POLITICAL CONVICTION WITHOUT POLITICAL HOSTILITY: BUILDING A CULTURE OF IDEOLOGICAL DEBATE AHEAD OF THE 2027 ELECTIONS

As Nigeria prepares for the 2027 general elections, one question deserves our attention: Must we become enemies simply because we support different political parties or candidates?

Can we disagree politically without insulting one another, destroying friendships, losing professional relationships or bringing disgrace to our families on social media? The answer is yes. But to achieve this, we must learn to separate political ideology from blind loyalty to individuals and political parties.

Politics should be more than the exchange of insults, the defence of political personalities and the endless struggle to prove that our preferred candidates are better than everyone else’s. It should be a contest of ideas, values, policies and visions for society.

Our political discussions should be ideologydriven, not personality driven. For those who do not know, I subscribe to a socialist ideology. Therefore, when someone presents himself as a political saviour, I believe we should examine whether his political philosophy, policies and proposed solutions align with the principles I hold dear. A candidate’s popularity, eloquence, financial resources or ability to mobilise supporters should not automatically earn my support. I should be able to ask critical questions about their policies, economic philosophy, approach to governance and commitment to social justice. This is the essence of ideological politics: supporting political ideas because of what they represent, rather than supporting individuals simply because of who they are.

However, holding a different ideology does not make another person ignorant, wicked or unintelligent. It means we may have different explanations for society’s problems and different ideas about how those problems should be solved.

Philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and Heraclitus offered different perspectives on human existence, knowledge, politics and society. Their differences remind us that intellectual progress requires questioning, reasoning and the willingness to examine competing ideas.

The same principle applies to politics today. We should be able to challenge another person’s arguments without attacking their dignity.

Our Differences Should Not Destroy Our Relationships. Consider religion. Muslims may differ in their interpretations and religious traditions. Christians may worship within different denominations, while adherents of traditional African religions may have distinct spiritual practices and approaches to worship. These differences do not mean that every person must become an enemy of everyone who interprets faith differently. Although these traditions are not identical, they demonstrate how people can maintain distinct beliefs and practices while still sharing aspects of a wider social identity. Politics should not be different. We can support different candidates, belong to different political parties and subscribe to different economic or political philosophies while sharing a common desire for a better Nigeria. One person may believe socialism offers the best path to economic justice. Another may favour social democracy, liberalism or conservatism. Rather than resorting to insults, we should examine the arguments, policies and likely consequences of these competing positions.

The question should not merely be, Who are you supporting? It should also be, Why are you supporting that person, what ideas do they represent, and how will their policies improve the lives of Nigerians?

When we begin to ask these questions, political participation becomes more meaningful.

You can support your ideology without becoming an enemy of others. I support Omoyele Sowore because I identify with aspects of his political ideology and the political change he advocates. However, some of my mentors and benefactors belong to other political parties. They have not forced their political beliefs on me, even when they have encouraged me to support their preferred candidates. I have also contributed to professional work involving the ruling party through one of my mentors. Yet, my professional engagements have not required me to abandon my political convictions.

There is an important lesson here: professional cooperation does not automatically mean ideological agreement, just as political disagreement does not automatically make people adversaries. A person’s professional competence should not be dismissed simply because they support a different political party. Equally, receiving mentorship, employment opportunities or professional assistance from someone should not require us to surrender our independent political judgement. We must learn to distinguish between professional relationships, personal loyalty and political conviction. They can co-exist without one necessarily cancelling out the others.

This is not an argument for abandoning principles or pretending that all political positions are equally acceptable. Where policies threaten human rights, undermine democratic institutions or promote injustice, citizens have every right to challenge them firmly. The point is that criticism should be informed, purposeful and directed at ideas, actions and policies rather than reduced to personal abuse.

The danger of personality-driven politics. One of the problems with personality driven politics is that it encourages people to defend political leaders even when their actions contradict the very principles their supporters claim to uphold. When political loyalty becomes more important than ideology, citizens may excuse corruption in their preferred party while condemning the same conduct in an opposing party. They may defend poor policies because their candidate introduced them and attack good policies simply because an opponent proposed them.

This inconsistency weakens accountability. A politically conscious citizen should be able to criticise their preferred candidate when necessary and acknowledge a sensible policy proposed by an opponent. Supporting a political movement should not mean surrendering the ability to think independently.

As we approach the 2027 general elections, Nigerians must resist the temptation to turn political disagreement into a personal war. Social media should not become a platform for humiliating former friends, disgracing family members or destroying relationships that have taken years to build. Before publishing an insult against someone because of their political affiliation, ask yourself: Am I defending an idea, or am I merely reacting emotionally to a different opinion?

Political education is more important than political noise. Ignorance takes us nowhere. A person who understands their political ideology is better positioned to evaluate candidates, scrutinise manifestos, question public policies and make informed electoral decisions. This requires citizens to read, research and understand the principles behind the political parties and candidates they support. It also requires us to move beyond campaign slogans and examine the practical implications of proposed policies for employment, education, healthcare, security, human rights and economic development.

Political awareness is not measured by how aggressively we defend a candidate online. It is demonstrated by our ability to explain our convictions, engage with opposing arguments and hold political leaders accountable. We must also understand that proximity to power does not necessarily mean ideological agreement with those in power. People may work with government institutions, contribute professional expertise or maintain relationships with political officeholders without becoming unquestioning supporters of their political agenda.

In a democracy, professional independence and freedom of political thought should be respected.

A better nigeria must be our common goal. Ultimately, our political ideologies may differ, but we should be able to discuss the future we want for Nigeria. We may disagree on the best economic system, the structure of government or the policies required to address insecurity and unemployment. Those disagreements should inspire debate, research and democratic participation, not hatred. As the 2027 general elections approach, let us interrogate ideas, compare policies, scrutinise candidates and vote according to our convictions. Let us challenge misinformation and hold political actors accountable without treating every supporter of an opposing party as an enemy.

You can disagree without insulting. You can defend your ideology without becoming intolerant. You can maintain professional relationships without abandoning your convictions. And you can support a candidate without pretending that the candidate is incapable of making mistakes.

Let us make the 2027 elections a contest of ideas rather than a battle of personal loyalties. We may not agree on every political question, but we can still work towards a Nigeria where citizens enjoy security, justice, equal opportunities, accountable leadership and a better quality of life. That is the kind of political maturity our democracy needs.