This misleading narrative that immigration laws are changing because Nigerian/African migrants are making content about life in host countries has to stop. It’s absolutely nonsense, and I have to time to dismantle it today.
Na that AI go k!ll there.
In case you are still unaware, Nigeria 2027 is not a race for who governs Nigeria, it is a race for who becomes the preferred puppet of the United States, the race for who becomes the primary instrument the U.S. military, or you say, the race to prove who’s the most valuable US intelligence asset.
Sowore is informing whomever it may concern that he will offer US military contractors such as Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Sam Altman unrestricted access to Nigeria’s National security architecture (if there’s any part of it that’s currently not open to all and sundry), under the guise of AI governance.
These guys will be dropping massive hints with their campaign messages, but Nigerians are obviously not paying attention.
Unwise human being who consumes everything America presents
Iran preserves more Christian rights than America who is trying to shove everything lgbtq to you.
Wake up dullards. Wake up
I took a course on Economic Theory during my early days at the university, and this note by Magatte Wade is almost a flawless, mirror-image reflection of the exact, simplistic arguments our economics professors used to justify the desperate need for an unregulated "free-market" economy.
Wade:
"A lot of intellectuals get nervous around free markets because free people make the planner less important. If a woman in Senegal can open a shop without begging ten offices for permission, hire two people, serve customers, and keep enough of what she earns to grow, she has already solved the problem the conference people wanted to manage for her."
This naive, free-market economic model is a foundational pillar of the "Washington Consensus," a neoliberal doctrine that imperialist institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) aggressively forced down the throats of several developing countries across the Global South. It is not surprising that this exact dogma easily found its way into our university economics textbooks. In these heavily sanitized books, the argument predictably asserts that state bureaucracy, government planning, and administrative regulations inherently stifle development, thereby concluding that an unregulated "free market" is the absolute savior.
However, the fundamental flaw with this line of thinking is that merely pointing out that a developing country currently has a dysfunctional, corrupt government is not, by itself, a logical proof that an unregulated free market is the ideal economic model.
The neoliberal intellectuals who actively, passionately push for unregulated free markets in developing nations routinely point to corrupt officials, excessive red tape, bureaucratic delays, and terrible economic planning to argue that the state should simply get out of the way and allow the magical "invisible hand" to control the market. But these administrative bottlenecks exist in almost every developing nation primarily due to a complete lack of strong, modern, and digitized state institutions. Securing basic business permits, land titles, or import licenses can be a soul-crushing nightmare in these nations simply because almost everything is handled through slow, manual processes, requiring access to multiple layers of corrupt offices just to collect official stamps.
But again, this structural decay exists largely because these post-colonial nations directly inherited oppressive, extractive colonial institutions that were originally built by European empires strictly to extract as much raw money and mineral resources as possible from the indigenous people. The incoming post-independence governments simply inherited this predatory administrative model and refused to make any genuine attempt to dismantle these extractive institutions, mainly due to ignorance or because the system conveniently filled their own corrupt pockets.
Merely using the administrative ailments prevalent in a developing country to advocate for a blanket, uncritical application of the free market is a classic logical fallacy. Proving that a government is inefficient or corrupt does absolutely not mean that an unregulated market will automatically produce good, equitable, or sustainable outcomes on its own. Unregulated markets systematically, violently experience devastating market failures, rapidly forming ruthless monopolies, price-fixing cartels, and corporate oligopolies as dominant players aggressively block new competitors from entering the market.
Furthermore, as Nigeria has largely based its national economic policies on the humiliating austerity measures and deregulation demands handed down by the IMF, many of our local markets are severely plagued with toxic pollution, catastrophic environmental degradation, wage theft, and highly unsafe working conditions. This is because in a completely free market, profit-driven businessmen and corporate directors will never voluntarily spend their private money to conduct environmental impact assessments, morally agree to follow safety guidelines, or utilize their excess profits to manage industrial waste efficiently. Lastly, these unbridled free-market actors will certainly never use their excess corporate profits to build public research facilities, fund scientific institutions, or develop national infrastructure to improve the quality of local goods and make the domestic economy structurally efficient.
This is precisely why using a broken, colonial-era bureaucracy in a developing country to justify total, blind reliance on the free market is a complete "false choice." In fact, if we look at objective economic history, almost no sovereign country on earth has ever achieved high-income status, technological dominance, or industrial power purely through laissez-faire, unbridled free markets. Western European nations, Japan, and the United States relied heavily on state-funded infrastructure, aggressive state-backed monopolies, strong legal systems, subsidized public education, state-directed scientific research, and high protectionist trade tariffs during their core industrialization periods. In every single one of these successful historical cases, real economic growth emerged from a disciplined, symbiotic relationship between a highly capable, interventionist state and a regulated private sector, absolutely never from the absence of the state.
If false rape accusers bodies were found dead on the streets on a routine, women will think twice before falsely accusing men for rape.
The fact these hoes get away with it in Europe and in the US, the believe they can get away with it in other continent.
If she knew Hong Kong had a strong laws against false rape accusation, she would have waited to enter UK before falsely accusing a man for rape
We don't harm false rape accusers enough.
Sarkodie - Ibrahim Traore (Song Breakdown)
Mainstream African artistes typically avoid mentioning sensitive political themes or names in their music for fear of rocking the boat in the politically-exposed entertainment industry.
Ghanaian hip-hop superstar Sarkodie is not one of them. His latest single titled 'Ibrahim Traore' directly takes aim at the attempted imperialist targeting of Burkina Faso's revolutionary president, urging Africans to close ranks around Traore and protect the nascent political revolution in the AES.
For The Spearhead, @Big_Mck, who has been active in the entertainment industry reviews the new single and gives his informed verdict.
Ibrahim Traoré is now an "everlasting slave" for pointing out that Burkinabés studying CIA-backed Wahabbi nonsense in Saudi Arabia are a threat to Burkina Faso. The person who wrote this also claims to support Gaza and oppose the Americans killing Gazans.
But as usual when it comes to dealing with Black people, it is racism uber alles. Not even an international anti-imperial coalition can stop their inner white, yellow, or brown Hitler from jumping out AS SOON AS a black man says something that challenges their fragile ego.
The racism train is never late. Doesn't matter whether it's a European lecturing you about human rights while his country is physically occupying your own, or a Lebanese fleeing from Israeli bombs who still remembers to lock their African maid up in the house after seizing her passport.
Race and nationality burn class.
Every. Single. Time.
Some people out there genuinely still think that one Bola Tinuboobooroo somewhere is the one making these decisions.
I am tired of explaining what should be obvious to anyone but the world's most hard-headed people...
My favourite kind of racist. The open and shameless kind who will tell you to your face what his intention for you is. Which gives you clarity and time to prepare.
Much preferable to the Biden/Clinton kind who smile at you and shake your hand while ordering a hit on you.
The United States has forced Ghana to extradite “Yahoo boy” Abu Trica, who allegedly defrauded elderly Americans, but at the same time, the US offered permanent residency to an Ex-Ghana Minister who misused public money belonging to Ghanaians, shielding him from a corruption trial back home.
What sort of arrangement is this?
“They (FG) won't come directly, but you will see their hand in virtually everything. They are frustrating me”
Of course, he's right. That's exactly what the government of Nigeria is doing to him. But I don't know if he and those he's talking to actually understand that what he just described here is exactly how neocolonialism works.
And I ask again, how come people understand this easily, but when you tell them that foreign governments do the same thing, and that these foreign actors are the source of whatever heavy-handedness they complain about their local leader, suddenly it becomes hard for them to understand?
I just cannot reconcile this type of cognitive dissonance.
Daybreak in Udi was the first Nigerian movie to win an Oscar.
It was shot in Udi, Enugu, in 1949 and featured dialogue in Igbo language.
It won the Oscar Award for Best Documentary Feature in 1950.
For those confused, here’s a former MOSSAD director admitting that they treat injured ISIS and Al-Qaeda fighters. “it’s for humanitarian reasons, as it’s always good to treat your enemies in a humane way” he says. But when asked if they can treat injured Hezbollah fighters too, he replies with an emphatic NO.
What other proof do you need about the real sponsors of terrorism?