Developed by Prof Ben, compiled and advanced by Eval Asikong
The concentric of Ayadesian Model is the provision of substance that seeks to address or solve human yearnings of intrinsic value (food and health for all) which has become a fundamental problem, mostly, in frontier societies. To achieve this, the theoretical submissions of two classical models, that tend to be focused on the improvement of socio-economic well-being, have been queried by pro-Ayadesians for their inabilities to enhance the expected social reproduction and proffer a long-lasting solution to the pandemic material poverty in human society, with the Adam Smith’s model, at one side, imposing severe structural rigidity by prescribing a market-system free of institutional intervention where the entire economy is, inexorably, left at the mercy of interacting market forces, which has been presumed to be the cause of the great economic depression of 1939, and the Keynesian principle of institutional intervention by way of increasing government volume of spending to stall systemic distress and eventual collapse, at the other side. All these elegant theories have not provided any solution to an economically receding world.
In fact, in praxis, these two models have been warped by contradictions with escalating conceptual variance. As the divide and struggles for the conceptual superiority of these two classical models grow, a vast majority of people are, continuously, being plunged into lack and hunger with resultant provocation of social tension. This phenomenon further results in the distortion of socio-economic harmony, as the private sector becomes completely disjointed with an increasingly widening gap from the public sector with staggering and massive outstanding disbursements, devoted to challenge the little resources often accumulated. As the world gradually slips-off the grasp of redemption, economic recession or depression becomes a song of self-pity in the mouth of mankind.
For this reason, Ayadesian model’s proposition is neither against the preponderance of private-sector-driven economy nor against the neo-mercantilism proposed by Keynesians, but strives to bridge their conceptual divide by developing a more comfortable frame-work where the private sector and government could come together in business partnership. To achieve this, Ayadesian principle introduces the Special Purpose Vehicular Concept (SPV) which creates a very smooth meeting point between the public and the private sector.
Ayadesian model is neither a total deviation from the two foremost classical concepts, nor completely conforms with either of the two, but identifies their strengths, combines them to solve a fundamental problem that has haunted mankind for centuries, while dispensing the weaknesses of these models. Ayadesian model, in a way, also lends credence to the Estonian model of behaviourism which provides a framework for systemic preservation through government’s continuous responsiveness to the challenges in both physical and social environment. See Easton, David (1965).
According to Easton, (1965), “changes in the social or physical environment surrounding a political system produce “demands” and “supports” for action or the status quo directed as “inputs” towards the political system, through political behavior. These demands and supporting groups, then, stimulate competition in a political system, leading to decisions or ‘outputs’ directed at some aspect of the surrounding social or physical environment. After a decision or output is made (e.g., a specific policy), it interacts with its environment, and if it produces change in the environment, there are ‘outcomes”. This is interesting. While Estonian approach focuses on the periphery of extrinsic and intrinsic, Ayadesian principle launches into the depth of intrinsic, utilizing the ‘extrinsic’ as a tool of accomplishing the intrinsic satisfaction which is the basis for survival. That is to say, all that government does, be it investments, projects and programs (ventures of extrinsic concern), should be directed towards satisfying human intrinsic yearnings (food on the table and good health for all).
Ayadesian Ideology also has similarity with the twin concepts of perestroika and Glasnost, also known as Gorbachevism that was introduced in 1986 by Mikhail Gorbachev, who was the chairman of the Central Communist party of the then Soviet Union. A concise interpretation of these concepts is the openness/ loosening of internal bureaucracy and setting a platform for bourgeois ascendancy which has made emphasis to be laid on aggressive economic integration and has aided in the success of globalization with attendant knowledge explosion which is evident in the current digital technology we enjoy today. This concepts tend to steer a middle course between the extremities of socialist principles and liberalism and douse the existing mutual suspicions between the then bi polar powers of the Soviets and United States. See Wilie Martin, 1989.
While Gorbachevism stands for internal openness and setting a platform for bourgeois ascendancy, Ayadesian concept seeks to promote normative enterprise, while setting a platform for industrial ascendancy with a unique framework that brings public and private sector together in business partnership.
A viable need assessment mechanism will, inexorably, tailor government’s priority in its policy making processes and programs for the avoidance of misplaced priorities. This creed in governance has, often times, been overtaken by politics which had made authoritative allocation of values to be wrongly skewed, hence, the vigorous complains over mismanaged resources which has made 90 percent of people in frontier societies to live below poverty line. Ayadesian concept seeks to put this right.
However, Ejemot Esu has posited that many propositions by african scholars are often restricted to their paper submissions, as praxis is often difficult. Some that are often implemented are short-lived by the African poor continuity culture in government programs, as government changes, certain vital programs are often discontinued. And that if the tenets and creeds established by the Ayadesian concept is taken seriously with vigorous promotion, it is going to be one of africa’s intellectual products that will be found most worthy of intellectual communion at most international seminars.
I have advanced several mental trips into several models of statecraft and ideologies with striking similarities with the Ayadesian concept and I have come to discover that almost all are fraught with ‘praxis’ difficulties which is where Ayadesian model differs. Ayadesian concept introduces a new chapter of structural change.
Eval Asikong is the S.A. Social Media and Expert in Research and Statistics