President William Ruto’s assertion that one way of moving a country forward is through dictatorship has sparked intense debate among Kenyans. The statement raises fundamental questions about leadership, democracy, accountability, and the true drivers of national development. While history shows that some countries achieved rapid progress under authoritarian rule, the idea that dictatorship is a necessary path to development remains highly controversial.
Supporters of this view often argue that dictatorships allow for fast decision-making and strict implementation of policies. In such systems, leaders face little resistance from opposition groups, courts, or the public. This can make it easier to roll out large infrastructure projects, enforce discipline, and push through long-term economic plans without political distractions. Countries like China and Singapore are frequently cited as examples where strong, centralized leadership played a role in rapid economic growth.
However, this argument overlooks the serious risks associated with dictatorial governance. When citizens are discouraged or forbidden from questioning leadership, power becomes concentrated in the hands of a few individuals. This often leads to abuse of authority, corruption, human rights violations, and suppression of dissent. Without checks and balances, poor decisions can be enforced nationwide, even when they harm the majority of citizens. History is full of dictatorships that promised development but instead delivered economic collapse, repression, and instability.
Democracy, though slower and sometimes messy, provides mechanisms for accountability. Public debate, free media, and opposition voices help expose corruption and policy failures before they become national disasters. Questioning leadership is not a sign of disloyalty but a safeguard against misuse of power. Countries that have achieved sustainable development through democratic systems demonstrate that progress does not require silencing citizens.
Kenya’s own history makes this debate particularly sensitive. The country has experienced periods where authoritarian tendencies limited freedoms, leading to social unrest and economic inequality. The push for multiparty democracy was driven by the understanding that development must go hand in hand with freedom, justice, and public participation.
Strong leadership is essential for national progress, but strength should not be confused with dictatorship. Effective leaders can be decisive while still respecting democratic institutions and listening to criticism. Development that ignores the voice of the people may appear successful in the short term but often proves fragile in the long run.
True progress is achieved when leadership combines vision, discipline, accountability, and respect for citizens’ rights. Silencing questions may speed up decisions, but it also silences warning signs that protect a nation from repeating costly mistakes.
