Rejoinder: Criticism Is Not Campaigning — The Real Gap Is the Opposition

Rejoinder: Criticism Is Not Campaigning — The Real Gap Is the Opposition

 

Dear Mr. Kperogi,

 

The suggestion that critical voices are, by default, “campaigning for Tinubu” feels like a convenient framing that sidesteps a more obvious reality. Criticism, in itself, is not endorsement. At most, it only translates into political advantage when there is a credible, prepared opposition capable of converting dissent into momentum. That crucial ingredient, at present, appears largely absent.

 

President Tinubu’s current position cannot be dismissed as accidental. It reflects years of calculated political engagement and a deep understanding of Nigeria’s complex, everyday realities. One may disagree with his policies or style, but it is difficult to ignore the strategic depth that underpins his political journey.

 

In contrast, what passes for opposition today raises legitimate concerns. Messaging is often fragmented, organisational structures appear weak, and there is a noticeable disconnect between political rhetoric and grassroots realities. The claim of wanting to “rescue” the nation rings hollow when not backed by visible structure, coherence, and sustained engagement.

 

There is also an uncomfortable truth that deserves attention: meaningful political movements demand sacrifice. They are not built on convenience or fleeting outrage. Tinubu’s trajectory included years of persistence, investment, and endurance—even through periods of intense criticism and political uncertainty. By comparison, segments of the opposition seem to expect similar outcomes without demonstrating equivalent commitment or groundwork.

 

On your broader analytical framing, there is a perception—fair or not—of unevenness in how responsibility is assigned. The weight of criticism does not always appear balanced with adequate historical context, especially when assessing different administrations and regions. In a country like Nigeria, where governance is shaped by both formal institutions and informal political understandings, ignoring these nuances risks reducing analysis to what can be interpreted as positioning rather than objective critique.

 

To be clear, this is not about shielding any administration from scrutiny. Robust criticism is essential in a democracy. However, such criticism must be accompanied by balance, context, and a recognition of the broader political landscape.

 

So no, critics are not “helping Tinubu.” It only appears that way because the alternative has yet to demonstrate sufficient depth, cohesion, or readiness. Until that changes, the perception will persist—regardless of how it is framed.

 

That, in essence, is the matter.

 

Thank you for your consideration.

 

Mudashir ‘Dipo Teniola

Filmmaker/Journalist

Lagos, Nigeria

 

 

Rejoinder: Criticism Is Not Campaigning — The Real Gap Is the Opposition