Cyprian Edward-Ekpo Dialectics & Treatise

THE ANATOMY OF A SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT: PART ONE

There is something extremely pestiferous , which I want to visit in a lecture series.
Observation suggests that over time, the majority of men and women of African extraction become complacent living within a psychological framework — a disease mindset I term the 'SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT'

The great penchant of living in “ Entitlement Mentality “ , is, by not realizing that no one owes you a duty of generosity . It is important to know that it is only by good heart which streams from evolution that have spanned incarnations of a soul personality through his spiritual growth that some men and women are born with good hearts, that make them always desirous to help others, such as — sacrificing for their communities, families, friends , colleagues, and neighbors.

Unfortunately, many families, friends, and neighbors routinely exploit good-hearted individuals. They mistake genuine kindness and personal sacrifice for an obligation or an inherent right. Consequently, good-hearted people are often dismissed as fools. Evidence shows that many selfless individuals face malice, resentment, and hostility from the very people they try to help, sometimes facing evil attack and blackmail simply because of their generous nature.

Let me go further by sharing an experience which in this subject series I title the subject , thus “ THE ANATOMY OF A SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT : PART ONE“.

I have a senior friend who serves at a directorate level in the Federal Judicial Service Commission in Nigeria, while her husband, at a time , was working as a director of legal service for an oil-servicing company. In a common sense estimation, they are considerably comfortable ecomimcally.
Some years ago, she had asked me for financial support to attend her daughter’s graduation garden at the University of Cardiff in the United Kingdom. That wasn’t the first time she had asked for financial support. I recollect at least thrice I had responded positively, except for this specific event.
Over the years, I have noticed that people rarely repay loans to me. Rather than damage relationships or constantly chase debts, I developed a simple rule: Never lend out an amount you can not comfortably write off as a gift. I have always helped those facing genuine distress—such as medical emergencies, academic research when the person who needs support can convince me that he previously did not expect to face distress along the way ( not those who deliberately plan their personal projects, such as wedding, etc., on other people's economy) —but I do not fund vacations or social events or someone else’s inordinate aggrandizement .
In this particular case, I actually didn’t have the money to spare at the time of her request as I had some projects at hand, I told her I could not offer her a loan.

Three days later, I was traveling from Abuja, Nigeria, to Europe and happened to be on the same connecting flight. She noticed I was flying in Business Class, which is how I usually travel. I fly Business or First Class for two main reasons: it provides the comfort and quietude I need to read non-researched books (like novels, megazines or less-voluminous books) since I always have tight daily schedule, and it gives me access to the specific drinks I prefer.

Ever since that day, she has essentially cut ties with me. For about five years now, she stopped reaching out. Even when I sent birthday greetings, she rarely responded, and if she did, her tone was entirely indifferent.

Two months ago, I needed some critical information that I knew this friend had access to. After calling repeatedly without getting an answer, I reached out to a close mutual friend to see if she was okay. The mutual friend later told me that this lady had deliberately avoided my calls because she felt I was a "bad friend."
Her reason was petty and illogical: she had asked me for financial assistance, I claimed I had no money, yet three days later, I was boarding a Business Class flight. It was then I realized why she had been indifferent to me some years now.

My question is simply this: what gives her the right to expect me to forfeit my personal comfort just to fund her wants?

First, her request was to fulfill a want , not to address a distressing need. She neither had a family funeral or medical emergency or such other unforeseen circumstances. It was a graduation garden , and her presence wouldn't be mandatory if she didn’t have enough funds at the time. Attending her daughter's graduation garden is not a necessity, and a person's personal travel budget has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not they are willing or able to subsidize another person's lavish lifestyle. I personally only give my hard earned money to those who need money , not those who want money.

While we wait for Part Two of the Anatomy of a Sense of Entitlement series, I would love to hear your thoughts on this issue. Do you think this lady was justified in severing our friendship simply because I did not give her money, even though I could afford a business-class flight for myself?

Follow me this month at Cyprian Edward-Ekpo Dialectics & Treatise on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter for an ongoing series sharing real-world experiences regarding " The Anatomy of a Sense of Entitlement."

With all my heart love, God bless you, and God bless all humanity.

~ Cyprian Edward-Ekpo

WHEN THE FOUNDATIONS CRUMBLE: THE SLOW DEATH OF DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW

When transition is imminent, for example, in the terminal phase of a cancer, despite good intentions, it is often counter-productive and deceitful to a soul personality, and of course, inadvisable to comfort patients by saying that they will get better, unless one truly feels that it is necessary.

As I have observed, the genesis of war — whether family crisis, intra-community war, inter-community war, civil war or international war, is rooted in human ego and violability of fundamental human rights — of the realm of civil liberty — the second generation rights regime, principally the freedom of expression and access to justice. In a clearer wording, War—whether on a micro or macro scale—is fundamentally rooted in the human ego and the violation of inherent civil liberties, particularly freedom of expression and access to justice.

In these, controversy has raged over decades with no direct judicial test of validity of suppression of these basic rights that has ever been pleasant and sustainable. Of course , these basic rights are inherent as they came with the nature of man as a living being.

It was until World War I that important issues regarding these basic and inalienable rights came to the surface that they have been receiving extreme suppression by man and that nations have failed because of the suppression tendencies impacting these basic rights of man.

Today, as many nations are degenerating from the status of civilized world to the status of third-world society — as they lost touch with the the tenets of democracy, it is preferable not to keep the illusion of greatness of these nations and pretend that they are leading to a better world for humanity . To pretend that a deteriorating society is great is as offering false hope to a terminally ill patient which ignores reality. Maintaining the illusion of a healthy democracy while its foundational pillars rot blinds citizens to the truth.

All evidence pointing to collapsed nations we know so far , is that the worst form of corruption has been disparagement to the rule of law. This arises in two forms — judicial corruption and treatment of court orders highly disparagingly. These activate one another — leading to loss of confidence in the system of law and spuring up to anarchism in the long run.

The foregoing explanations should be sufficient for us to understand why the rule of law can become a mockery and why democracies die .

~ Cyprian Edward-Ekpo @ Cyprian Edward-Ekpo Dialectics & Treatise

DOES BEING A MINOR JUSTIFY A JUDICIARY-SANCTIONED RISK TO THE PUBLIC ?

In the case of a 16-year-old, Timothy Hudson, accused Stepsister's Murder in a crusing yacht at the international waters during a family tourism cruise , who was released by Court to Family Custody in a Florida community, the Court, Coram : Chief Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres ruled that 16-year-old Timothy Hudson—charged with the horrific r**e and murder of his stepsister—will await trial from the comfort of home because of his minor status. This federal judge granted Timothy a pretrial release to live with family.

But here is the most chilling twist: his own parents, that is, mother, step-father, and other siblings don't even want him back. In an incredibly rare move, Hudson’s mother and stepfather completely kicked him out and begged the court to keep him locked behind bars. Beyond their sheer disgust and grief, the parents reportedly refused to trust him around their other surviving children. Since his immediate family shut the door, his uncle stepped in to take him. The teen is currently living at his uncle's house while the justice system plays out.

Despite the legal disposition of the Bail Reform Act of 1984 (18 U.S.C. § 3142) which is a US Federal law that mandates detention if no combination of release conditions can reasonably assure the safety of the community or the defendant's appearance, the court disregards the prosecutors argument that the sheer brutality of the charges—first-degree murder and aggravated sexual abuse—presents "clear and convincing evidence" of an ongoing public threat.

What are your thoughts on this?

Do you think the judge made the right call based on his age, or should the severity of the crime override his minor status?

How do you feel about the uncle stepping in after the parents officially begged the court to keep such an evil boy detained?

Does pretrial house arrest for violent crimes of r**e and murder undermine public trust in the justice system?

I welcome brilliant thought on this in the comment's section:

~ Cyprian Edward-Ekpo @ Cyprian Edward-Ekpo Dialectics & Treatise

THE TRAP OF SELF-SUFFICIENCY: WHY NO ONE BENEFITS FROM ARROGANCE OR SUCCEEDS ALONE

Years ago, I cautioned a wealthy friend to treat others with respect and adhere to the harmonious norms of society, reminding him that no one knows what tomorrow holds. He dismissed my advice, confidently declaring that he would never need anything from any man because his immense wealth secured both his future and his children's inheritance. Eventually, however, life took an unexpected turn. Fortune reversed, his riches vanished, and he was left depending on the very community he had disregarded.His downfall illustrates a timeless truth: although humans existed before formal communities, society remains the essential instrument for individual fulfillment. It unlocks unique advantages that solitary effort simply cannot achieve, proving that collective participation is necessary to realize our full potential. Echoing Plato and the Neoplatonists, the state acts as the "greater self" of the individual. Consequently, a man must choose a life of virtue over fraud and chaos, aligning his actions with constructive societal norms. He must answer the positive demands of community life—fostering trust, order, and cooperation—without ever compromising his deepest spiritual convictions.

May God always help us to vibrate humility and wisdom .

With all my heart love , God bless you , and God bless humanity .

~ Cyprian Edward-Ekpo

THE ZONING FALLACY: WHY POLITICAL QUOTAS UNDERMINE THE CORE PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY
---------------------------------
I recently engaged in a public discourse with Chief Okoi Obono-Obla, a prominent Nigerian lawyer and former presidential aide during the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari. Chief Obono-Obla took issue with my thesis advising against the institutionalization of zoning for elective positions. My contention remains clear: zoning is fundamentally alien to democratic theory, and it fails to guarantee executive competence or governance utility. When Obono-Obla was challenged to produce any historical or theoretical precedent where foundational democratic architecture incorporated the zoning of elective offices, he defended his position by characterizing it as a uniquely Nigerian adaptation of democratic principles. Let me quote his words Okoi Obono-Obla thus : " There is indeed a universal definition of democracy, but the standards for measuring it vary across nations... The fact that elective positions in Nigeria are zoned does not mean that Nigeria’s democracy is flawed. Every country evolves a brand of democracy that reflects its peculiarities..." ( End of quote).

I am persuaded that this conceptualization of governance represents a fundamental misunderstanding of democratic principles. The systematic integration of non-democratic mechanisms into a democratic framework does not broaden the definition of democracy; rather, it dilutes it into a pseudo-democracy. Consequently, while zoning may exist as a political compromise, it cannot be classified as a legitimate democratic practice.

What is democracy ? "

" DEMOCRACY " is a system of government, which the citizens represent themselves either directly or through representatives periodically elected by the citizens.

Neither geopolitical nor tribal interest forms part of the features and principles of democracy. The entire paradigm of democratic expression revolves strictly around popularity—manifested through competitive candidates and popular majoritarian mandates. It is an arithmetic system predicated on the principle that the will of the majority must prevail, driven by the collective endorsement of an individual's competence to deliver good governance.

Democratic principles do not recognize allocation based on family, clan, tribe, or politico-geography. To enforce such divisions directly undermines the core strength of the democratic process, which relies entirely on the unhindered will of the majority of the electorate.

To this end, I am emphatic that the principles of democracy , like those of other governance systems, vary only a little from tradition to another, but not fundamentally. Such can be seen in monarchial democracy where a Monarch is seperated from a prime minister -- thus making a Monarch a trado-ceremonial leader while the regular form of democracy from office of the prime minister to the least like major prevails itself .

While advocating for political inclusivity and equity is entirely valid within a developing polity, however, the precedence of zoning in Nigerian politicking does not grant such a practice democratic legitimacy, nor does it render it permanent or sustainable. It can, and should, be dismantled, as it constitutes anti-democratic practice .

An objective critique of democracy reveals that it remains the most viable vehicle for sustaining an egalitarian society. The only and primary vulnerability of democracy lies in its susceptibility to majoritarian exploitation, where an uninformed electorate can inadvertently elevate incompetent, destructive, or authoritarian leadership. A populist majority can empower a demagogue who ultimately threatens the structural survival of the democratic system itself. Yet, despite this inherent risk, institutional democracy remains superior to all alternative forms of government.

I am convinced that at a time when good governance and an egalitarian society are essential for everyday citizens, any civilized society should prioritize competence—based on a leader's intellectual prowess, public and corporate policy experience, and character—over the geographical zoning of political leadership.

~ Cyprian Edward-Ekpo

———————————
Original paper available at https://uniserl.education/the-zoning-fallacy-why-political-quotas-undermine-thecore-principles-of-democracy/