Afr.j. pel*, id. (1996), Vol. 1 No. 2,154-175 Popular Struggles in Nigeria 1960-1982 Abubakar Momoh* Abstract 77K paper examines some of the dominant social movements in Nigerian politics since independence; the causes and character of the struggles waged by them - students, workers, peasants and the Nigerian Left. It argues that these struggles constitute the mainstream of the struggles of the popular masses and achieved significant political, social and economic results. They were however limited in their overall impact on the Nigerian political economy because they lacked unity and political largely as a result of the weakness of the Nigerian Left. At Nigeria's independence in 1960, it became apparent that the emergent petit bourgeoisie, the merchant class and the elite who mounted the political turf were set to run a neo-colonial state; the promises and hopes of independence were dashed; and all the anti-colonial and anti-imperialist campaigns by the Nigerian peoples - workers, peasants, women, students, the professionals and indeed the left were compromised. The political energies of the popular forces — as expressed, for example, in the Egba women's revolt, the 1945 workers' strike, and the revolt following the Iva Valley massacre—were squandered. Our objective in this paper is to show that the struggles of popular forces assumed a general tenor and thrust that had as its goal the transformation of the Nigerian social structure. However, these struggles either remained unsyslematised, unharnessed, sectarian and unco- ordinated; or they were not captured and channeled within the framework of a vanguardist political movement This, to us, is the tragedy of the Nigerian socialist movement.1 By popular struggles we mean the struggles waged against the Nigerian state and its ruling class by the social forces located in the lower levels of country's social structure, where the majority of its citizens subsist—workers, peasants, students, unemployed, small commodity producers, and petty traders. But first a brief statement on the nature of the Nigerian state and social classes. 1027-0353 © 1996 African Association iij Political Scicme Popular Struggles in Nigeria 155 State and Class in Nigeria The Nigerian State has been described as neo-colonial (Ake 1985). That the state is neo-colonial does not mean that it only serves the interest of the metropolitan capitalist class. Indeed, it serves the interest of some local beneficiaries. The exploited classes remain the working class and (he peasantry (Toyo 1985). It would seem therefore that the arguments about the relative autonomy2 of the neo-colonial state are superfluous. For example, the Nigerian state is far more dependent on a network of internal and external classes than can be imagined. In this connection, Ekuerhare has identified three major ways in which this dependence is manifested. First, there is the tax on rent from natural resources. The second is the appropriation of workers' social surplus through the price system.1 These are complemented by a third mechanism — prebendalism.4 Because the organised private sector is dominated by the multinationals, the state sector is used as an agency of economic development and hence capital accumulation.5 That the pattern of accumulation is along capitalist lines and consolidates neo-colonialism, is both a reflection of the general dependence of the emergent dominant class on the bourgeoisie of the centre as well as the weak and embryonic nature of the Nigerian national bourgeoisie. The foregoing raises questions about Ake's notion of the state as being characterised by limited autonomy, and more especially his view of the Nigerian peasantry as living in externality to civil society6, marginalised in the contextof the limited development of commodity relations, and thus characterised by the politics of anxiety and normless political procedure (Ake 1985: 13-14). This view is contestable because, as Ake himself acknowledged, the peasantry has political consciousness, but their politics has been shaped or redefined by the dominant values of the Nigerian state. For as Emckwe notes, the peasantry maintain links with their relatives in the towns who patronise them; they view the "success" of such relatives as "theirs" (Emekwc 1986). In effect, the nature of the Nigerian state can only be expressed through an undersliuiding of the social structure and the class struggle. Classes are formed by groups related to the ownership or non-ownership of the means of production. This basic qualification is the basis upon which forms of power, control, appropriation, and domination arc exercised. It is also the basis upon which struggles are waged, consciousness aroused and changes brought about. The dominant classes in Nigeria have to be identified within the dominant mode of production; viz., capitalism restructures social relations of the Nigcrhui ssiucfl!theumonssetuPaJomtAction c S t t J a A ^ d e c l a ^ m a t i f m e d e m a n d w a s n o t i ^ t w . t h m t h e d e a d h ne of September 27 1963. they would call a general strike. When the government renegedon the payment of a minimum wage, the unions declared a general strike in June 1964. ^government was compelled by this action to negotiate immedi- aielywithtbeJAC;andthestrikewascalledoffonJunel3."11iewagesetUement that followed more or less fell between the government's white paper and the MorganReport'srecominendations." [Cohen 1974:168]. As Cohen further points out, ... the General strike of 1964 replicated, at least in three respects the lessons of 1945 First, it was clear that given a reasonable unity of purpose the unions could represent a fairly formidable political force. Second, their ability to act together depended largely on a favourable coincidence between political dissatisfaction and economic grievance. Finally, the issue most likely to galvanise the unions to action was an increased perception of social inequality combined with governmental insensitivity, and arrogance in handling their demands. [Ibid:. 164]. What were the political implications of the workers strike? First, it provided a leverage for the political parties and interests which were opposed to the govern- ment to press and win support for their views. Second, it exacerbated the political Crisis in the country. Third, organised labour won more respect in the power equation of the country. However, the left, which was actively involved in the activities of the affiliate unions that took part in the strike, did not derive any political gains from it. Rather, it became engulfed in factionalism, and accusations of corruption and high handedness, all of which undermined its collective political integrity. On May 11, 1981, during the civilian government of Shehu Shagari, the Nigerian Labour Congress mobilised about 700,000 workers for a 2-day nation- wide strike, again over the question of a new minimum wage policy. The decision to embark on the strike was adopted at the Kano Conference of the Nigerian Labour Congress in February 1981. At the Kano Conference, Hassan Summon had been returned as the NLC President, defeating the pro-establishment candidate, David Qjeli. The economy under the Shagari administration had witnessed hyper-inflation- ary trends, official corruption and a frivolous spending-spree by public officers. For the predominately compradorial political class hoarding, profiteering and unspeakable speculative trading activities held sway. The economy was caught in Popular Struggles in Nigeria 167 hyper-inflation and uncontrollable crisis. It was in this light that individual trade unions started asking management to review their salaries and fringe benefits. In April 1979, an emergency meeting of the Executive Council of the NLC had given an ultimatum to the Military government on the need to review, within 21 days, rent and transport allowances, restore car loans and fix a national minimum wage. [Otobo 1981: 70; Tokunboh 1985:167-168]. The military government tactically dragged its feet during the negotiations until the new civilian regime of President Shehu Shagari was elected into office. On January 10, the NLC gave another ultimatum to the government to negotiate a settlement with labour on/or before March 31, or expect a workers' general strike. In the light of the general economic crisis and arbitrary increases in salaries and allowances which politicians had approved for themselves, and the pressure mounted by labour, the national parliament decided to set up a labour committee to look into the case. The NLC, therefore, suspended its decision to call a general strike. The Labour Committee recommended 120 naira as the minimum wage." When all efforts to convince the government on a higher minimum wage than 120 naira failed, the NLC led by Hassan Sunmonu declared a general strike on May 11, 1981. Only seven unions which sympathised with David Ojeli took a contrary view and boycotted the strike action. The NLC ignored president Shehu Shagari\s pleas to the workers to rescind their proposed action in the "Nation's interest". After several rounds of negotia- tions involving the two houses of parliament, a new minimum wage of 125 naira was agreed on by all the parties. The Sunmonu led strike was a success to the extent that the state and capital made concessions to labour and acknowledged the miserable social conditions of the working class, caused especially by die rising cost of living, poor conditions of service, and workers' retrenchment. But the strike, in a political sense, showed the limits of economism. [Otobo op. cit:. 80]. Although the issues upon which the NLC's demands were hinged were welfare oriented, the essence of their demands raised political and class questions. It became apparent that despite the populist or radical claims to be progressive, which were made by parties such as the Peoples Redemption Party (PRP) and the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN), the parties did not align themselves with workers or channel the workers' struggles into positive direction. Indeed, in the stales which were controlled by these political parties, workers who went on strike were victimised. Such was the case of WRECA workers in Kano. The political gains from the strike were minimal due, largely, to the limits of the scope of trade unionism, both in terms of its legal constraints and the political consciousness of its rank and file. The Nigerian Left and the Struggles of the Masses The Nigerian left has given impetus to the struggles of the masses, either through intellectual articulation, direct participation, or solidarity. And especially, most of 168 Abubakar Momoh the labour leaders who steered the trade unions through the most turbulent periods inthe history of labourbelong to the Nigerian left. This notwithstanding, we would argue that the struggles of the Nigerian Left have remained lactional.scd, espe- cially along sectarian, geographical, cultural and doctrinal lines. This has deprived thestrugglesoftheNigerianpeopleofastronganduniiedLenwingmovememihal could also benefit from the political struggles of the masses. The energ.es ol the various factions have been wasted on futile contests as there is often no meeting ground between the warof words and the warof positions. In what follows, we give an outline of the history and politics of the Nigerian left, and the issues around which it has struggled. We assess some of their major com radict ions and issues of disagreement, and their attempts to unite. Left politics in Nigerian has a rich pedigree dating back to the Zikist movement which was formed in 1945 with a membership that was largely radical, anti- colonial and anti-imperialist. Some of its members, became the leading activists and theoreticians of the socialist movement in independent Nigeria. The ZikisLs were able to make serious attempts to redefine the form and content of the anti- colonial struggle, and in several instances succeeded in putting working class demands on the political agenda iu dose concert with the trade union movement. Abdulraheem and Olukoshi 1986:65]. But the movement's achievements were ninimum because of its inarticulate and inchoate ideological position, the domi- lant idealist tendencies within its ranks, and its alliance with the bourgeois eformist NCNC whose main political agenda was to secure the institutional ransfer of power onto itself. The way some members of the left were disowned by he NCNC and Aziki we showed not only the limits of their political ideas, but also >f the political space in which they operated their capacity and their influence. Following the emergence of regional politics in Nigerian, the politics of the left dso became regionalised. It was in this context that the Northern Dements •regressive Union (NEPU) emerged with Saad Zungur and Aminu Kano as its learest ideological representatives. Rauf Mustapha characterises the orientation nd politics of NI-I'U as populist [Mustapha 1984:112-13]. Although it showed ympathy with workers, NllPlfs fountain head remained the Talakawas, as nunciated in the Swaha declaration. Its peasant base was undeniable. Mustapha includes: The most profound contribution of NEPU towards the Nigerian revolution was the political education of the peasantry. In the face of the often brutal and savage repression through the Native Authority police, courts, etc. the NKPl I was able to articulate and maintain a tradition of political intransi- gence. | Ibid.: 131. In actual fact, thcNKIM I's struggle was conceived as a struggle against Northern Popular Struggles in Nigeria 169 feudalismor aristocracy. Thus within tbeNEPUitself.basKpersoaal, organisational and ideological issues were raised that questioned the integrity and ideological clarity of its leader, Mallam Aminu Kano. However, within the bourgeois consti- tutional framework inherited in 1960, NEPU's politics continued to be progres- sive. Within the Action Group, a party whose ideology of Democratic Socialism was first imposed on it by its militant youth wing in 1962, the leftwing members of the party pursued their activities "within the framework of the electoral factional rivalries and the fortunes or misfortunes of its leadership." [Abdulrabeem and Olukoshi 1986: 69]. By this time, the Nigerian Youth Congress (NYC) had emerged and it had such leftists as EskorToyo, BabaOmojola,TunjiOtegbeyeand Wahab Goodluck within its ranks. The Congress allied with the workers and other democratic forces in political struggle including the struggles against the Anglo- Nigerian Defence Pact in 1961. The NYC also worked with the student movement In August 1963, the NTUC and NYC agreed on the need for the formation of a political platform, and the Socialist Workers and Farmers Party (SWFP) was launched with Uche Omo as its leader, and Tunji Otegbeye as secretary-general. The SWFP formed the Patrice Lumumba Academy of Political Science and Trade Unionism in 1964 and launched a bi-weekly newspaper, Advance, during the same year. It went into economic ventures, starting a restaurant (Hotel De Executive), hospital (Ireti Hospital), chemist shop (Tutu Chemist), printing (Eko Printers) and vehicle maintenance (Eagles Garage). [Tokunboh op. cit:. 73]. They received subventions mainly from socialist countries. This became their undoing since financial accounting caused a major rift in their ranks, which was exploited by the factions of the Nigerian bourgeoisie during Iheir own political wrangling. The SWFP launched a political programme based on the principles of scientific socialism at about the same time as the Nigerian Labour Party was formed under Michael Imoudu with a membership of leftists such as Ola Oni and M.E. Lolagbodi. The two proclaimed socialism as their ideological goal. However, following the military coup of 1966 and the banning of all political parties, the "socialist" parties died. Madunugu laments: One would have expected a revolutionary party, whose legal existence under a nco-colonial regime was an exceptional (and therefore a temporary) situation, to respond to this decree by going underground. This did not lake place, nor could it have taken place. A political party with no mass base and whose leadership was bitterly divided over the issues could not possibly pretend to go underground — a process wlicre absolute secrecy, discipline, courage and sacrifice are demanded. [Madunagu 1982: 61 ]. During ihc civil war (1966-1970) the left was divided between those who 170 AbubdkarMomoh 1 course. On ae^daalsMeweretho hosaw the secessionist bourgeoisie as trying todivide the country while the other faction of the left saw the civil war as an intra-class contradiction and a problem of the entire bourgeoisie which consisted of both the Federal and Biafran factions. For some leftists on the Biafran side the Ahiara Declaration was a way of mitigating the social crisis, anguish and privation, that the war had brought on the toiling people in the Biafran enclave. The declaration, if anything attempted to legitimise and consolidate the cause of the secessionist facttonofthenationalbourgeoisie. [AbdulrabeemandOlukoshi 1986:71;Babatope 1986: 57]. Tbi Biafran Communist Party (BCP) publicly claimed credit for the Ahiara Declaration. The Nigerian Afro-Asia Solidarity Organisation (NAASO) tod by Eskor Toyo and Aminu Kano, condemned the Biafran left and the propaganda which they had launched abroad. [Oni 1983: 54]. In 1970, after the civil war, some leftists gathered at the University of Nsukka to fonn a proletarian movement The B iafran Marxists, at this meeting, denied ever supporting secession. The meeting did not yield fruitful dividends. [Oni Ibid.: 54] Another meeting was scheduled for Kaduna in 1970; but it was aborted. However, the Nigerian Academy of Intellectual Workers, which was formed in 1965, continued to align with workers and students and condemned the excesses of the military junta. In 1971, the academy set up an organisation called the "Movement for Economic Justice" which campaigned against price increases, police and army brutalities, and the reactionary character of the Adebo wages report In 1972, the Academy set up the "Committee for Full Indigenisation" to educate the Nigerian masses on how to attain genuine indigenisation of the economy [Ibid:. 55]. Much later in 1973, the Committee for Patriotic Front emerged to mark the death of Kwame Nkrumah. The Committee was rather unwieldy and ill-defined in its character and objectives; but from it, the Nigerian Socialist Movement (NSM) was formed. The NSM's support-base was among the students and intellectuals and not the rank-and-file of shop floor workers. Its main activity between 1973 and 1975 was the fight to return the country to a constitutional democracy. In 1976, the Movement for Peoples Democracy (MPD) was born in Benin. It served as a broad front of Marxists with the major objective of "how to influence the return to civil rule in a way favourable to the proletarian movement and bow the proletarian struggles would continue under civil rule" [Ibid:. 59]. The MPD submitted a memorandum to the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) and, in 1977, the first all-Nigerian Socialist Conference was held in Zaria. This well attended conference resolved to form a common socialist platform when the ban on politics was lifted by the military government of Olusegun Obasanjo. The MPD members disagreed over a number of issues, including whether or not it was politically correct for the left to form a political party to participate in what was essentially bourgeois politics. Some members questioned Ola Oni's leadership of Popular Struggles in Nigeria 171 the MPD. Ola Oni for his part, and while the major issues and wranglings were still unsettled, went ahead to announce the formation of tbe Socialist Workers and Farmers Party (SWFP) along with some members of the MPD. Other members of tbe MPD pitched their tent with Wahab Goodluck who was believed to be in touch with workers, because several members of bis political movement were in tbe trade unions. Yet others, such as S. G. Ikoku and Aminu Kano, joined the National Party of Nigeria (NPN), and later pulled out to join tbe Peoples Redemption Party (PRP) when tbe stakes in the NPN were alleged to be small. In so doing, tbe left depleted its forces and lost some of its ideologues to bourgeois reformist parties. Goodluck proclaimed the formation of the Socialist Working Peoples Party (SWPP) and started tbe publication of a left magazine, New Horizon, [Oni Ibid.] in conjunction with the Afro-Asian Peoples Solidarity Organisation (AAPSO). Meanwhile, several left organisations blossomed; but basically tbey all had their roots on campuses, mostly at Ahmadu Bello University (Zaria), University of Ibadan, University of Ife, and the University of Calabar. As Tyoden rightly remarked: T he tragedy of the Nigerian left is that whichever group one looked at, there is nothing tangible... as far as the stated goal is concerned." [Tyoden 1983:12]. In a nutshell, the squabbling and factionalism within the Nigerian left from 1976 to tbe early 1980s contributed immensely to its own weakness, and inability to advance tbe political struggles of the Nigerian masses. Conclusion The period 1960-1982 certainly saw the growth of objective conditions for popular struggles that could have been channeled in a positive political direction. The inability of the left to unite its ranks and act as a consistent and reliable vanguard organisation was the result of a sociological failure: it could not structurally and organisationally be rooted in the working class. While most Nigerian left organisations accepted the working class ideology, their political practice occurred within the framework of petit bourgeois aspirations and bourgeois state institu- tions. The fundamental problem of the PRP, for example, was not so much because it participated in politics on a liberal democratic turf. Rather, the problem of the party originated from the fact that its principles and programmes were not based on the working class ideology. The party itself was not rooted in the working class; nor was it rooted in the amorphous Talakawas. It merely made symbolic appeals to and identifications with the latter for purposes of mobilising them for electoral politics. In a nutshell, our study has brought to the fore some major issues. First, in spite of the repression and the various sanctions imposed by the slate, the oppressed classes, especially the workers and peasants, could struggle and win some concessions. Second, the popular struggles waged by the oppressed classes have been limited or constrained by the fact thai they did not form an integral part of a 172 AbubakarMomoh «tflicalii»veiiiei*ii«didtbeyhave^^ onto oat. failed to offer the necessary leadership because of its own internal weaknesses. By so failing it lost a decisive political moment in the history of Nigeria. Lecturer in Political Science, Lagos State University, Lagos, Nigeria Notes • 1 A Nigerian socialist, Edwin Madunagu, wrote a book by the title, The Tragedy Of The Nigerian Socialist Movement And Other Essays (Calabar Century Press, 1980), pp. 1-24. In the work, Madunagu laments the tragedy (as a calamity^ rather than proffering scientific explanations for the political weakness of the left. 2. Ibis view was forcefully articulated by Hamza Alavi, "The state in post- colonial societies: Pakistan and Bangladesh", New Left Review 74, (1972). 3. Bright U. Ekuerhare, "Recent patterns of accumulation in the Nigerian economy", in Siddique Mohammed and Tony Edoh (eds.), Nigerian: A Republic In Ruins (Zaria: Gaskiya Corporation, 1986), pp. 206-207. 4. Richard Joseph, Democracy And Prebendal Politics In Nigeria (Cambridge University Press, 1987). 5. Erne Ekekwe, Class And State In Nigeria (London: Longman, 1986), Chapter 111. 6. "The Nigerian State: Antinomies of a Periphery Formation" in Claude Ake (ed). The Political Economy Of Nigeria (Essex longman, 1985), p. 14. 7. There are varying views of the role of the bourgeoisie vis-a-vis its metropoli- tan counterparts and whose interest the Nigerian state serves. For the debate, see for instance, Claude Ake, "The Nigerian state: antinomies of aperipheral formation" in Ake (ed.) op. cit. p. 20; Mark Anikpo, "Nigeria1 s evolving class structure": in Ake (ed.) ibid. Sugun Osoba, "The deepening crisis of the Nigerian national bourgeoisie", Review of African Political Economy, No. 13, 1978; Bjorn Beckman, "Imperialism and the national bourgeoisie" Review of African Political Economy, No. 22, Oct.-Dec. 1981 and "Whose state? State and capitalist development in Nigeria" Review of African Political Economy, No. 23, 1992; E. O. Akeredolu-ak, "Private foreign investment and the underdevelopment of indigenous entrepreneurship in Nigeria"; in Gavin Williams, (ed.) Nigerian: Economy and society (London: Rex Collins, 1976); and Festus Iyayi, "The primitive accumulation of capital in a neocolony: Nigeria"; Review of African Political Economy No. 35, May, 1986. 8. Ibid.,932. 9. TheNUNwasreconstitutedastheNational Association of Nigerian Students Popular Struggles in Nigeria 173 in 1981. 10. Okcllo Oculi, "The political economy of (he planning of ihe Balolori irrigation project, (1974-1980)" in Wsman (ed), Ibid:, p. 99. Iyayi, The impact of business companies, op. cit., pp. 43-45. 11. 12. Quarterly Bulletin ofLalxmr Statistics, 1VSJ, Nos. 1 and 2 (Lagos: Federal (iovernmcnl printers. 1984), 9.33. 13. Toyin Falola and Julius Ihonvbere, The Rise And Fall Of Nigeria's Second 14. 15. Republic, (London: Zed Books, 1985), p. 147 Ibid, p. 211. For a liberal but a fairly gcxnl account of Labour repression under military rule in Nigeria, see Austin Isamah "Organised labour under military regimes in Nigeria" Africa Development, Vol. 15 No. 2. 1990. liarlicr on the goveninieni had set up the Justice Adeyinka Morgan Commis- sion in a bid to forestall the general strike. But it refused to implement that Commission's recommendations. 16. Dale ()lobo, "Hie Nigerian general strike of 1981"Ibid., pp. 74-75. 17. Cf."'l'wentyb;Lsicqiiesti()iisonilieNi:i)U-NCNCalliance"inMv//»/?rt//i'/<'.? OfOur Struggle: Documents FromThe NepuDaysToThe Prp.Vol. l,(zaria: gaskiya corporation. 1980). 174 Abubakar Momoh References Abduhaheem, T., and A. Olukoshi (1986) "The left in Nigerian politics and the straggle for socialism: 1945-1985", Review of African Political Economy, No. 36. Aina, % A. (1986) "Class structure and the economic development process in Nigeria (1945-1975)." ODU: A Journal of West African Studies, No. 29. Aina, T. A. (1989) "The Nigerian crisis and the middle class" Viertel Jahres Berichte Nr. 116. Altbach, P. (1967) "Students politics". Transition Vol. 6. Babatope, E. (1986) Nigerian: The Socialist Alternative. Benin: Jodah. Beckman, B. (1985) "Balotori: peasants versus state and capital." Nigeria Journal of Political Science Vol. 4, Nos. 1 and 2. Beer, C. E. F. (1976) The Politics Of Peasant Groups In Nigeria. Ibadan: Ibadan University Press. Beer, C. E. F. and Williams, G. (1976) "The politics of the Ibadan peasantry", in G. Williams (ed.) Nigeria: Economy and Society. London: Rex Collins. Cohen, R. (1974) Labour and Politics in Nigeria. London: Heinemann. Falola, T. and J. Ihonvbere (1985) The Rise And Fall Of Nigeria's SecondRepublic. London: Zed Books. Dome, O. (1973) "Problems of students welfare" in J. F. A. Ajayi and T. Tamuno (eds.). The University of Ibadan, I948-1973Jbadan: Ibadan University Press. Iyayi,F. (1989) "The impact of the Business companies and corporations" in Yusuf Bala Usman (ed.) Nigerian Since Independence, The First 25 Years: The Society. Ibadan: Heinemann. Lipset, S. M. (1960) "University students and politics in underdeveloped coun- tries." Comparative Education Review Vol. 10, No. 2. Lloyd, P. C. (1966) 77K- New Elite Of Tropical Africa. New York: Oxford University Press. Madunagu, E. (1982) Problems of Socialism: The Nigerian Challenge London: Zed Books. Mustapha, A. R. (1984) "The relevance of the NEPU/PRP heritage to the Nigerian revolution: A critique." Studies in Politics and Society No. 1. Nzongola-Ntalaja, G. (1995) "Democratic Transitions in Africa" AAPSNewsletter New Series No. 19 June-September 1995. Odeyemi, I. (1982) "How it (Bakolori massacre) all started" in Yusuf Bala Usman (ed.), Political Repression In Nigeria kano: bonnic. Olusanya, G. O. (1982) The West African Students Union. Ibadan: Day Star Press. Oni, O. (1983) "Proletarian struggles in Nigeria: Historical highlights," in A. Essien-Ibok (ed.) Political Repression And Assassination. Zaria: Gaskiya Corporation. Popular Struggles in Nigeria 175 Otobo, D. (1981) "The Nigerian general strike of 1981." Review of African Political Economy, No. 22. Tokunboh, M. A. (1985) Labour Movement In Nigeria: Past And Present. Lagos: lantern. Toyo, E. (1985) "Neo-colonialism, primitive accumulation and Third World orientations." Nigerian Journal of Political Science. Vol. 4, Nos. 1 & 2. Tyoden, S-G. (1983) "The dilemma of the Nigerian Left", in A. Essien-Ibok (ed) Towards A Progressive Nigeria Zaria: Gaskiya Corporation.