"Na Statistics We Go Chop?": Macroeconomic Gaslighting, the 'Stomach Infrastructure' Paradox, and Nigeria's Trillion-Dollar Delusion (2023–2026)
Abstract
Between 2023 and 2026, Nigeria embarked on one of the most consequential and socially disruptive macroeconomic experiments in its post-independence history. The simultaneous removal of the long-standing fuel subsidy and the unification of foreign exchange windows—policies long advocated by international financial institutions—produced a profound and well-documented divergence between official macroeconomic triumphalism and the lived microeconomic realities of ordinary citizens. This article introduces and develops two interlocking conceptual innovations: "macroeconomic gaslighting," the institutional construction and aggressive dissemination of selective, nominal, and low-base statistical narratives that systematically obscure deteriorating household welfare; and the "stomach infrastructure paradox," the structural neglect of the foundational layer of household food security, energy access, and real purchasing power that ultimately invalidates the mathematical and political assumptions underpinning elite-driven adjustment programmes. Drawing on secondary quantitative data from the NBS, CBN, IMF World Economic Outlook (April 2026), World Bank reports, and Debt Management Office releases, alongside qualitative discourse analysis of high-level official statements and public counter-narratives, the paper demonstrates how the pursuit of a "trillion-dollar economy" by 2026 collapsed under the weight of its own currency arithmetic. Nigeria's dollar-denominated nominal GDP plummeted from approximately $487 billion in 2023 to around $252 billion in 2024, relegating the country from continental economic leadership to fourth position in Africa. Simultaneously, public debt surged toward ₦155 trillion, headline inflation peaked above 33 percent before easing to 15.9 percent by May 2026, and an estimated additional tens of millions of Nigerians were pushed into multidimensional poverty. The paper concludes with sequenced policy lessons: social protection and productive investment in agriculture, security, and energy must precede or accompany macro shocks, not follow them as palliative afterthoughts.