Is An alternative to Democracy possible?

Everything is possible. 
Since everything is possible, the answer to this question must be yes.

But is it desirable to find an alternative to democracy? The answer, as far as Nigeria is concerned, must still be yes, if we look at what democracy  has delivered so far.

Why alternative?
Reasons to consider an alternative to democracy has nothing to do with the horrendous  cost, in the midst of dwindling resources. If democracy were to deliver optimally, the costs can be overlooked. The major reason is also not the dangerous martial mindset usually exhibited by Nigerian  politicians during electioneering, counter productive as this has been to our development.

The major reason one may begin to look for an alternative to democracy is the poor quality of the results. Without fail, time and again, Nigerian democracy has managed to deliver to us, poor quality leadership. It is bad enough to purchase a product for an expensive price, but worse if the product turns out to be a poor quality. That is what we have been getting  since the return  to democracy  in 1999. This is more pronounced  in the local governments  where it seems there is no government  at all in place.

Democracy delivers indifferent results

For instance, I live in Kubwa, Abuja, and I can say that there is little or no evidence of a working local government in the area. But for the newspaper adverts showing monthly statutory allocations, one would think no money accrues to the local government. Even if no money accrues, the people that got themselves elected should have been able to do some creative thinking to source funds to transform their locality. But what we see is that local officials are big on pomp and pageantry, paraphernalia of office,  and indulgence, but very small  on innovation. Results around the environment suggest little  thinking, and little interest in development, the real reason why they are in office.

Collegiate System, or outright appointment ? (!)

One can then begin to wonder if it is not better to find another means of appointing  people to office. Of course die hard Democrats will frown at the very suggestion of the idea, but it is a desperate  move, borne of frustration. To take a simple example, the physical environment. This is usually so dirty and unkempt that one wonders whether anyone is in charge, and these are simple things that should not cost much money, except perhaps much thinking.

It may then be time to begin to experiment with appointment  of leaders, or maybe a collegiate system where knowledgeable  people vote for leaders. Such a group can then hold the leaders thus elected to strict account, including impeachment, and maybe  criminal prosecution if necessary.

For now, the system of electing people who become lords and who do nothing extraordinary  in office year in year out is not serving the best interests  of anyone.

This may be something  to consider going forward. It is not guaranteed for instance that democracy  delivers the best, most altruistic, and most visionary leadership. After all, in setting up corporations, leaders are not necessarily appointed by democracy. CEOs are appointed based on strict criteria. And societies are at least as important as corporations, and it's leadership should be appointed with equal or more care.

Just food for thought.