The idea of the phrase ‘unity in diversity’ is very old and dates back to ancient times in both Western and Eastern old world cultures. It has applications in many fields, including ecology, cosmology, philosophy, religion and politics. It expresses harmony and unity between dissimilar individuals or groups.
Unity in diversity is a concept of unity without uniformity and diversity without fragmentation. It is all about unity based on a mere tolerance of physical, cultural, linguistic, social, religious, political, ideological and/or psychological differences towards a more complex unity based on an understanding that difference enriches human interactions. This is the kind of unity that binds the entity called Nigeria together.
This kind of unity that is not hinged on uniformity and diversity that habours no fragmentation, can only be sustained when the various unified components uphold a common goal, and not forced into an incompatible alliance or marriage.
Just yesterday, Nigeria rolled out drums, the 59th time, and celebrated her liberation from colonial rule. For watchers out there, it takes a united whole to celebrate. But the overt expression of hostility and antagonism among Nigerians, even in an atmosphere that is replete with the euphoria of celebration, leaves one asking whether the people actually understand why the celebration.
Granted that once we were colonised, and later gained Independence from our colonial masters which no doubt calls for a hilarious celebration, we must not jettison to history in a hurry, the fact that before the1960 episode, there was a 1914 incidence that gave credence to the outcome of 1960. This epic event in history is what I call the fulcrum that drives the nation called Nigeria.
It is not in dispute that the amalgamation of the entity called Nigeria, was a marriage of fundamentally different forms of government and major political and social structures that differed radically in administrative and political styles. In fact, there was little or no unification, as Lord Lugard, the proponent of the amalgamation concept, simply superimposed the South, on the existing structure of the colony in northern Nigeria.
Although political analysts had expressed doubt as to whether Lugard, or most of his successors in the colony, ever thought of the future of Nigeria with a view of a single political entity. Their doubt was substantiated in 1919, when Lugard’s successor as the governor-general, Hyu Klifford, warned that ‘the coordination of all administrative work should be directed from a single centre’, a directive which his successor, Richard Palmer, failed to implement, instead he claimed that Nigeria was a mere geographical expression.
It may have certainly been very unpopular in both North and South of Nigeria at the time. Come to think of it, the educated elite of Lagos vigorously opposed it.The powerful emirates in the north were against it; they feared that a centralized administrative system would weaken their power, which was actually dependent on the British rule.
In the south, it was feared that it could lead to the introduction of an unpopular system of indirect rule and collapse few political rights. However, Sir Arthur Richards, another Governor General, when considering the 1923 Clifford Constitution, stated that his primary objective was to promote the unity of Nigeria.
All the same, Lugard and most of his administrative successors in Nigeria may have had a different vision for the country, the fact that the liberation of the product of the amalgamation is being celebrated by the federal government, means an acceptance of one’s fate without complaint.
Upon this insinuation, I guess, our founding fathers hailed the country called ‘Nigeria’ which was bequeathed to them. The statement; ‘’ though tribe and tongue may differ, in brotherhood we stand’’, affirms their acknowledgment of their diversity, yet the declaration of their resolve to remain as one indivisible entity was unequivocal.
In the same spirit of oneness irrespective of varying backgrounds, all immediate post-Independence Nigerians were proud to serve a country they reverred as their ‘sovereign motherland’ which the flag so reflected. Their utmost desire was to hand on to the children a banner without stain, a country where truth and justice reigns and no man is oppressed.
For me, a mention of the date; October1, should rather call to mind an appraisal of the journey so far; vis – a- vis the dreams and labours of our past heroes, and our sustenability of their legacy.
With much hostility in the air; each component trying to limit their brotherhood to their native tribe, one wonders where lies the place of collective responsibility in the task of nation building? We must not forget that we are under obligation to obey Nigeria’s call and that can only be possible when we realize ourselves as one indivisible entity.
Our concerted effort is required to expand trade and grow our economic relationship. It is imperative in battles against terrorism and any other external aggression. All these will elude us if we speak in disconcodant tunes.
According to President Muhammadu Buhari’s statement in his 2019 Independence Day speech, “The path of hatred and distrust only leads to hostility and destruction”. I think that it will be more rewarding if the vast majority of Nigerians would tread the path of peace and prosperity, as we continue to uphold and cherish our unity.

Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi