We Are NOT Victims BUT Accomplices To Our Own Suffering

Kenya’s gravest crisis is not corruption alone. It is complicity. It is the quiet, stubborn, and often emotional decision by ordinary citizens to defend systems that impoverish them, projects that do not serve them, and leaders who do not respect them. This is not an abstract moral failing. It is a measurable, repeatable, and costly national habit.

Every major public scandal in Kenya follows the same pattern. A project is announced with patriotic language. Billions are committed. Questions are dismissed as “noise,” “politics,” or “hate.” A section of citizens rushes to defend the project online. Years later, the country is left servicing debt, maintaining white elephants, and asking why nothing works.

The tragedy is that the beneficiaries of these projects are rarely the defenders. Contractors get paid. Vendors exit early—middlemen bank commissions. Politicians move on. Meanwhile, the public remains with broken systems, higher taxes, and fewer services—yet still insists on defending the mess.

Take Huduma Namba. Conceived as a unifying digital identity, it was rolled out at a considerable cost and with considerable political urgency. Years later, its utility remains unclear, its legal foundation contested, and its integration with essential services inconsistent. Despite this, millions were coerced into registration, and dissenters were labelled anti-progress.

The result is a classic Kenyan outcome: sunk costs with limited returns. Systems that were supposed to streamline service delivery now coexist awkwardly with legacy databases, duplicating effort rather than eliminating inefficiency. Yet criticism is still treated as sabotage.

Then there is the Standard Gauge Railway, operated under Kenya Railways. It was sold as a transformational infrastructure project that would reduce transport costs and spur industrial growth. Instead, it has struggled to meet revenue projections, required continuous operational support, and locked the country into long-term repayment obligations.

This is not conjecture. Official audits and parliamentary reports have consistently shown that freight uptake has fallen short of targets and that the railway’s operational model remains financially fragile. Still, public debate around the SGR is often emotional rather than analytical, framed as loyalty versus betrayal instead of value versus cost.

The Kisumu–Nanyuki railway revival followed a similar script. Launched with fanfare, justified with regional integration rhetoric, and celebrated online, it quickly ran into commercial reality. Passenger numbers failed to justify operations. Freight demand was insufficient. Services were quietly scaled back.

None of this should surprise anyone. Railways do not succeed because of sentiment. They succeed because of industrial demand, logistics planning, and cost competitiveness. Kenya skipped that analysis and went straight to symbolism, then punished anyone who questioned it.

The Competency-Based Curriculum (CBC) is another case study in citizen-enabled failure. Introduced with noble intentions, it has morphed into a costly, chaotic, and uneven system that disproportionately burdens parents. Textbooks are non-reusable. Continuous assessment demands resources many public schools do not have. Parents pay the price.

Publishers and suppliers, however, have thrived. Year after year, new materials are required, guaranteeing demand regardless of educational outcomes. Parents complain privately, suffer silently, then defend the system publicly because opposing it is framed as opposing “reform.”

This is the Kenyan contradiction: suffering in reality, loyalty in public. A population that knows something is broken but cannot bring itself to say it loudly enough to force change.

The enabling does not stop at policy. It extends to procurement. Vendor-driven projects—where solutions are designed to fit suppliers rather than citizens—dominate public spending. Technology systems are procured without clear use cases. Infrastructure is built without demand analysis. Maintenance costs are ignored.

When these projects fail, the narrative shifts. The problem becomes “implementation,” never design. “Sabotage,” never incompetence. “Politics” never has accountability. Citizens internalize these excuses and repeat them on behalf of people who will never defend them in return.

Political loyalty plays a central role. In Kenya, policy critique is often interpreted as an attack on identity. Once a project is associated with a leader, questioning it becomes treason. Rational analysis is replaced by tribal arithmetic.

This is how scams survive in plain sight. Not because they are invisible, but because calling them out is socially expensive. You risk isolation, insults, and mislabelling. Many choose silence. Others choose defence.

The economic consequences are devastating. Kenya is now a high-tax, low-service state. Citizens pay more through PAYE, VAT, fuel levies, and digital taxes, yet still fund healthcare privately, educate their children at personal cost, and rely on personal savings for retirement.

Debt servicing consumes an ever-growing share of revenue, crowding out development spending. Meanwhile, failed projects continue to demand maintenance budgets, becoming permanent drains rather than temporary mistakes.

What makes this worse is that none of this is inevitable. Countries with fewer resources have done better by insisting on evidence-based planning, transparent procurement, and post-project audits with real consequences.

Correction begins with one uncomfortable truth: defending a bad project does not make you patriotic. It makes you complicit. Patriotism is not loyalty to power. It is loyalty to outcomes.

Kenyans must learn to separate leadership from policy. A leader can be popular and wrong. A project can be well-intentioned and disastrous. These are not insults; they are analytical positions.

Public participation must also mature. Being consulted is not the same as influencing decisions. Citizens must demand feasibility studies, cost–benefit analyses, and pilot phases before national rollouts. Applause should come after results, not before.

Parliamentary oversight must be treated as a civic priority, not a partisan nuisance. Audit reports should be read, discussed, and acted upon publicly. Silence after audit findings is another form of enabling.

Procurement laws already exist. What is missing is public insistence on enforcement. Blacklisted contractors should remain blacklisted. Failed vendors should not be recycled into new projects under new names.

Education reform must be paused, reviewed, and corrected based on classroom realities, not consultant presentations. Infrastructure investment must follow demand, not ribbon-cutting calendars.

Most importantly, Kenyans must reclaim the right to say no. No to rushed projects. No to emotional blackmail. No to defending what does not work.

The country’s greatest enemies are not whistleblowers or critics. They are the reflex defenders who confuse loyalty with silence and identity with policy.

Kenya will not collapse because of corruption alone. It will collapse because citizens keep shielding corruption from consequences.

The correction is painful, but simple: stop defending what is hurting you. Demand evidence. Demand value. Demand accountability.

Until then, the cycle will continue—new projects, same excuses, bigger debts, louder defenders, and deeper suffering.

Kenya is not short of intelligence, resources, or ideas. It is short of civic courage.

And courage, unlike billion-shilling projects, costs nothing to deploy.

Read Also: The Tyranny of the Crowd: How Groupthink Keeps Kenyans Prisoners Of The Political Class