A philosophical reflection on the nature and relevance of Azikiwe’s political ideology of neo- welfarism

This paper attempts a reflection on the nature and relevance of Azikiwe’s Political philosophy of Neo-Welfarism. Azikiwe advanced Neo-welfarism as a political ideology as his contribution to the search for ideology in the aftermath of colonialism. With NeoWelfarism, Azikiwe sought to advance a philosophy for colonial emancipation and the decolonization of Africa. At the background of this ideology is his dissatisfaction with the dominant ideologies of the era being capitalism, socialism and welfarism. This dissatisfaction triggered an attempt to formulate a via media that takes into cognizance, the 'good' aspects of these ideologies through the method of eclectic pragmatism for the greatest good of the greatest number. This paper found out that one of the main objectives of Neo-welfarism is to build a system that works to the advantage of many rather than one that speculates and works to the disadvantages of many. This paper also found out that Neo-welfarism as a political ideology is not without flaws; this is because the workability of such a via media has been called to question among other issues that are at the kernel of this ideology. The conclusion that is reached in this paper is in two folds: one, the articulation of neo-welfarism when there was an apparent search for ideology for the decolonization of Africa is both timely and laudable. Two, the non-implementation of neo-welfarism after several decades of its advancement; notwithstanding, it is yet relevant in the sustained need to deepen democracy and search for an operational ideology for African's development even today.


INTRODUCTION
African political philosophy is a less explored field of study in comparison to research areas such a metaphysics, anthropology, theology, sociology, and economics. Many people confine this discipline (African Political Philosophy) to theories of one or another emblematic African leader such as Nkrumah , Senghor (1906Senghor ( -2001, Nnamdi Azikiwe (1904Azikiwe ( -1996 and Nyerere (1922Nyerere ( -1999, etc. Others reduce this philosophy to both the vicissitudes and hazards of African politics in considering it a chronicle of African nations' ups and downs. However, Muyiwa defines Africa's social and political philosophy as "a set of political philosophy which has everything in common with what we have described as political philosophy except its Africanness" (Gbadebo, 2012: pp. 8). For Okolo, African socio-political philosophy "is that branch of African philosophy that deals with the Africans' ideal social and political organizations" (Gbadebo, 2012: pp. 9).
What can be deciphered for the above is that Africans reflect with the intension of coming to terms and finding ways out of their problems and attaining self-realization. In the above understanding and the prevailing reality of an apparent need for decolonization, such African nationalists leaders like Kwame Nkrumah, Leopold Senghor, Julius Nyerere, Sekou Toure, Obafemi Awolowo, Nnamdi Azikiwe among others rose up to the challenge of self-realization during the colonial and post-colonial era. This culminated in the pontification of such philosophies as Philosophical Consciencism, such brands of African socialism like Ujaama, Negritude, Neo-welfarism amongst others.
The present paper seeks to undertake a reflection on the nature and relevance of Neo-Welfarism in the political thoughts of Nnamdi Azikiwe. While is a statement of fact that several studies have been carried out on Azikiwe's postulation of Neo-welfarism, this paper intends to elevate the discourse beyond a mere critique of the same. The paper will attempt to argue for the contemporary relevance of Neo-welfarism especially in at a time when it seems obvious that Africa in general and Nigeria still have not gotten it right as regards the question of what should be the operational ideology that will drive the sustainable development project in the continent. To do this, the paper in what follows is divided into four sections: the first section which is the thematic pre-occupation of this paper accounts for the meaning of Azikiwe's idea of Neo-welfarism, the second section dwells on a critique of Azikiwe's concept of Neo-Welfarism while the discourse on the contemporary relevance of Azikiwe's Neo-welfarism and the conclusion of this discourse forms the third and the fourth sections respectively.

ON THE CONCEPT OF NEO-WELFARISM IN NNAMDI AZIKIWE'S THOUGHT
The question of what should be the ideology that will lead to Africans' political and economic liberation from the overlordship of the colonial masters took center stage between the end of the colonial era and the beginning of the postcolonial era. African social and political thinkers according to Onyeaghalaji "were not reluctant to borrow foreign ideology often uncritically, and give them African slant or even claim that they are supported by traditional African culture. In all, they put forward what they consider their ideologies for African political liberation and economic independency" (Onyaghalaji, 2012: pp. 250). Nnamdi Azikiwe was not left out in this regard. He did set out to seek an appropriate ideology that would shape the political, social, and economic decisions and policies. The concept and philosophy of Neo-welfarism as put forward by Nnamdi Azikiwe were quite timely as it was because Africa was "at a crossroad of desperate cultural orientations and was in the quest for political structures and quality leadership ideologies. Most of the competing ideologies were capitalism, socialism and welfarism" (Nwosu et al., 2015: pp. 251).
Azikiwe began his political philosophy, which will later culminate into the Neo-welfarism as an ideology with a critical examination of capitalism's credibility and workability, socialism, and welfarism. From his critical analysis, he envisioned the possibility of making good out of the best of these three political systems to forge a new system for Nigerian in her quest for self-realization and self-governance in the post-colonial era. This system is what he called and is now known as Neo-welfarism. Onyeaghalaji seems to be thinking in this path when he stated that "Azikiwe made a study of these ideological formulations and decided that the most appropriate for human survival is Neo-welfarism" (Onyaghalaji, 2012: pp. 251). This leads to the question of what is neo-welfarism? The answer to the above question is not far-fetched as Azikiwe himself took pains to explain and define the ideology he was putting forth at that time. According to him: Neo-welfarism is an economic system which blends the essential elements of capitalism, socialism and Welfarism in a socialeconomic matrix, influenced by indigenous Nigerian mores, to enable the state and the private sector to own and control the means of production, distribution and exchange, while simultaneously enabling the state to assume responsibility for the social services, in order to benefit the citizens according to their needs and officially specify minimum standards, without prejudices to participation in any aspect of the social services by voluntary agencies (Azikiwe 1980, pp. 10).
He further argued in his Ideology for Nigeria: Capitalism, Socialism or Welfarism? that neo-welfarism is a "vernal and dynamic interpretation of welfarism and its synchronization into a social matrix of the best elements in the universally recognized ideologies of capitalism, socialism and welfarism" (Azikiwe, 1980: pp. 127).
Deducible from the above is the fact that Neo-welfarism as put forward by Zik, is a blend of the good element of capitalism, socialism and welfarism having critically analyzed the merits and demerits of the systems above. Neowelfarism is a new form or type of welfarism that seeks to assign the state's primary role to that of providing welfare packages for the state. It is a complex attitude and belief that asserts that the state should take responsibility for providing such welfare packages like housing and social security while encouraging human rights. Again, Neo-Welfarism from the above is an ideology influenced by Nigerian mores. Ikechukwu in agreement with the above stated that "Azikiwe saw Neo-Welfarism as an ideology re-oriented and truly Nigerian, manifesting the Nigerian qualities: democratic according to her institutions, Welfarist in her economic background, altruistic in her sociological life and religiously animist" (Ikechukwu, 2018: pp. np).
In the words of Azikiwe, "this system of government (Neo-welfarism) is eclectic and pragmatic in the sense that it makes a beautiful synthesis of rationalism and empiricism. Incorporating into itself the utilitarian and practical elements of capitalism, socialism and welfarism" (Azikiwe, 1980: pp. 10). Commenting on Azikiwe's Neo-Welfarism, Onyeaghalaji asserted that the basic elements of Azikiwe's Neo-welfarism were western and eclectic-taken from capitalism, socialism and welfarism. The western inclination of his ideology did not deter him. What matters to him is the ability to adapt it to our needs. He believes that Neo-Welfarism synchronizes with the socialist capitalist, welfarist and democratic nature of the indigenous African society. He believes that indigenous Nigerian societies were communal in nature and capitalist in the content; and democratic in the procedure. This is so because he believes that public matters were democratically decided where people's opinions were given equal consideration. Again, communalism was based on landed peasantry which underscores trade by barter. He is of the view that the presupposition of the Neo-Welfarism is necessary for social order and development in Nigeria" (Azikiwe, 1980: pp. 252).
In Azikiwe's view, a new-welfarist state should be able to create viable conditions for the thriving of democratic principles. It should cooperate with external powers to develop and exploit the human powers, natural resources for mutual advantage. A neo-welfarists state should be able to put socio-political structures that would make it possible for the realization of political freedom and economic security (Azikiwe, 1980: pp. 279).
Hence, Azikiwe further stated the following as the primary objectives of Neo-welfarism: • To reform and renew the instruments of power according to the Nigerian political experience; • To insist on the rule of law; • To bring about a total restoration and reinforcement of the fundamental rights of all citizens according to the constitution; • To bring into reality, the universally accepted principles of the separation of power between the Executive, Legislative and the Judiciary; • To bring about the renewal of confidence in the integrity of government; • To bring about a sincere and reliable organization and administration of public utilities, welfare services, education, agriculture, recreational facilities, and entertainment; • To introduce an open-door policy in the importation and exportation of products and • To introduce and sustain a taxation policy that would be in accord with a reasonable scale (Azikiwe, 1980: pp. 129-131). Besides the above, Agbafor put forward the following as the fundamental assumptions of neo-welfarism that can be discerned from Azikiwe's thought: one; that reality is many-sided and can best be apprehended by a receptive broad mind which sifts and harmonizes the various facets of reality yielded by experience and reason (Azikiwe, 1980). Two, that the truth of any proposition is determined with reference to its practicality and usefulness. Truth is not absolute nor static such that it can be discovered once and for all, rather, it is ever emerging, and constantly being revealed through sense experience and reason (Azikiwe, 1965). Three, all existing socio-political philosophies embody some truth but not the whole truth about socio-political matters. However, the truth contained in each socio-political philosophy may be embedded in some chaff and thus needs to be sifted and harmonized with the truth disclosed in others for the benefit of mankind. Four, the method of sifting some truths embedded in some socio-political philosophy is eclectic and pragmatic. This method promises to give a more adequate view of reality in general and socio-political matters, than any other. Five, neo-welfarism presupposes that socio-political philosophy is dynamic just as the phenomenon with which it deals. Thus, just as an assumption (2) above suggests, no socio-political philosophy can be always valid, in all places, but would need to be reconstructed to meet emergent truths and the new situations unfolded by experience and reason. And six, Neowelfarism also presupposes the possibility of perfecting social systems through an experimental and integrative approach. Hence, it purports to integrate those aspects of any system which are shown to be practicable and useful (Obiwu, 2017).
Regarding the economic aim of neo-welfarism, Azikiwe avers that it makes for "an abundant society, organized based on the economics of abundance, as opposed to an affluent society organized based on the economics of scarcity" (Azikiwe, 1980: pp. 128). And this economics of abundance is in his opinion characterized by "abundant food, abundant shelter, abundant clothing, abundant necessities of life and abundant amenities, within reasonable cost and within reach of many" (Azikiwe, 1980: pp. 124). As an economic ideology, Neo-welfarism will have the ingredients of capitalism, socialism and welfarism; but it will be capitalist, it will not be socialist, and it will not be welfarist per se. rather, it will be a harmony of opposite a top of our extended family system to further the frontiers of state responsibility for all its citizens (Azikiwe, 1980: pp. 125). He further argues that "Neo-welfarism embraces belief in private enterprise, reinforced by state participation in the private sector and state collaboration in management technology for competently and efficiently administering, on the profitable basis, statutory corporations and parastatals, commercial enterprises, including government-owned, government-controlled and government-sponsored companies" (Azikiwe, 1980: pp. 127). As a political ideology, he argued that the objective of neo-welfarism in Nigeria is to restore democracy by building a new political leviathan where there will be political freedom, economic security, and social inequality.
Deducible from the above discourse on Azikiwe's philosophy of neo-welfarism is the fact that he was dissatisfied with capitalism, socialism and welfarism in themselves. This necessitated the imperativeness of his use of the eclectic pragmatic method in the harmonization and the sifting of the good aspects of the ideologies so mentioned above into a single system that he named neo-welfarism. This harmonization is both complementary portend a better system that does not refute completely as it were, the tenets of the other ideologies that were operational in parts of the world at the time of his philosophizing.

A CRITIQUE OF AZIKIWE'S NEO-WELFARISM
A plethora of criticisms has been brought against Azikiwe's Neo-welfarism. Chief amongst the earliest are those brought forth by Joseph Omoregbe and Ezekiel Kolawole Ogundowole. Omoregbe argued that there is via media between capitalism and socialism any more than there is a via media between injustice and justice or between vices and virtue (Omoregbe, 1984: pp. 9). A critical evaluation of the Azikiwe's Neo-welfarism reveals that it has within itself, a few drawbacks. This is evident in the fact of the illogically of Zik's via media. In the words of Omoregbe, It contradicts the laws of thought especially, the law of excluded middle, which states that anything is either A or not A, that is, a thing is either A or B and cannot be both at the same time. it is either capitalism or socialism. For there can never be capitalism during socialism in the true or logical sense of nomenclature because both are ideologically divided. Hence, Zik's eclecticism or via media negates the law of excluded middle, as such; it has the philosophical implication of illogicality (Omoregbe 1990, pp. 9).
In his Self-Reliancism: Philosophy of a New Order, Ogundowole corroborated Omoregbe while criticizing the eclectic methodology of neo-welfarism. To quote him, "it is just like the case when a glass of milk is mixed with another glass of lime juice. The result is obvious -incompactibility. Mixed social-economic system will invariably advance to a stage where the whole system becomes frustrated and eventually collapsed and destroyed" (Ogundowole 1988, pp. 26). He further argued that: Mixed systems based on an eclectic methodological approach can never lead to the attainment of self-realisation because, like the mixture of water with oil, both the good from capitalism and the good from socialism will never get blent. They, obeying simple Aristotelian logic, will always co-exist sided by side together with all the problems that logically follow therefrom (Ogundowole 1988, pp. 26-27).
Again, Azikiwe in his philosophizing on Neo-welfarism fails to show with exactitude, what elements of capitalism, socialism and welfarism his considers as good and intends to forge a harmonization. This omission makes the ideology to lack the weight it ought to have. In his contribution to the critique of Neo-welfarism, Agbafor argued that the ideology did not as much as explain how individual and collective interest can be balanced and synchronized. It also fails to show how the publicly owned economic resources can be efficiently and profitably run for the people's overall wellbeing (Agbafor, 1992: pp. 364). Yet another drawback of Azikiwe's ideology is that he failed to explain the difference between 'Neo-welfarism' and the 'mixed economic system' (Agbafor, 1992: pp. 367). Okaneme contributed to the above critiques when he averred that, If Neo-welfarism is to be adopted as the political and economic ideal in the Nigerian democratic principle, it must be clearly defined and understood so that its meaning is not lost in ambiguity. The welfare programs which Neo-welfarism sets out to achieve must remain enshrined in the nation's constitution and its implementation must be sacrosanct (Okaneme, 1992, pp. 132).
Again, another contemporary challenge to this theory is in the question of the workability of Ziks via media in the 21 st century when capitalism has been accepted all over the world as the best socio-economic system. In this regard, it can be said that Neo-welfarism remains a utopian ideology that exist only in the mind of Nnamdi Azikiwe that has never been implemented and is most unlikely to be implemented soon. This is because as Okaneme argues, "it seems Neo-welfarism does not have the adequate ingredients to withstand and replace socialism and capitalism or even welfarism as the best alternative, even as each of them habours some dangerous defects" (Okaneme, 1992: pp. 134).
The above flaws notwithstanding, Azikiwe's Neo-welfarism, Azikiwe's postulation at the time when there was a search for an ideology of emancipation from the shackles of colonialism is both timely and laudable. This is hinged on the fact that his major concern was the formulation of an effective philosophy for the decolonization of Africa. It is a post-colonial ideology that sought to comprehensively harmonise the valuable elements of the major existing ideologies through the eclectic method for man's common good in post-colonial Africa. Yet another merit of Azikiwe's Neowelfarism that it constitutes an alternative to the two most antagonistic economic doctrines in the contemporary worldcapitalism and socialism. More so, it blends the good elements in both capitalism and socialism (Okaneme, 2018: pp. 129). What should be noted is that Zik was a philosopher in his time and the novelty of his ideas can only be understood against the background of colonialism and the African search for liberation.

THE CONTEMPORARY RELEVANCE OF AZIKIWE'S NEO-WELFARISM
It here remains to argue for the contemporary relevance of the philosophy of Neo-welfarism. That Azikiwe's Neowelfarism possesses the capacity and tendency to usher in a new dawn for Nigeria and Africa, in general, is a statement of fact. While quoting Ikechukwu Kanu and Agbafor Igwe, Okaneme argued that Azikiwe in his Neo-welfarism aims at ushering in a new dawn for Nigeria and that it was formulated with the intent of tackling the problems of lack of appreciable development and ideological confusion which beset the new state (Okaneme, 2018: pp. 125).
Regarding the relevance of Neo-welfarism, Eze Nwokereke can be read as arguing for the same because it incorporates the good elements of different systems while it discards its bad aspects, all to serve to humankind. It is yet relevant even today because it will avoid capitalist non-challant attitude towards social injustice, and socialist degradation of human beings who are reduced to thoughtless, purposeless non-entities made to function as puppets of the constituted authority (Okaneme, 2018). The philosophy of Neo-welfarism is yet relevant today because it is result-oriented. Okaneme corroborated the above fact when he averred that Neo-welfarism and its eclectic-pragmatism method promise practical results for the good of many and it is concerned not just merely theoretical speculation. He further argued that following from the above, one can say that Azikiwe's theory is utilitarian since he cares about the greater good of the greater number of people (Okaneme, 2018).
It must also be stated that the relevance of the ideology under review is evident in the fact that it is suitable for addressing the problems and challenges of Africa. If it is true that the problems of Africa can only be solves by Africans and if it makes sense to argue that Africans should take their destiny into their own hands and develop her own policies based on the need of its people as then Azikiwe's Neo-welfarism is yet relevant in the face of the myriads of challenges we now face. Agbafor Igwe as quoted in Okaneme corroborated the above when he argues that eclectic pragmatism is most suitable in dealing with African problems, in view of the variegated traumatic experiences which precipitated them. Those experiences were engendered by European colonization of Africa which brought in its wake, economic, political, cultural, and even spiritual denudation of the continent Nigeria is not an exception in this colonial mess. Apart from being the appropriate method for overcoming the colonial mess, eclectic pragmatism is equally the best method of dealing with certain persistent problems, which include tribalism, frequent coup d'état, religious strives and the recurrent question of an effective developmental ideology. For Okaneme, eclectic pragmatism of Neo-welfarism can lead to a realistic solution to each of these problems such as tribalism, political instability, and religious intolerance (Okaneme, 2018, pp. 127). Now ethnicity and religious intolerance have been the major challenges that Nigeria has had to grapple with. Regarding ethnicity, Odum and Alo, while arguing for the fact that ethnicity, when manipulated to serve selfish purposes, constitutes a problem for Nigerian averred that, While the history of ethnicity and ethnic conflicts have been traced to the forceful amalgamation of the Northern and Southern protectorate in 1914 to become the entity called Nigeria today, it remains to argue that after over a hundred years of this amalgamation and over five decades of her independence, Nigeria has not been able to transcend this history and see themselves as Nigerians. Rather, they have elected to conceive of themselves as Igbo's, Hausa's, Yoruba's, Tiv's, Ijaw's just to mention but a few. The consequence of this antecedent is that there has been a crisis of attritions that have served to fuel the ambers of ethnic agitation and conflicts. These have also led to the elevation of tribal nationalities over and against the country Nigeria which houses all the ethnic groups. In this regard, loyalty is paid to the tribal and ethnic configuration and not to the Nigerian state. The implication of the present reality in Nigeria is that national integration has been sacrificed on the altar of ethnicity, the frontiers of peace have been pushed back and hence, the presence of little or no development (Odum, et al., 2017, pp. 45).
The above is the same within the context of religious intolerance. In Nigeria, adherents of the three major religious traditions have not been able to tolerate one another. This attitude has led to some form of extremism and fundamentalism. It must be noted that "religious fundamentalism is not a tendency that is exclusive to Islam, fundamentalist and extremist tendencies also exist among those with Christian persuasion" (Odum, 2018: pp. 204). As he further argues, Christian fundamentalists and extremists belong to the conservative Catholics, evangelicals and Pentecostal groups who deride African religion and Islam as both evil and fetish (Odum, 2018: pp. 204). Drawing from the above, it feels safe to argue that ethnicity/tribalism and religious intolerance hold sway in Nigerian and they are the major bulwarks of crisis in the country. However, drawing from the eclectic pragmatic method that is at the background of Azikiwe's Neo-welfarism, these tribal and religious differences and intolerance can be tracked successfully and the good aspects of the same "harnessed into a strong instrument for national unity" (Okaneme, 2018: pp. 128). This is because, within the context of religious intolerance, eclecticism entails that adherents of different religions should maintain an open mind, reason with one another, and avoid condemning one another without a fair hearing. The cultivation of broad-mindedness, which is an important requirement of eclectic pragmatism, could enable the adherents of various religions to differentiate between the spiritual essence of most religions and their doctrinal-cum-cultural aspects. They might discover that their disagreement stemmed from the latter and not from the former (Okaneme, 2018). Consequently, the frontiers of the idea that "your god is more god than my god" (Odum, 2018: pp. 204) and my tribe is more tribe than your tribe will be pushed back.
On the relevance of Azikiwe's Neo-welfarism, Okaneme further argued that the use of Azikiwe's eclectic pragmatic method will help deepen Nigerian democracy. To quote him: From Azikiwe's perspective, tribalism which many people would regard as evil can be turned around to serve national ends and advance the country's democracy through eclectic pragmatism. Since tribe aggregate into a nation, the only way of replacing tribal loyalty with national loyalty is for the state to provide strong inducements such as were never provided by the tribe. These will come in form of economic, social, and political security to be guaranteed by the state. With this, and given the proper educational curriculum, individuals would begin to see that they have more to gain by paying greater allegiance to the nation than to the tribe. A strong feeling for the tribe would be replaced with a stronger feeling for the nation hence, the realization of national unity, national stability, and authentic democracy (Okaneme, 2018, pp. 128).
In the face of the Nigerian state's inability since 1960 to come up with an operational ideology that will drive her to crave and quest for development, the relevance of Azikiwe's Neo-Welfarism cannot be gainsaid. This is because as it has been argued, Neo-welfarism presents a veritable alternative to Nigeria's fledgling democracy. Bearing in mind that Nigeria is such a divergent nation with people of different ideologies which by summation either have socialist or capitalist or welfarist inclinations, both government and the citizens should be allowed to participate in the free market, while at the same time, the government takes up the responsibility of monitoring the individual's extreme tendencies, at the same time, provide the minimum standard to better the lives of citizens which shall include the provision of basic amenities that enhance human existence and wellness like electricity, water supply, schools, etc. These are the advocacies of neo-welfarism which if properly harnessed will take Nigeria to the next level in her quest for critical development (Okaneme, 2018: pp. 129).
Through the eclectic pragmatic method of Neo-welfarism, the (good) principles of capitalism, socialism and welfarism would be harmonized in a socio-economic mold comprising elements of a mixed economy, a planned economy, and an indigenous rationalized economy. Such a neo-welfarist society would eschew and effectively control factors that could breed cornering of the market, monopoly, inflation, profiteering, and the enthronement of artificial scarcity as the cornerstone of the economic system. Hence, Neo-welfarism is yet relevant today because the ideology reorientation provides a more humanistic and realistic expression to an open-door policy. Within reasonable limits for free enterprise, based on unrestricted but regulated competition, under the paraphernalia of a welfare system, whose objective should be the well-being of all Nigerians and those who live within its borders. It should facilitate the establishment of state machinery to enable our people to share the Nigerian nation's wealth, geared towards the fostering of individual prosperity and collective welfare (Edor & Odok, 2010;.

CONCLUSION
In the preceding paragraphs, attempts have been made to account for the nature and relevance of Neo-welfarism in the political thoughts of Nnamdi Azikiwe. What should be noted that neo-welfarism as put forward by the Zik of Africa is not without flaws. That notwithstanding, the combination of the good elements of capitalism, socialism and welfarism through the instrumentality of eclectic pragmatism is to enable the state and private sector to own and control the means of production and distribution of goods and services for the good of the greatest number. In Zik's view, neo-welfarism would enable the state to assume responsibility for social services provision to benefit the citizens. Zik concludes that voluntary organizations can also play a role in providing social services in his neo-welfarism economic blueprint.
Finally, he recommended eclecticism and pragmatism as the philosophical basis for neo-welfarism. No doubt, Zik used the indigenous African culture of practical work and cohesion to fashion out his neo-welfarist economic ideology based on his understanding of indigenous pre-colonial African economies that flourished and were independent of external influence. Despite the ideals of neo-welfarism as espoused by Zik, African political leaders failed to utilize it; and to date, African states are still searching for an appropriate ideological base for their socio-economic and technological development. It is in this continual search for an operational ideology that can drive Africa in general and Nigerian out of the derogatory club of the third world and to place the content in the path of sustainable development that the contemporary relevance Azikiwe's Neo-welfarism can be deciphered.