Politics is often described as the art of governance and the science of managing competing interests for the common good. In every functioning democracy, political parties exist to offer citizens alternative visions of how society should be governed. Elections are, therefore, designed to allow the voting masses to compare ideas, evaluate records, and decide which group is best suited to administer public affairs. The defeated regroup, learn from their mistakes, improve their programmes, and prepare for another opportunity. The winners govern with the understanding that power belongs ultimately to the people and that they, too, could in future find themselves in opposition. That is how democracy is supposed to work.
Sadly, this is not how politics is practised in many parts of the world, especially in African countries. Rather than see one another as healthy competitors in the marketplace of governance ideas, politicians often regard their opponents as enemies to be destroyed. Political contests become battles for survival. Campaigns resemble wars. Election arenas become theatres of intimidation. Victory is celebrated as total conquest, while defeat is treated as a political obituary. The consequences of this destructive mentality have been devastating, costing countless lives, destroying democratic institutions and slowing the continent’s march towards political maturity.
The greatest tragedy is that this hostility is completely unnecessary. It is, in every sense of the word, idiotic. It is an irrational way of conducting public affairs because politics is not warfare. It is public service. Political opponents are not enemies of the state. They are fellow citizens who simply disagree on how the nation should be governed.
One of the greatest strengths of democracy lies in its recognition that no individual, party or ideology possesses a monopoly of wisdom. Every political party is capable of producing brilliant ideas, competent leaders and innovative policies. Likewise, every party is capable of making mistakes. Democracy acknowledges this reality by allowing different viewpoints to compete peacefully while it leaves the final decision in the hands of the electorate. The opposition therefore performs an indispensable function. It questions government policies, exposes weaknesses, proposes alternatives and keeps those in power accountable. Without opposition, democracy would gradually degenerate into authoritarianism.
This is why mature democracies refer to opposition parties as “alternative governments.” They are governments-in-waiting. Their responsibility is not to destroy the country in order to embarrass the ruling party, nor is the duty of the ruling party to cripple the opposition in order to remain in office forever. Both sides ultimately serve the same nation. Their disagreement concerns methods, priorities and policies—not patriotism itself.
Unfortunately, politics in many African countries has evolved into a winner-takes-all enterprise. Winning an election frequently means controlling enormous state resources, appointments, contracts, security agencies and public institutions. Losing often means exclusion from influence, diminished economic opportunities and, in some cases, exposure to politically motivated investigations or persecution. Under such conditions, elections cease to be ordinary democratic exercises. They become desperate struggles in which every available weapon is deployed.
This reality encourages politicians to perceive opponents not merely as rivals but as existential threats. Every election becomes a battle between “us” and “them.” Every criticism is interpreted as sabotage. Every opposing voice is labelled disloyal. Every political setback invites retaliation. Democracy gradually transforms into permanent political warfare.
The irony is that this mentality ultimately harms everyone, including those who temporarily benefit from it. Governments consumed by hostility spend valuable time fighting opponents instead of solving national problems. Opposition parties become more interested in frustrating government programmes than offering constructive alternatives. National development suffers while politicians wage endless battles for supremacy.
The victims extend far beyond politicians themselves. Ordinary citizens pay the highest price. Businesses avoid politically unstable environments. Foreign investments decline. Public confidence in democratic institutions weakens. Young people lose faith in politics altogether, concluding that it is merely an avenue for personal enrichment and violent competition rather than public service. Even more tragic are the lives lost to political violence. Across different African countries, history records assassinations, suspicious disappearances, violent attacks during election campaigns and extra-judicial killings allegedly linked to political conflicts. Every life lost in the name of politics represents a monumental failure of democracy. No political office is worth the blood of a single citizen. No electoral victory justifies violence against opponents.
Some of these tragedies occur because political leaders deliberately inflame passions. Instead of educating supporters about democratic competition, they mobilize them as though they were preparing for war. Opponents are portrayed as enemies of the ruling party. Every election becomes a moral crusade in which compromise is equated with weakness and coexistence is treated as betrayal. Such rhetoric inevitably encourages violence among supporters who merely imitate the language and attitudes of their leaders. The roots of this unfortunate political culture are complex. Colonial administrations concentrated enormous powers in central governments but after so many decades of self-rule it would be childish to point a finger at colonialism for what is happening today in African politics. On another level, many years of military rule had further entrenched authoritarian habits. Weak institutions often leave politicians uncertain about their safety after leaving office. Patronage politics has successfully made access to government synonymous with access to wealth and influence. Ethnic and regional divisions sometimes deepen political rivalry, transforming ordinary elections into struggles between communities rather than contests between policies.
These realities explain why there is political hostility in African politics, but they do not justify it. Understanding a problem is not the same as excusing it. African leaders must recognise that democracy cannot flourish where opponents are treated as enemies. The notion that politics should be a do-or-die affair reflects a profound misunderstanding of democratic governance. Political office is temporary. Nations are permanent. Governments come and go, but the country remains. Every administration inherits institutions built by predecessors and leaves foundations upon which successors will build. No government begins history anew. Every administration is merely one chapter in an ongoing national story.
The most successful democracies understand this continuity. New governments may alter policies, introduce reforms or pursue different priorities, but they rarely regard everything done by previous administrations as worthless simply because political rivals initiated those programmes. They preserve what works, improve what requires adjustment and discard only what is demonstrably harmful to the society. Such continuity strengthens public confidence and accelerates development.
In contrast, where the concept of enmity dominates the political space, incoming governments often dismantle worthwhile projects merely because opponents conceived them. Roads remain abandoned. Housing schemes deteriorate. Industrial projects are neglected. Educational reforms are discarded. National resources are wasted simply because politicians refuse to ever acknowledge that rivals can produce good ideas. This is not governance. It is pettiness masquerading as politics.
True patriotism demands a higher standard. Every political party should remember that it seeks to govern the same country, serve the same people and protect the same national interest. Their methods may differ, but their destination ought to be identical with national progress. Partnership in nation building should not mean eliminating political competition. On the contrary, vigorous competition is healthy. Citizens deserve genuine choices. Governments should be criticized when they fail. Opposition parties should expose corruption, incompetence and abuse of power wherever they exist. There should be robust debates because they enrich democracy.
No matter the circumstance, political disagreement must never descend into hatred. Political rivalry must not become personal hostility. Elections should determine who governs, not who deserves to exist. Defeat should not produce persecution, while victory should never produce arrogance. This requires leaders who possess democratic maturity. Such leaders recognise that criticism strengthens governance rather than weaken it. They understand that opposition parties represent millions of citizens whose voices deserve to be heard with respect. They appreciate the fact that collaboration is not surrender but statesmanship.
National institutions also matter very much in political issues. Independent electoral commissions, independent and impartial courts, professional security agencies and effective legislatures reduce the temptation to manage politics as warfare. When politicians trust that elections will be credible and that constitutional rights will be protected regardless of who wins, the stakes become less existential. Equally important is the political education of citizens. Supporters must learn that belonging to different parties does not make neighbours enemies. Families should not be divided permanently by elections. Religious organisations, traditional institutions, educational establishments and the media, all of them have responsibilities to promote democratic culture and democratic tolerance.
Citizens should judge politicians by competence, integrity and performance rather than inflammatory rhetoric. The media, in particular, must avoid becoming instruments of political warfare. Journalism should inform, educate and hold every government accountable without becoming captive to partisan interests. Responsible reporting encourages peaceful democratic engagement rather than emotional polarization.
Political leaders themselves should consciously cultivate a new language of democracy. Instead of describing opponents as enemies, they should refer to them as opponents. Instead of preaching hostility, they should encourage respectful disagreement. Instead of threatening revenge, they should promise accountability under the law. Words matter because they shape attitudes, and attitudes ultimately shape behaviour.
There is also an urgent need to reduce the excessive rewards attached to political offices. Where public office becomes the quickest route to wealth, influence and privilege, competition inevitably becomes ruthless. Strong, effective and financially independent anti-corruption institutions, transparent public procurement and equitable economic opportunities outside government can reduce the desperation surrounding elections. Ultimately, democracy does not automatically succeed just because politicians always agree on points but because they accept rules that allow disagreement without violence. The ballot exists precisely to replace the bullet. Elections are designed to settle political disputes peacefully so that societies need not resort to conflict.
Africa has already demonstrated encouraging signs in several countries where peaceful transfers of power have become increasingly common. Former ruling parties have accepted defeat. Opposition leaders have assumed office constitutionally. Incumbents have handed over peacefully after losing elections. These examples prove that democratic maturity is possible on the continent. They deserve to become the norm rather than the exception.
The future of African democracy depends largely upon abandoning the destructive psychology of political enmity. Leaders must reject the illusion that opponents are adversaries to be crushed. Instead, they should recognise them as fellow patriots entrusted by different segments of the population with advancing alternative ideas for national development.
When governments govern well, the nation benefits regardless of party affiliation. When opposition parties offer constructive criticism, the nation benefits regardless of who occupies public office. When elections are peaceful, investors gain confidence, institutions grow stronger and citizens become more hopeful about the future. Everybody wins.
The measure of democratic civilisation is not whether political parties agree on every issue. That would be impossible. The true measure is whether they can disagree vigorously while they still recognise one another’s legitimacy and common commitment to the spirit of nationalism.
Once again, let us accept that political parties are not enemies marching towards a battlefield. They are different teams participating in the same national enterprise. They may wear different colours, chant different slogans and advocate different policies, but they all owe allegiance to the same flag and responsibility to the same people. The day African politicians fully embrace this simple truth will mark the beginning of a new democratic culture—one in which elections are contests rather than wars, opposition is respected rather than persecuted, governments govern rather than seek revenge, and politics returns to its noble purpose: the service of the people. Until then, the needless hatred that turns fellow citizens into enemies will remain one of the greatest absurdities of African politics. It is an absurdity that deserves to be called by its proper name: the idiocy of political enmity.
Chief Sir Asinugo, PhD., M.A., KSC, is a UK-based author and veteran journalist.
