect individual rights, provide justice for victims, punish offenders, and rehabilitate criminals to prevent future offenses. I am not a lawyer, but having practiced journalism for decades, I am very conversant with the meaning of the word, fair. Fair hearing, fair trial, fair presumption and fairness in the resolution of conflicts. By my understanding, the best process of resolving conflicts should involve peace or peaceful and mutually satisfactory solutions, through listening to the parties and negotiating with them in order to find a comprise or address the root causes of the problem. Ultimately, and without engaging in emotion, the goal is to reach a solution that satisfies all parties. That way, you arrive at a “win-win” situation, thereby avoiding conflict.

America’s status, as the beacon of human rights, justice and democracy, is being contested, because of its regular prioritisation of interests over values. This deliberate bias of interest is making the meaning of fairness ridiculous. And by extension, putting a question mark on the historically projected position of the United States, as the beacon of justice and fair play. As I write this article, some American lawmakers have introduced a bill to the US Congress, seeking to impose sanctions on the former Governor of Kano state and former Minister of Defence, Sen. Rabiu Kwankwaso, over allegations of violations of religious freedom. To the best of my knowledge, no one made attempt to hear from Kwankwaso. According to the provisions of the bill, Kwankwaso is identified as one of the individuals contributing to systemic religious “persecution of Christians that has persisted” in Nigeria.

Let me start by putting the records straight. I am not a supporter of Kwankwaso. We belong to different political parties and we have differences in ideological beliefs. But our differences not withstanding, I am totally in disagreement with the position of those behind the bill that is seeking to sanction him. It is wrong, very wrong and brazenly in conflict with the meaning of fairness. Even the local and international observers of events that are unfolding in Nigeria, would vehemently disagree with that claim. Kwankwaso can be crucified for some sins, political sins, but to implicate him in religious persecution is not only ridiculous but loudly laughable. Anyone familiar with Kwankwaso, knows that he doesn’t belong to the class of people engaged in religious fanatism. Far from that. It is probably an attempt by the powerful, to give the powerless a bad name, in order to hang him. And that smells like a jow jow with jungle justice, I think.

It reminds me of that old book, written by George Orwell, called the Animal Farm. The famous line from the book says, “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” For some reasons, today, America is acting like a country that is in the script of George Orwell’s Animal Farm. The Animal Farm was written based on the Russian Revolution concept, by showing how those in power can be corrupt and how they can oppress the people they’re supposed to help. In todays world, the “Almighty” America is playing the bully, by hurting or attempting to hurt or frighten, some people or countries, so as to force them to do something that they do not want to do. Nigeria has since fallen into the category of those victims. And now, attempt is being made to unjustly, add the name of Kwankwaso.

It is heartening to hear that his movement, the Kwankwasiyya movement, through the NNPP’s National Publicity Secretary, Ladipo Johnson, had issued a statement, describing the whole thing as a blackmail. “The months before the latest development, Kwankwaso had openly reacted when President Donald Trump re-designated Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern over alleged religious persecution. Kwankwaso cautioned against what he described as oversimplified characterizations of Nigeria’s internal challenges. Kwankwaso stated that it was important to emphasize that our country is a sovereign nation whose people face different threats from outlaws across the country.”-Johnson.

Indeed America is acting according to the 7 rules in the Animal Farm, which goes thus:
1. Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
2 Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
3.No animal shall wear clothes.
4.No animal shall sleep in a bed.
5.No animal shall drink alcohol.
6.No animal shall kill any other animal.
7.All animals are equal, BUT some animals are more equal than others.

I cant talk about MACBAN and the two others, whose names appeared alongside that of Kwankwaso, but despite my political disagreement with him, I can attest to the religious tolerance of Eng. Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso. So, the US Congrees men should put on their thinking caps, and know that the name to put in there, is not Kwankwaso.