For Being The Most Vociferous Critics Of Jonathan’s Government, Tweeter Users React To Wole Soyinka’s Silence On Tinubu’s Worst Administration

BY ISAAC ASABOR*

In the ever-vocal world of social media, Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka has found himself at the centre of a storm. His past critiques of former President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration were scathing, likening it to a “reign of impunity” and condemning police sieges on the National Assembly. However, as President Bola Tinubu’s tenure unfolds, Soyinka’s silence has become deafening.

Twitter users, known for their sharp tongues and quick fingers, have not hesitated to point out the apparent double standard. During Jonathan’s regime, Soyinka was a vocal critic, questioning the government’s actions and demanding accountability. But now, as Tinubu navigates the complexities of leadership, the literary icon seems to have taken a vow of silence.

The question on everyone’s lips: Why the change? Is it political bias, selective outrage, or a genuine shift in perspective? Some argue that Soyinka’s silence reflects a pragmatic approach, allowing Tinubu time to “make up” for any perceived shortcomings. Others, however, see it as a betrayal of principles, a departure from the fearless critic they once admired.

Soyinka himself has clarified that this deliberate delay is a personal policy. He reserves judgment until one year into Tinubu’s administration, giving the President ample opportunity to address any deficiencies. But the court of public opinion remains divided. Has Soyinka’s pen lost its ink, or is there a deeper game afoot?

As the Twitter-verse buzzes with speculation, one thing is certain: Wole Soyinka’s silence speaks volumes. Whether it is a calculated strategy or a genuine change of heart, only time will tell. Until then, the virtual jury deliberates, and the literary giant remains an enigma in the age of 280-character debates.

For the sake of clarity, the age of 280-character debates began in September 2017 when Twitter expanded its infamous character limit from 140 to 280. The change sparked both jokes and rage, but Twitter hoped it would attract new users. While the move altered the nature of the service, it also presented a unique challenge for word lovers: how to be creative within the expanded limit. So, in a nutshell, 280-character debates have been part of Twitter’s landscape for several years now!

Vivian Umukoro@vian337, a tweeter user tweeted, “This’s how life plays out! Fuel: N87, bag of rice: 10k, spaghetti: N60, Bread: N150, Live goat: 12k, Painter of garri: N180, University fees: less than 50k, crate of eggs: 600, Lagos to Abuja flight: 20k, 2006 Corolla: 1.2m, pack of indomie: N800 yet a professor called a sitting president worse than Nebuchadnezzar and even invented a new nomenclature for the wife of the president “hippopotamus”

“Now, Nigerians can barely feed, he is busy praising the administration on board and attacking the opposition.

“Truly, that someone is a professor does not mean absolutely that he/she is the most intelligent and reasonable. Being knowledgeable and being intelligent are indeed two different things. Beautiful morning to you all”.

Her tweet, no doubt generated comments, of which, most could be considered to be acerbic.

Nigeria must be great@GabrielUjah6 tweeted, “Tribalism is worse than racism. His education is a waste. Even people in the village that didn’t attend any school at all are far better than him”, and Vivian Umukoro@vian337 replied “Apt”. Frank Opara@fopara03 tweeted “One of the achievements of Tinubu is exposing this man for who he is”, and Vivian Umukoro@vian337 retweeted, “Another angle”.

In a similar vein, PatrickoBayern@PatrikoBayern tweeted, “He was asked to rate administration after customary 100 days in office review, and He said he won’t talk on performance till after one year. (365 days). He thought one year wouldn’t come? Well, what’s the time now? It’s One year + 3 months. He has refused to give his scorecard…”

Criticizing Wole Soyinka for not speaking truth to power during Bola Tinubu’s era is a subjective matter. However, it is essential to consider the context and individual perspectives.

For instance, Wole Soyinka, an acclaimed playwright, novelist, and Nobel laureate, has made immense contributions to literature and human rights in Nigeria. His dedication to truth, freedom, and artistic excellence is widely acknowledged, and naming a road after him (the Wole Soyinka Way) reflects the recognition of his impact on Nigeria’s international acclaim.

However, during Bola Tinubu’s tenure, opinions on his governance and policies varied, and some may criticize Soyinka for not being more vocal during this period, while others appreciate his overall contributions. It is essential to recognize that public figures have different roles and approaches to addressing power dynamics.

Soyinka once advised Tinubu to support a brilliant individual for leadership, rather than seeking power himself.   Their conversations highlight differing viewpoints on how to effect change.

Be that as it may, whether criticizing Soyinka is justified depends on personal beliefs, historical context, and the complexity of political dynamics. As with any public figure, opinions will differ, but acknowledging Soyinka’s broader impact is crucial.