WHEN IS ONE WITHOUT SENTIMENTS IN POLITICAL ANALYSIS?

As I sit back to reflect over the last few months, it occurred to me that from January to May of 2015 the frequent word spoken that have captured my ear-time and my reading time through discussions and interactions with friends, colleagues, commentators and other wish wishers  have been the word “sentiments”. From the sunrise of the political struggle on the journey to Asso rock characterized by campaign, accusations and counter accusations from different factions to the mid-day of queuing at the polling units and resting with the sunset of the inauguration of Nigeria’s current president, most discussions have the statement “let us keep sentiments aside” when an individual is about to drum support for his candidate. This prompted me to ask when an individual is objective in a political analysis.

An attribute common among some Nigerians that constitute the “so-called minorities” in northern Nigeria moments preceding the presidential election based on my observation was that when an individual drums support for President Buhari, he is termed objective, patriotic and has the love of country at heart while if another does same for former President Goodluck Jonathan he is term as sentimental, biased and subjective. Despite being among the Nigerian population that contributed to the present government coming into power with a mindset that as it was in 2011 so shall it not be in 2015, I do not consider myself more objective, more patriotic and less subjective than other Nigerians that wanted continuity with the government of former President Goodluck Jonathan. I feel Nigerians were protecting their interest and they all have right to do so as my preference for “pate” over rice does not necessarily means the later is better than the former but has more to do with personal choice.  

As a social scientist I was taught that objectivity indicates the attempt to observe things as they are, without falsifying observations to accord with some preconceived world view. It is the ability to perceive or describe something without being influenced by personal emotions or prejudices and the fact or quality of being accurate, unbiased, and independent of individual perceptions. However, Karl Gunnar Myrdal a Swedish Nobel Laureate economist, sociologist and politician opined that total objectivity is an illusion which can never be achieved because view points are guided by subjectivity. The Spanish painter and sculptor Pablo Picasso using his profession to define objectivity said “Painting is a blind man's profession; He paints not what he sees, but what he feels, what he tells himself about what he has seen”

In the natural science where inanimate objects are primary targets, objectivity can be achieved while in the social science where animate objects are used complete objectivity is not guaranteed. We may align ourselves with any of the above school of thoughts but in my opinion, telling an individual not to use sentiments is a calculated attempt to guide that individual towards an expected pattern of analysis or response. Hence as the saying goes that refusing to take a decision among a range of options available to an individual is a decision itself, I would say telling an individual not to involve sentiments is sentiments itself.

Bijimi Daniel Meindous

@Dmeindous