Elections in Kenya always end with important lessons for many people, both locally and abroad.
The August 9 General Election was a trending story everywhere in the Eastern Africa region.
It is not surprising that about 10 former presidents and former prime ministers were heading election observation teams.
Unfortunately, the international community and the region sometimes do not always have good reasons for giving attention to Kenya’s elections.
Foreign commentators always review Kenya’s elections using violence as a lens. They look for violence everywhere even when there are no signs.
They torture everyone they interview with hard questions about where there are no signs of violence.
Where there are no signs, they end up saying they can see the tension.
In the process of looking for violence where it doesn’t exist, they miss out on key nuances of what makes Kenya a resilient society.
The August 2022 election had fascinating insights about why ordinary voters cast their votes and why they make the choices they make at the ballot, as well as why middle-class voters are infatuated with analyses of the future and make choices based on how they think the future should be.
The ordinary voters rationalise their choices using daily experiences and their review of past events.
They do not make choices because they are paid to vote. They do not make choices because they are coerced to do so.
Theirs are rational choices made on the basis of experiences and ordinary conversations with one another.
In discussions with ordinary voters, you envy their insights about different candidates, why they would vote for some of them, and their views on who would win or lose an election.
In one particular example in Murang’a County, I began my discussion with ordinary voters by asking them about their views on Kenya today and the direction in which the country was headed.
Some were optimistic but a majority were pessimistic about the future. They said the cost of living was unbearable and that they had not seen any improvements in the economy.
But the most fascinating comment was from an elderly woman who said that this time “I will not vote on the basis of ethnic identity”.
She said the idea of always voting for “mtu wetu” (our own) had led to poor performance of the economy.
She completed her observation by saying that “in 2013 and 2017, we voted for ‘one of our own’”.
But from then on, “the cost of living has gone up for everybody… the cost of living is up for the Kikuyu and Kalenjin who voted for the ruling (Jubilee) coalition… the cost of living is also high for the Luo and the Kamba who did not vote for the ruling coalition”.
In her view, voters in her region were suffering in the same way as voters elsewhere in the country. She was determined not to use “mtu wetu” as a guide to determine how she votes. Her comments were persuading even to others.
In one area in lower eastern, the Ukambani region, a group of youths animatedly discussed why they should or should not vote for presidential candidates opposed to their regional kingpins.
Some of them were categorical that they were opposed to regional kingpins acting as gatekeepers to local politics.
They argued that regional kingpins were only concerned about the interests of their families and other relatives. They did not care about the region.
The discussion in the lower eastern was one of the most fascinating. The youth exchanged pleasantries about whether one of their own leaders would ever be President of Kenya.
They unanimously said no. They were emphatic that none of their leaders had a chance to lead Kenya and it was a waste of time to support any of them in a competition they had lost.
Asked why they did not want to support one of their own, again they all seemed to agree that electoral politics is now a market.
Some of the most insightful conversations concerned integrity of leaders and the electoral process itself.
In these discussions, we would ask ordinary citizens about the quality of leaders and whether integrity matters.
When this was posed to groups, opinion was divided on the importance of integrity and specifically whether it is an issue to worry about.
I recall about two discussions during which members of the groups argued that they cared very little whether someone is corrupt or not.
They all seemed to argue that it is a bad thing at the local level but they prefer the corrupt who share their “loot” with the local community.
But again they were keen to emphasise that looting county government funds was bad because these are meant for their development.
But they did not have a lot of problems in endorsing “eating” what they considered the “loot” from the national government or elsewhere outside their counties.
The last aspect of these conversations was the most hilarious. It was about their views on the integrity of elections.
When asked what they would do if a candidate they supported for any post won an election by stealing votes, many said they would still continue to support the candidate.
To them, there is nothing wrong because even the opponent would have stolen the election if given a chance to do so.
In their view, these days all politicians are keen to win by all means possible. And if you are not careful, your opponent will be ahead of you by far.
When asked why they support this view, they said it is because the winner will always remember his/her supporters and give them some benefits.
With these observations, one can say a new culture has evolved among voters. The voters have a reason for why they vote the way they do.
Their choices are informed by their circumstances and general disillusionment with political leaders.
Prof Karuti Kanyinga is based at the Institute for Development Studies (IDS), University of Nairobi, [email protected] ; Twitter: @karutikk
