POLITICAL LOYALTY WITHOUT LOSING OUR HUMANITY

By Innocent Igelle

The point raised here deserves serious reflection, particularly on the way young people engage in politics and the responsibility of political appointees and supporters in shaping that engagement.

Political participation should not require the surrender of one’s conscience, dignity or capacity for independent thought. A political appointee or supporter can be loyal to a principal, defend a government and promote its achievements without turning every political disagreement into a personal war. Mature political engagement means knowing the difference between defending a policy and defending every action of the person behind it.

Unfortunately, political engagement among supporters of opposing camps often throws caution to the wind. Genuine political differences become excuses for insults, mockery, character attacks and the deliberate discrediting of anything associated with an opposing camp. In the process, genuine intentions are sacrificed on the altar of imagined loyalty. Some supporters seem to believe that the more aggressive they become, the more loyal they appear.

That is a dangerous misconception.

There is nothing impressive about destroying another person’s reputation merely to demonstrate loyalty to a politician. There is even less wisdom in attacking every useful effort simply because it comes from someone perceived to be on the other side. Constructive criticism should interrogate ideas, policies and outcomes. It should not descend into personal abuse.

Political bootlicking, on the other hand, often follows a predictable pattern: praise one’s own side, attack the opponent, dismiss every achievement of the opponent and defend every weakness of one’s own side. Repeating that cycle does not strengthen a party or advance society; it only deepens division.

More troubling is the phenomenon of people behaving like political opponents within the same political party. One sometimes wonders how members of the same political family arrive at a point where their engagements become more hostile than those of the formal opposition. Internal competition is normal in politics, but personal destruction should never become the price of participation.

Political appointees have an even greater responsibility. Their public conduct reflects not only on them personally but also on the institutions and political leadership they represent. They should therefore promote issues rather than personalities, facts rather than rumours, achievements rather than propaganda, and persuasion rather than provocation.

A political appointee should be able to say, “This is what our government has achieved,” without suggesting that everyone who disagrees is an enemy. They should be able to challenge an opposing argument without humiliating the person making it. They should also be capable of acknowledging a good initiative from another political camp without seeing such acknowledgement as betrayal.

Politics is temporary, but relationships, reputations and public records can endure.

The young person insulting someone today may need that same person as a colleague, professional partner, community leader or political ally tomorrow. Political offices change hands. Parties experience realignments. Alliances shift. People who stand on opposite sides today may find themselves working together tomorrow.

This is why political education must go beyond mobilising youths for rallies, defending personalities and generating applause for political principles. Young people should be taught how to interrogate policies, verify information, distinguish criticism from abuse, disagree without hatred and defend their positions with facts.

Loyalty should have boundaries. It should never demand dishonesty.

A supporter should be able to defend his principal without lying for him. A political appointee should be able to promote government achievements without insulting critics. A party member should be able to disagree with another member without turning the disagreement into permanent hostility. And a young politician should understand that the reputation built while serving one political principal may become part of the political capital carried into the future.

The objective should not be to produce youths who can shout the loudest, insult opponents most viciously or defend their principles at all costs. The objective should be to produce citizens who can think, engage, question, persuade and disagree intelligently.

Political loyalty without intellectual independence is dangerous. Political ambition without emotional intelligence is self-destructive. And political engagement without civility ultimately damages the very political community we hope to lead.

Our young people should therefore learn to engage politics without becoming prisoners of it. Support your principal. Defend your party. Promote your government’s achievements. Challenge opposing arguments. But preserve your dignity, your relationships and your future while doing so.

Politicians will change, political offices will change hands, and political camps will realign. What ultimately remains is the character and record of the individual.

Let us therefore disagree without destroying one another, compete without dehumanising one another, and participate in politics without becoming political zombies.

Rotr. Innocent Igelle cLMiH, mPPSN, MCAI, is a creative writer and a Social Critic