As Nigeria’s political landscape heats up, concerns about the ruling party’s communication approach have sparked debates about the potential dangers of violent rhetoric and its consequences. Dr. Amadi, a seasoned political analyst, recently discussed these issues, focusing on the challenges facing the All Progressives Congress (APC) in navigating their messaging ahead of the 2027 elections.
He began by noting that while criticism of government policies is not only fair but expected, the rhetoric used by political figures, especially within the APC, risks crossing into dangerous territory. According to him, making bold statements about political opponents, labeling them as “economists of misery,” for example, is within the bounds of fair political speech. However, he warned that when statements are followed by threats of consequences, particularly in the Nigerian context, they can be perceived as mobilizing violence.
“The issue arises when political leaders use language that implies real-world consequences—such as arrest or state action—against those who oppose them,” he explained. “What is often missing in Nigerian politics is the ability to engage in ideological battles through communication. Instead, the tendency is to resort to violence or to silence opposition through arrests and threats.”
The political analyst highlighted on Arise tv, that Nigerian politics often lacks a deep ideological commitment, with many politicians focusing more on transactional gains rather than nurturing intellectual debates. This lack of ideological depth, he argued, leads to a tendency to escalate tensions rather than address the issues through civil discourse.
“Political engagement in Nigeria too often turns transactional, with politicians eager to win elections by any means necessary,” he said. “This transactional nature breeds a toxic environment where politicians avoid engaging with ideas and instead focus on silencing or punishing opposition.”
With 2027 on the horizon, the expert stressed that the APC is in a challenging position. The party’s policies, while well-intentioned, have not delivered the desired results for many Nigerians. High inflation, poor economic indicators, and rising energy costs have made it difficult for the ruling party to frame its achievements positively.
As a result, opposition figures such as Peter Obi and Atiku Abubakar have gained significant traction, often capitalizing on public dissatisfaction. He warned that if the ruling party cannot address these issues effectively, they may resort to increasing the “violence index” by attacking opponents’ speeches and rhetoric, which could escalate into more severe actions like arrests or, in the worst case, physical harm.
“The real danger lies in the potential for violence and the erosion of democratic principles,” he cautioned. “If the government continues to struggle with governance and fails to change the narrative, we might witness an alarming increase in violent rhetoric and even physical confrontations.”
As the conversation turned to the broader question of free speech and the potential for incendiary rhetoric, Dr. Amadi emphasized the need for civil society and the media to step up their vigilance. “The media plays a critical role in pushing back against harmful rhetoric,” he said. “It is essential for society to call out instances where language crosses the line and to ensure that those who engage in violent speech are held accountable.”
He also suggested that the Nigerian government could benefit from a more proactive stance in regulating political speech, not through censorship, but by using “soft power” to influence political behavior. For example, the Nigerian Security Forces could take a more active role in enforcing accountability for statements that incite violence or spread false narratives.
Amadi’s analysis underscored the broader issue within Nigerian politics: a lack of focus on constructive, ideologically-driven debate. Without this, he warned, the political climate could become increasingly volatile. He argued that Nigerian politicians need to shift their focus from transactional politics to substantive ideological engagement, ensuring that their communication is not just about winning at all costs but also about fostering genuine public discourse.
More Read
“In the end, politics is a contact sport, but it must remain civil and productive,” he concluded. “We need to ensure that politicians engage with ideas and policies in a way that respects the democratic process while avoiding language that could incite violence. The future of Nigerian democracy depends on it.”
