As political rhetoric becomes increasingly hostile, education experts are warning that children are absorbing dangerous patterns of dismissal and aggression.
With insults flying across podiums and screens, the focus is shifting from what children are seeing to how they are learning to communicate in an era of “performative” disagreement.
The exchanges continue, on podiums, across microphones, and through screens carried into our homes. Words are thrown, returned, amplified, not to persuade, but to wound.
Somewhere in the background of all this, children are still listening. The debate continues, and things continue to fall apart.
“We are raising children in a time when disagreement has become performance, where volume is mistaken for strength and where cutting words travel faster than careful thought, where attention is rewarded, even when respect is not,” says Prof Rebecca Wambua, an educationist, author and counsellor, adding: And slowly, almost quietly, something shifts, not in policies, or headlines, but in tone.
She says for parents, the current exchange of acrimonious words among leaders demands more than concern and attention, because the question is no longer only what children are exposed to, but what they are becoming in response, and not in grand declarations.
Family coach and counsellor, Catherine Mugendi, says children’s reaction, when exposed to the current back and forth among leaders, is affected, and their comprehension may be noticed in the way they speak, react and respond. “Because long before a child learns how to lead, they learn how to disagree,” she says.
For Grace Wanjiku, a mother of two teenagers, the shift showed up in an ordinary conversation. “Recently, we were having dinner, and my son repeated something he had heard online. The words were harsh and dismissive, and I immediately understood where it had come from,” she recalls.
After she had absorbed the shock, she says, she did not “mince words” in her reaction. “We don’t speak like that here,” I told him sternly, not because I want him to agree with me, but because I want him to respect people, even when he doesn’t.” She says what followed was a “calculated and deliberate long conversation.”
Prof Rebecca says, children, it turns out, are not just absorbing words. “They are absorbing patterns. How quickly we interrupt, how easily we dismiss, and how often we reduce complex ideas into sharp, simplified attacks.”
The expert explains that children are not confused by what they see, but rather, they are learning from it, and what they are learning is not always what parents intend. Many parents, she says, do not realise how much of what is at play in the public arena is noticed and absorbed by their children.
Mugendi says there is a growing need to teach children something that does not come naturally in a noisy world: How to disagree without becoming disrespectful.
“It sounds simple, but it is not, because it requires slowing down what the world speeds up, holding back when everything pushes forward, choosing dignity even when it feels less powerful,” the expert says.
She further explains that respect is not agreement, but rather, it is recognising the humanity of the other person, even when you strongly disagree. That distinction is not always visible in public spaces, but it must be made visible at home.
In many ways, the home has quietly become the first civic classroom, not in the formal sense, but in the everyday practice of engagement.
Prof Wambua says, against the background of the ongoing public theoretics, parents should take the responsibility of conducting civic classrooms within home environments for day scholars, while teachers should take up this in special sessions at schools.
“Parents and teachers should monitor how siblings argue, at home or how students react in schools, and should be ready to responsibly take charge if things seem to be out of hand,” says the Professor.
The experts explain that these parents-children-teacher-students’ sessions should address the current public debates and serve as rehearsals in preparation of what is ahead, elections and voting.
She says, whether a child is eligible for voting or not, this is the prime time to teach them the basics: that disagreement does not require anger, but careful thinking. Children should be taught how to react positively when they encounter opposing views in the world, whether those views are threats or invitations to think deeper.
For some parents, this means allowing more conversation. “I tell my students they can disagree with me, but they must explain why, and they must do it respectfully,” says Mwalimu Geoffrey Muthomi.
“Though this may not be easy, there is also a quieter layer to this kind of parenting, one that requires self-reflection, but depends on how we speak when we are frustrated, how we respond when we feel challenged, and how we model disagreement in our own relationships,” says Mwalimu Geoffrey.