Nigerian pastor Femi Lazarus has sparked discussion with his comments on democracy, political awareness and the way repeated exposure to certain ideas can influence public perception.
Speaking about the state of democracy in Nigeria, Lazarus suggested that people’s understanding of whether government is performing well is often shaped by what they know, experience and are repeatedly exposed to.
According to the cleric, citizens may judge government differently depending on their individual circumstances and the information available to them.
“What we are practicing now in Nigeria is called democracy. If you feel the government is not doing bad, you’re the one who feels so, and you’re feeling so because of what you know,” Lazarus said.
He then shifted his argument toward the power of repetition and gradual conditioning.
Using an example of how people’s attitudes can change when they are repeatedly exposed to something they initially dislike, the pastor argued that constant presentation of a particular idea or condition can eventually make it appear normal.
He explained that people may initially resist something, but continued exposure can lead to acceptance. Over time, he suggested, that acceptance could develop into attachment and even active defence of the same system.
The pastor illustrated his point with a reference to slavery, arguing that enslaved people could eventually become emotionally attached to or protective of those who held them in bondage.
“It will get to a point they will defend it and not want to be free,” he added.
The remarks have generated debate because of the comparison between political systems and the historical experience of slavery.
While Lazarus appeared to be using slavery as an analogy for psychological conditioning and the acceptance of oppressive circumstances, slavery itself involved systems of forced labour, deprivation of freedom and coercion. His comparison should therefore be understood within the broader argument he was making about perception and repeated exposure.
His comments also touch on a wider question about how citizens form political opinions.
People’s views of government can be influenced by personal experiences, economic circumstances, access to information, political messaging and the performance of public institutions. As a result, two citizens living under the same government may have dramatically different assessments of its effectiveness.
The pastor’s remarks have consequently prompted renewed conversations about political consciousness and whether citizens sometimes become accustomed to conditions they initially considered unacceptable.
For some, his analogy highlights the importance of questioning systems and remaining conscious of how repeated messaging can influence public attitudes. Others may find the slavery comparison too extreme or historically difficult to equate with modern democratic politics.
Regardless of interpretation, Lazarus’ comments have opened another debate about democracy in Nigeria and the factors that shape how citizens understand, accept or challenge the systems under which they live.
