As we gradually approach an election year, the nexus between politics, politicking and the material conditions of society needs to be re-examined, given the historical hallucinations often associated with previous epochs.
Moreso, the struggle against poverty, orchestrated by the fast-diminishing purchasing power of the average citizen, especially at this time when the reality of hunger, its effects and tributaries are being given a new meaning by the governing elite, makes this discourse a relevant one.
It is a popular Marxist argument that state policies, political institutions and power relations are maximally determined and best understood through the material conditions of society and its contending social classes.
It is against this backdrop that one needs to understand the hue and the cry of concerned citizens, nay voters, about the lopsided electioneering slugfest coming up in early 2027.
In a society where the gap between the rich class of the ruling elite and the poor is infinitely elastic, and where hunger has been unjustifiably weaponised against the poor, one can, without a crystal ball, predict the outcome of any election in the circumstance, as not capable of being the true representation of the wishes of the people, as it were.
It is well understood, with the benefit of hindsight, that the political economy of electoral seasons often favour the ruling elite and their cronies both in the short and long term. This is because those who are in the position to determine outcomes are often “empowered” and induced with the wherewithal to guarantee the desires of the smallest circle who governs the rest of us.
So, why the Nation cries because of injuries and injustices, the powerful smile to their Banks and their “political thrones” as the case may be, assured of a seat in the next four years around the table of a sumptuous buffet.
And this has been our national dilemma; the absence of credible elections being made possible by those who stand to benefit from this artificial fault line, that is.
Now the question every materialist observer would ask, which should be a pertinent one for the rest of us is: who “owns” the structure of the electioneering processes? Who benefits more in terms of the outcome both in the short and long term? How effective is the role of a hungry electorate in the whole process? What has the state done to ensure transparency?
Until and unless these pertinent questions are answered in favour of the people, this vicious circle of corruption that we refer to as “Elections” will continue unabated while social relations in our already skewed society plummet. And then the scavengers will remain on the throne unendingly. We must begin to ask the right questions.