When Leadership Becomes a Private Estate
By
Nze David Ugwu
When Power Forgets Its Purpose
Power is supposed to be a public trust. At its best, it is the authority to serve, protect, and uplift. Yet history repeatedly shows how quickly leaders slip from stewardship into dominance, from service into self-glorification, and from responsibility into entitlement. Political scientists call it the arrogance of power — a condition in which leaders, intoxicated by authority, begin to believe they are invincible, indispensable, and above the law.
Across continents and centuries, this phenomenon recurs with astonishing predictability. Leaders start out humble, visionary, even beloved. But as they consolidate authority, eliminate constraints, and bask in flattery, they slowly drift into behaviors that disregard public opinion, weaken institutions, and silence dissent.
The consequences are often catastrophic: political instability, economic decline, weakened democratic institutions, public resentment, and in extreme cases, national collapse.
This article explores historic and modern examples across the world, then turns to Nigeria, unpacking the roots of this arrogance and the conditions that allow it to flourish.
How Power Mutates into Arrogance
Robert Mugabe (Zimbabwe): From Liberation Hero to Authoritarian Monarch
Mugabe began as a freedom fighter and a symbol of African resistance to colonial oppression. But over the years, he equated himself with the state, eroded democratic institutions, manipulated elections, and presided over economic collapse. Zimbabwe’s hyperinflation and mass emigration were the natural consequences of unchecked authority.
Consequence:
A once-thriving economy fell apart; political repression became normalized; Zimbabwe became a cautionary tale of revolutionary arrogance turned tyranny.
Saddam Hussein (Iraq): The Cult of Invincibility
Saddam built a cult of personality so powerful that contradicting him became a death sentence. His belief in his absolute correctness led Iraq into devastating conflicts, including the Iran–Iraq War and the Gulf War, and ultimately to the destruction of his regime.
Consequence:
Decades of war, sanctions, infrastructural ruin, and national fragmentation.
Ferdinand Marcos (Philippines): Cronyism and the Illusion of Permanence
Marcos believed power was a family inheritance. His years in office were marked by extravagant corruption, suppression of dissent, and a declaration of martial law to extend his hold on power.
Consequence:
Public uprising (People Power Revolution), exile, humiliation, and the exposure of decades of plunder.
Vladimir Putin (Russia): Power Without Boundaries
Putin’s long reign epitomizes the modern form of arrogance of power — control over state institutions, suppression of opposition, and a belief that geopolitical realities must bow to his personal worldview. The annexation of Crimea and the invasion of Ukraine reflect a leader who sees himself as the embodiment of national destiny.
Consequence:
International sanctions, economic downturn, military losses, global isolation, and domestic repression.
Donald Trump (USA): The Ego Presidency
Although operating within a robust democratic system, Trump’s term showed how a leader can weaponize rhetoric, attack institutions, and view power through the lens of personal loyalty rather than public duty. The January 6 Capitol attack was the climax of a presidency that frequently treated institutional norms as optional.
Consequence:
A deeply polarized nation and a crisis of democratic trust.
Across these examples, one finds a consistent pattern: leaders who begin to view themselves as larger than their nations inevitably lead those nations into trouble.
A Continent That Knows Power’s Dark Side
Africa provides some of the most dramatic illustrations of the arrogance of power.
Idi Amin (Uganda): Brutality in Uniform
Amin ruled with raw, unrestrained violence. His erratic decision-making and violent paranoia created a climate of terror.
Consequence:
Economic collapse, diplomatic isolation, thousands killed, and national trauma still felt today.
Yahya Jammeh (Gambia): “I Will Rule for a Billion Years”
Jammeh’s declaration was not metaphorical — he genuinely believed power was eternal. He ruled through intimidation, fear, and superstition, imprisoning critics and manipulating the constitution.
Consequence:
A near-civil conflict, mass human rights abuses, and eventual forced exile after losing elections.
Jacob Zuma (South Africa): The Arrogance of Corruption
Zuma’s presidency was marked by “state capture,” where private interests infiltrated government decision-making. His refusal to step down despite massive public pressure demonstrated the arrogance of seeing power as personal entitlement.
Consequence:
Economic stagnation, damaged institutions, and a national corruption crisis.
These leaders share a psychological thread — the belief that the nation exists to serve them.
A Culture of Power Without Consequence
Nigeria, too, has not escaped this global pattern. The arrogance of power has become woven into the political fabric, cutting across governments, parties, and generations.
While Nigeria has avoided the extremes of dictators like Amin or Saddam, it has suffered chronic forms of power arrogance — leaders who:
- Act as though accountability is optional
- Treat public office as personal inheritance
- View criticism as hostility
- Surround themselves with praise-singers
- Manipulate systems to retain influence
- See themselves as separate from the people they govern
Nigeria’s Political Psychology: “Big Manism”
At the heart of Nigerian political culture is the “big man” mentality — the idea that leaders should be feared, adored, and unquestioned. This mindset cuts across civilian and military leadership alike.
Historical echoes
Military rulers from the 1960s through the 1990s often governed with limited tolerance for criticism. Civilian leaders have also displayed patterns of aloofness, defensiveness, and resistance to accountability.
Contemporary Manifestations — The Behavioral Symptoms
Dismissiveness Toward Citizens
Leaders make statements suggesting public concerns are exaggerated, irrelevant, or signs of disloyalty.
Hostility Toward the Press
Journalists who challenge official narratives are branded enemies or saboteurs.
Closed Government
Key policies are often implemented without adequate public consultation or explanation.
Legislative Capture
When lawmakers “stand on the mandate” of the executive rather than exercise checks and balances, democracy becomes distorted.
Weaponization of State Resources
Power becomes a tool for rewarding loyalists and punishing opponents — a common feature of political arrogance.
The Imperial Convoy Culture
A physical symbol of the arrogance of power in Nigeria is the ever-expanding convoy of siren-blaring security vehicles pushing citizens off the road.
Lack of Humility in Crisis
When security collapses, inflation rises, or citizens complain, some leaders respond with blame-shifting, defensiveness, or disdain — rather than empathy or responsibility.
Why Does Arrogance of Power Thrive in Nigeria?
Weak Institutions
Strong institutions discipline leaders; weak ones are subordinated to them. Nigeria’s institutions — from the judiciary to oversight agencies — often lack autonomy and teeth.
Ethno-Political Loyalty
Leaders sometimes rely on ethnic, regional, or religious loyalty rather than performance legitimacy. This shields them from criticism and nurtures impunity.
Patronage Politics
Nigeria’s political economy is built on distribution of state resources. Those who control power control wealth — creating the belief that losing power equals losing survival.
Lack of Consequence
Corruption, abuse of power, or failure in office rarely leads to punishment. Without consequences, arrogance finds fertile soil.
Culture of Silence and Deference
Many citizens still see leaders as untouchable. Criticism is sometimes discouraged culturally, while sycophancy is rewarded.
Military Legacy
Decades of military rule have left behind command-style leadership habits — leaders expect obedience, not engagement.
Absence of Consistent Civic Pressure
Democracies thrive on active citizens. But as soon as elections end, public vigilance declines. Leaders thrive in the vacuum.
The Consequences — Nigeria’s Democracy at the Crossroads
The arrogance of power in Nigeria has real, painful consequences:
Declining Trust in Government
When leaders are perceived as indifferent or dismissive, citizens lose confidence in governance structures.
Growing Alienation and Disillusionment
Young people especially feel increasingly disconnected from leadership they see as aloof and self-centered.
Weak Governance and Policy Missteps
Policies formulated in echo chambers often fail because they do not reflect realities on the ground.
Escalating Social Tensions
Regions and groups feel marginalized when leaders disregard consultation or transparency.
Stunted Democratic Development
Arrogant leadership stifles debate, undermines institutions, and weakens the long-term stability of democracy.
Power Must Rediscover Humility
The arrogance of power is neither inevitable nor irreversible. Nations have reversed it through institutional reforms, civic awakening, robust media, and leadership committed to transparency and accountability.
Nigeria stands today at the intersection of possibility and decline. Whether it moves toward a stronger democracy or deeper disillusionment depends on whether its leaders — present and future — recognize that power is not a private entitlement but a public trust.
The enduring lesson from global and local history is simple:
Leadership without humility ultimately leads to downfall — not just of leaders, but of nations.
For Nigeria to rise, its leaders must learn that the highest form of power is the ability to listen, not dominate.
Nze David N. Ugwu is the Managing Consultant of Knowledge Research Consult. He could be reached at [email protected] or +2348037269333.
