Book Club: Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart, pt 2


Chinua Achebe, Author and Nobel Prize winner

Welcome back to our discussion of Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart. Today I thought it would be interesting to look at the history of the Igbo (aka Ibo) people, past and present.

The modern Igbo are one of the world’s larger ethnic groups, numbering around 34 million people, most of whom live in south east/central Nigeria. About 2 million Igbo live abroad, most of them in Britain (which, Chinua recounts, colonized Nigeria.) The Igbo diaspora is well-known for its intelligence, with Igbo students outscoring even Chinese students in the UK:

Although the Chinese and Indians are still very conspicuously above even the best African nationalities, their superiority disappears when the Nigerian and other groups are broken down even further according to their different tribal ethnicities. Groups like the famous Igbo tribe, which has contributed much genetically to the African American blacks, are well known to be high academic achievers within Nigeria. In fact, their performance seems to be at least as high as the “model minority” Chinese and Indians in the UK, as seen when some recent African immigrants are divided into languages spoken at home (which also indicates that these are not multigenerational descendants but children of recent immigrants).

Africans speaking Luganda and Krio did better than the Chinese students in 2011. The igbo were even more impressive given their much bigger numbers (and their consistently high performance over the years, gaining a 100 percent pass rate in 2009!). The superior Igbo achievement on GCSEs is not new and has been noted in studies that came before the recent media discovery of African performance. A 2007 report on “case study” model schools in Lambeth also included a rare disclosure of specified Igbo performance (recorded as Ibo in the table below) and it confirms that Igbos have been performing exceptionally well for a long time (5 + A*-C GCSEs); in fact, it is difficult to find a time when they ever performed below British whites.

Of course, Igbo immigrants to the UK are probably smarter than folks who didn’t figure out how to immigrate to the UK, but Peter Frost argues that even the ones who stayed at home are also pretty smart, via a collection of quotes:

All over Nigeria, Ibos filled urban jobs at every level far out of proportion to their numbers, as laborers and domestic servants, as bureaucrats, corporate managers, and technicians. Two-thirds of the senior jobs in the Nigerian Railway Corporation were held by Ibos. Three-quarters of Nigeria’s diplomats came from the Eastern Region. So did almost half of the 4,500 students graduating from Nigerian universities in 1966. The Ibos became known as the “Jews of Africa,” despised—and envied—for their achievements and acquisitiveness. (Baker, 1980)

The Ibos are the wandering Jews of West Africa — gifted, aggressive, Westernized; at best envied and resented, but mostly despised by the mass of their neighbors in the Federation.(Kissinger, 1969)

So what makes the Igbo so smart? Frost attributes their high IQ to the selective effects of an economy based on trade in which the Igbo were middlemen to the other peoples (mostly Yoruba and Fulani) around them, along with an excellent metalworking tradition:

Archaeological sites in the Niger Delta show that advanced economic development began much earlier there than elsewhere in West Africa. This is seen in early use of metallurgy. At one metallurgical complex, dated to 765 BC, iron ore was smelted in furnaces measuring a meter wide. The molten slag was drained through conduits to pits, where it formed blocks weighing up to 43-47 kg. …

This production seems to have been in excess of local needs and therefore driven by trade with other peoples …

This metallurgy is unusual not only in its early date for West Africa but also in its subsequent development, which reached a high level of sophistication despite a lack of borrowing from metallurgical traditions in the Middle East and Europe.

Here is a fun little video on Igbo bronzes (I recommend watching on double speed and pausing occasionally to appreciate the work quality):

So between the bronze, the river, and long-distance trade, the Igbo became the local market dominant minorities–and like most MDMs, with the arrival of democracy came genocide.

Nigeria achieved independence in 1960 and became a Republic in 1963. Periodic military coups and conflict kept disturbing the peace:

From June through October 1966, pogroms in the North killed an estimated 80,000 to 100,000 Igbo, half of them children, and caused more than a million to two million to flee to the Eastern Region.[76] 29 September 1966, was considered the worst day; because of massacres, it was called ‘Black Thursday’.[77][78]

Ethnomusicologist Charles Keil, who was visiting Nigeria in 1966, recounted:

The pogroms I witnessed in Makurdi, Nigeria (late Sept. 1966) were foreshadowed by months of intensive anti-Ibo and anti-Eastern conversations among Tiv, Idoma, Hausa and other Northerners resident in Makurdi, and, fitting a pattern replicated in city after city, the massacres were led by the Nigerian army. Before, during and after the slaughter, Col. Gowon could be heard over the radio issuing ‘guarantees of safety’ to all Easterners, all citizens of Nigeria, but the intent of the soldiers, the only power that counts in Nigeria now or then, was painfully clear. After counting the disemboweled bodies along the Makurdi road I was escorted back to the city by soldiers who apologised for the stench and explained politely that they were doing me and the world a great favor by eliminating Igbos.

… until the Igbos decided they’d had enough and declared themselves an independent country, Biafra, triggering a civil war. The Nigerian and British governments blockaded Biafra, resulting in mass starvation that left nearly 2 million dead.

Why the British government thought it was important to use money to starve children, I don’t know.

(Hint: the answer is oil.)

During the war, Britain covertly supplied Nigeria with weapons and military intelligence and may have also helped it to hire mercenaries.[102] After the decision was made to back Nigeria, the BBC oriented its reporting to favour this side.[103] Supplies provided to the Federal Military Government included two vessels and 60 vehicles.[104]


(Richard Nixon, always the voice of morality, was against the blockade.)

Chinua Achebe published Things Fall Apart in 1959, the year before independence–so he was awfully prescient.

As news got out about the genocide, people began demanding that food be airlifted into Biafra, but there were some problems getting the food off the ground:

Just “enemy propaganda” of little girls starving to death

Secretary General of the United Nations, U Thant, refused to support the airlift.[5] The position of the Organization of African Unity was to not intervene in conflicts its members’ deemed internal and to support the nation-state boundaries instituted during the colonial era.[6] The ruling Labour Party of the United Kingdom, which together with the USSR was supplying arms to the Nigerian military,[7]dismissed reports of famine as “enemy propaganda”.[8] Mark Curtis writes that the UK also reportedly provided military assistance on the ‘neutralisation of the rebel airstrips’, with the understanding that their destruction would put them out of use for daylight humanitarian relief flights.[9]

Soon Joint Church Aid, a combination of Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, and other NG organizations, chartered airplanes and began running the Nigerian blockade (three relief workers were killed when their plane was shot down.) The Biafra Airlift is second in scope only to the Berlin Airlift in non-combat airlifts.

Since the end of the war, the state of the Igbo people has steadily improved (the presence of oil in the area is finally benefiting them.)

Modern Nigeria has about 200 million people with a fertility rate around 5.5 children per woman (I don’t have data specifically about the Igbo) and a per capita GDP around $2,000, which is high for the area.

It’s getting late, so I’d like to end with some modern Igbo music, a reminder that the people we read about in anthropology books (or literature) never stay in anthropology books:

6 thoughts on “Book Club: Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart, pt 2

  1. Finished the book. It got more interesting when the British showed up, for sure. Interesting is usually about some sort of conflict, and the problem with the first 2/3 or so of the book is that there is very little of it. Stuff happens. People adapt to it. But even though at some level Okonkwo is the author of his fate, there is very little of it that he actually makes happen. I.e., his gun happens to blow up and kill a woman, and he has to flee.

    It also got textually more complex, I think, as the novel progressed. That is kind of interesting.

    Anyway, some thoughts about the story.

    1) People are driven by status, not money, not sex. Status is the overwhelming focus of Okonkwo’s life. Although money sort-of exists in the culture, nobody seems focused on it. Same for sex: Okonkwo wants wives for the status inherent in supporting them. But he never seems interesting in sex with them, nor is he jealous. Of course this may just be the circumspection of a more traditional time and culture. But it is remarkable to me how little time is spent in the book on anything even elliptically referent to sex and its social technology. By comparison there’s no sex per se described or talked about in Pride and Prejudice, but it informs almost everything that happens. Things Fall Apart does mention the idea that Okonkwo’s daughter grows up into an attractive woman, and that is about as close as it comes. But the context is that he wants to use her marriage to gain status when he returns home.

    Status is also interestingly related to the Christian penetration of Okonkwo’s area: it is the outcasts (who are otherwise nonentities in the story) that are the most enthusiastic converts.

    2) Power is superior to culture. We see how the Christians infiltrate and then establish themselves, and also the reactions locally. It is clear that absent state power, the Christians would have all been wiped out by the indigenous hotheads like Okonkwo.

    3) There’s an analogy between Okonkwo::Christianity and us::progressivism. Ordinary men don’t fight hopeless battles.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I remember the Biafran War – the actions of the USSR and Britain made me sick then, and they make me sick now. One really has to wonder what Biafra would have accomplished by now had they not been massacred, and then denied their independence. A fine, brave people who deserved much better than they got.

    Liked by 1 person


      Yeah, right.

      I find it interesting that many in ‘alt-right’ circles are just as keen to dump on Britain as any purple-haired SJW—and are just as allergic to research and facts. But Horseshoe Theory ain’t real.


  3. Wrt to Britain’s support for the Nigerian federal government being about oil—oil was also behind French support of the Biafran rebels, along with the Anglophobia of de Gaulle and his advisor Jacques Foccart, aka ‘Monsieur Afrique’. It might be a happier world if we prattled less about ‘values’ and acknowledged that our conduct at both individual and national levels is actually often selfish and about accruing power and wealth when past simply trying to survive.

    Wrt Nixon’s opposition to the blockade: Nixon took office on 20th January 1969 and the Nigerian Civil War officially ended on 15th January 1970, so what did he do about the situation as ‘leader of the Free World’?
    US State Dept. documentation here.
    USG was not shy about employing its power against France and Britain over Suez, to the point of even contemplating military action against us. Nor was USG shy of exerting pressure on Britain in our ‘Cod Wars’ with Iceland in the ’70s. So, if Nixon had seriously wanted to end the blockade, it would have ended.

    I’ve no wish to defend Britain’s Labour governments (although Wilson deserves some praise for declining USG’s generous invitation to get our lads killed in their Vietnam slaughterfest) but the ‘le eternal Anglo’ refrain is undeserved, here and elsewhere. We’ve been virtually a vassal state of USG since ’56: what sins HMG has committed in this complex world, USG has been at least approving bystanders when not the provocateur or source.
    (I had hoped that Trump’s 2016 win would mean our being America’s lapdog might work in our favour for once, with HMG following Trump’s lead in settling things down with Russia and promoting nativist polices. Unfortunately, the Deep State/Liberal Establishment seems too firmly ensconced on both sides of the Pond, and Trump is weak sauce.)

    And the Biafran government was not blameless in the tragedy either, with the US finding:

    Biafra refuses daytime [relief] flights into its one working airstrip for fear FMG aircraft will tailgate to the airfield. Biafra also values the protection given nighttime arms flights by the intermix with relief flights which the FMG is either reluctant or unable to interdict. It has thus far opposed (or countered with proposals unacceptable to the FMG) every land corridor proposed by the FMG on the grounds that it would be militarily exploited by the FMG and that the food might be poisoned.
    Both sides have obstructed relief, but on balance, the FMG has indicated more flexibility in its willingness to consider alternate relief routes and possibilities than have the Biafrans. The beleaguered Biafrans give priority to arms shipments over relief and they also know the suffering is a political asset.

    The 15th January 1966 coup by a group of Igbo majors should also be considered, which saw 22 people killed including several prominent politicians and high-ranking army officers, all northern Hausa-Fulani. This led to a northern counter-coup on 29th July, which then led to Biafran secession.

    Those Igbo conspirators did not act without some justification; but even if they had, their actions still would not reflect on the Igbo people as a whole. But it is the way of the world that a few people drive events while most others, only wanting to live out their lives, find themselves reaping a whirlwind sowed by others.

    No government emerges with credit from the Biafran episode: not the British or Russian, sure, but not the American or French either, and not the Nigerian federal nor even the Biafran secessionist.
    The blame should really be placed at the door of those who turned ‘imperialism’ and ‘empire’ into shameful concepts. Africans were far better off when the Europeans were in charge, and it is better to appoint a colonial governor than to be cutting deals behind closed doors with the latest local strongman. Honest imperial power > democratic secret diplomacy.

    None of the above is intended as criticism of any one nation’s people, who are as powerless in the face of the liberal Establishments as the rest of us across the Western world are (but those individuals instigating or supporting their governments’ policies must own it). Louis XIV famously (is said to have) said, ‘L’État, c’est moi,’ but L’État démocratique ce n’est pas nous ; c’est la caste dirigeante.

    (P.s. Rolf Steiner is a German ex-Foreign Legionnaire who fought with the Biafrans and his 1976 memoir The Last Adventurer is an interesting read.)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s