It is a psychological fact that we make decisions based on our emotions and not on logic.

Our emotions determine our choices and actions and influence our personalities and perceptions about the world .

Psychologists have identified a myriad of emotions experienced universally including; shame, pride, happiness, sadness, disgust, embarrassment, fear, excitement, surprise and anger.

Our environments and people we interact with elicit these emotions depending on how much time we spend around them.

It is for this reason that religion, poverty and politics are an intoxicating confluence for the masses.

Poverty provokes shame, anger and fear within those that deal with it on a daily basis.

A father’s inability to provide for his family; a young mother watching her child suffer from hunger or disease; or an entrepreneur unable to grow his business, provide for such enervating emotions.

Religion eases these discomforts by providing happiness and excitement about tomorrow.

It promotes a sense of confidence in the future and depending on the doctrine, will offer pleasant surprises in real and imagined miracles.

Its temporal impact obscures realities and causes of inequalities and wretchedness. 

Seasoned politicians know the importance of choosing the right constituency for their messages and initiatives, and the poor and/or intensely religious often provide an easier pathway to political success.

For instance, the act of speaking from a church podium identifies a politician’s ideas with a divine authority.

The church podium connotes mental and symbolic associations with God’s authority, giving an impression that whatever the politician says likely has divine approval. 

Speaking from the podium or mingling with the men of cloth also creates the image of a politician who is keen on fulfilling religious demands of love and compassion to the poor and brokenhearted.

Further, because churches bring together people from varied social, political and economic backgrounds, it provides an opportunity to bring the congregants together within one (religious) theme while balkanising denominations along political lines. 

Of greater significance is the quid-pro-quo that eventually thrives between politician and the church.

The church is a refuge for masses, who  get food, clothing and shelter from it, and while some churches can manage these demands, others struggle.

It is, thus, common for religious leaders to expect personal and communal favours in return for church numbers.

Whether tangible or intangible, they provide a win-win solution for both.

With such ‘divine’ endorsements, a politician is better placed to extend initiatives in the community.

They have established themselves as an approachable and pro-poor leader whose social activism inspires hope and confidence.

It is profitable to meet the poor at their points of need. The hungrier they are, the easier it is to ingratiate yourself with them.

Tokenism effectively fills this gap, providing the here-and-now relief to the recipient while reinforcing a politician as a socio-economic saviour.  

Kenya’s  political season is slowly picking up and politicians are propping themselves up for these and other vote hunting strategies.

It is known that some churches are politically inclined. It is also known that while we have made considerable efforts in bridging the country’s inequality gap, pockets of Kenyans still struggle to put food on the table.

Regardless, the politician that will carry the conversation over the next months will be the one to elicit two emotions: happiness and hope. —  The writer is an Advocate of the High Court