I read a piece claiming Buhari was the most insulted Nigerian leader and the most blessed. Being blessed is subjective, but I disagree that Buhari was the most insulted. I prefer “criticized” to “insulted” because it places the debate in social communication. The writer used “insult” to delegitimize all disagreement, to shield Buhari from blame. Constructive criticism, however, is a democratic duty.
Buhari enjoyed goodwill alive that most leaders only get in death. When he came to power, he delayed ministers, boards and budgets. Market women felt it. Politicians had no jobs, let alone ordinary Nigerians. He said he didn’t see the need for ministers, and people defended him.
Failures were blamed on Saraki as a fifth columnist, then on ill health and PDP. ASUU struck for almost a year, yet sympathy remained. COVID, recession and a chaotic Naira redesign that left you with money you could not spend came and went, yet saboteurs were blamed, not government. The PDP opposition was absent. Citizens showed unusual empathy for his age and health, a default that Tinubu is enjoying now.
Jonathan was more criticized than Buhari, but not like Tinubu. As an Ijaw minority, he added Azikiwe to his name to appeal to the Igbo South East. Blood, however, is thicker than water. Social Identity Theory explains it: shared identity breeds shared understanding. He still faced fierce opposition over Boko Haram and from an APC alliance of two dominant regions.
Tinubu is the most criticized. The Muslim-Muslim ticket that brought him to power made him vulnerable. Under Buhari and Jonathan there was a sense of “it is our government” driven by identity and in-group favouritism. That ownership is distorted now.
It is unclear if the South West has fully claimed Tinubu’s government with the softness that comes from closeness and familiarity. Fuel subsidy removal worsened the backlash, but as Situational Leadership Theory shows, popularity is not performance alone but situation. Perception is emotional. If a wife does not love her husband, nothing he does pleases her. That is cognitive dissonance at work.
Tinubu’s identity as a Yoruba Muslim made the Muslim-Muslim ticket possible, but it complicated his legitimacy. The crisis is Muslim-Christian rivalry. Neither side wants to own the government. I empathize with Yoruba Muslims caught in between.
What we see is a lack of a shared sense of ownership among different groups. While Christians may perceive appointments as offering greater representation to compensate for their perceived exclusion from the highest levels of leadership, this has not necessarily erased concerns about injustice or bias.
Similarly, despite the Muslim-Muslim presidential ticket, some Muslims feel that Christians have received a disproportionate share of other appointments.
Yet, in a diverse federation like Nigeria and Muslim-Muslim ticket, appointments cannot be expected to follow a strict 50-50 formula; rather, they require a careful balance that eases tensions, addresses suspicions and promotes a sense of inclusion.
Between these competing perceptions, criticism becomes persistent, as efforts to balance representation do not always translate into a shared sense of fairness and belonging.
Bagudu Mohammed is the founder of Alternative Perspectives, a widely read commentary platform on social media. It offers evidence-based analysis and real-life insights as a credible alternative to groupthink, convenient narratives, and echo chambers. The platform explores a wide range of issues, including politics, society, relationships, governance, and contemporary trends.
Web: https://alternativeperspective.onrender.com
