When Politics Makes Us Forget Who We Are

Today, after a long time, I found myself checking the political situation in our country again. I had deliberately stayed away from the political noise for some time, but when I looked at what was happening, one thought kept coming back to me: how easily the game of politics can make us lose sight of the beautiful teachings of Islam. I am not a politician, and I do not claim to understand the strategies, negotiations, alliances or calculations that happen behind political doors. However, I do know a little about human behaviour, psychology and the way our minds respond to people, situations and emotions. Perhaps that is why what I see worries me more than the politics itself. Politics is not only about policies, elections, leadership or power. It is also about human psychology. It is about understanding what people fear, what they desire, what makes them angry, what makes them feel safe and what makes them feel that they belong.

The Maldives is a small country, yet politically we have become remarkably divided. We have political parties with different identities, symbols and colours, and somewhere along the way, political affiliation can become much more than a choice about governance. It can become part of our identity. We begin to say, consciously or unconsciously, “I am this colour,” rather than simply saying, “I support this particular policy or this particular leader on this particular issue.” Once political identity becomes part of our personal identity, criticism of the party can begin to feel like criticism of ourselves. This is when political disagreement can become personal, and when a difference in opinion can slowly turn into hostility between people who may otherwise share the same community, the same faith, the same country and even the same family.

This is where psychology becomes important. Human beings have always had a desire to influence, protect, compete and control their environment. We want certainty when things feel uncertain, and we want to feel that we have some control over what happens around us. We also have a strong desire to belong to groups that make us feel safe, valued and understood. These tendencies are not new. They existed long before modern political parties, social media or elections. We can even reflect on the story of Habil and Qabil. The story reminds us of how jealousy, comparison, resentment and the inability to manage what is happening within oneself can lead a human being toward destructive choices. The lesson is much bigger than the individuals in the story. It makes us reflect on what happens when our emotions become stronger than our principles.

Politics can become a powerful stage for exactly these human tendencies. When political competition becomes intense, people are not always persuaded through facts alone. They can be influenced through emotions. Fear can become more powerful than information, anger can travel faster than careful reasoning, and belonging can become more important than evidence. When we strongly identify with a political group, we can also become more willing to accept information that confirms what we already believe while rejecting information that challenges us. We may not even realise that this is happening because the mind naturally looks for information that supports the beliefs we already hold. This is one reason political rivalry can become so emotionally powerful.

This is also where psychological marketing enters politics. Marketing has long understood that people do not make decisions purely through logic. Our decisions are influenced by emotion, identity, memory, social influence and perceived benefit. Political communication can use many of these same principles. A political message does not necessarily have to convince us through a detailed argument. Sometimes it only needs to make us feel something strongly enough that we stop questioning it.

One of the most powerful techniques is repetition. When we hear the same message repeatedly, it can begin to feel familiar, and familiarity can influence how credible something feels to us. A slogan, accusation, promise, image or political narrative repeated often enough can become part of the mental environment in which people make decisions. Eventually, people may stop asking whether something is actually true because they have heard it so many times. The message becomes familiar, and familiarity can easily be mistaken for truth.

Fear is another powerful psychological tool. Fear captures attention and creates urgency. A political message suggesting that something terrible will happen if the “other side” wins can be extremely effective because it activates our instinct to protect ourselves, our families and what we value. Instead of giving people time to investigate and think critically, fear can push them toward immediate emotional reactions. It creates a threat and gives people an enemy. Once people believe that their safety, identity or future is under threat, they may become much easier to mobilise.

Another powerful mechanism is the creation of an in-group and an out-group. We begin to hear language that divides society into “us” and “them.” Our side becomes the side that loves the country, while their side becomes the side that is destroying it. Our leader becomes the protector, while their leader becomes the threat. Our mistakes become understandable, while their mistakes become evidence of their character. Slowly, something dangerous happens: we stop judging actions and start judging identities. If someone from our political side does something wrong, we may search for an explanation or excuse. If someone from the opposing side does exactly the same thing, we may immediately condemn them. The behaviour has not changed; only the colour attached to it has changed.

This is why political polarisation can be so damaging. It does not simply create disagreement about policies. It can change how we perceive our fellow human beings. Social media makes this even more complicated because platforms are built around attention and engagement. Content that provokes strong emotional reactions is more likely to generate comments, shares and discussion. A calm explanation of a complicated policy may receive very little attention, while an angry accusation can spread rapidly. As a result, political communication can become increasingly emotional, simplified and confrontational, and ordinary citizens can unknowingly become part of the process.

We share before verifying. We forward something because it supports our side. We laugh at the humiliation of someone we dislike. We celebrate when an opponent makes a mistake. We attack people we have never met because someone has told us that they represent everything that is wrong with the country. At that point, we need to stop and ask ourselves who is actually controlling whom. We often think politicians manipulate the public, but psychological influence only works because it connects with something already inside us. A political message becomes powerful when it connects with our fear, anger, insecurity, hope, loyalty, desire for belonging or desire to be recognised.

This is why emotional awareness is so important for citizens. A psychologically aware citizen does not immediately ask, “Which side is this?” Instead, they pause and ask what is actually being said, what evidence supports it and what emotion the message is trying to create. They also ask themselves whether they would believe the same message if it came from the political group they dislike. Most importantly, they should ask whether they are supporting something because it is right or simply because it supports an identity they have become emotionally attached to. These questions may seem simple, but they can create a significant difference between a citizen who thinks independently and one who is simply responding to psychological triggers.

Islam gives us an extraordinarily powerful framework for answering these questions. The Qur'an does not tell believers to abandon justice simply because they dislike someone. Quite the opposite. In Surah Al-Ma'idah 5:8, Allah instructs believers not to allow hatred of a people to lead them away from justice, reminding us that justice is closer to righteousness. Think about how powerful that principle is in today's political environment. It means I cannot say that because I dislike a politician, everything they do must be wrong. It also means I cannot say that because I support a politician, everything they do must be right. Justice requires something much harder: the ability to recognise truth even when it comes from someone we dislike and recognise wrongdoing even when it comes from someone we love. That is a much higher level of emotional maturity.

The Qur'an also reminds believers that they are brothers and calls upon them to make peace between one another. Surah Al-Hujurat addresses behaviours that can destroy relationships, including ridicule, insulting one another, offensive labels, negative assumptions, spying and backbiting. Sometimes I wonder whether we read these verses only as religious teachings while forgetting to apply them to our political lives. What happens when we mock someone simply because they support another party? What happens when we give people insulting labels because of their political beliefs? What happens when we spread an unverified story because it damages a politician we dislike? What happens when we celebrate the suffering or humiliation of another Maldivian simply because they belong to another political camp? Have we forgotten the teaching, or have we somehow decided that politics is an exception? There is no political exception to good character.

We can disagree without humiliating one another. We can question without insulting. We can hold leaders accountable without dehumanising their supporters. We can oppose policies without hating every person who supports them. Perhaps this is where we need to change our understanding of political loyalty. A politician is not our family member. A political party is not our religion. A political colour is not our identity. These are choices. We should be able to change our minds when evidence changes, acknowledge when our preferred leader is wrong and praise an opponent when they do something beneficial for the country. We should be able to say, “I disagree with you, but I respect your right to think differently.” That is not weakness. That is maturity.

The greatest danger is not that Maldivians will have different political opinions. Diversity of political opinion is normal. The danger is when political rivalry becomes so emotionally powerful that we begin to see our fellow citizens as enemies rather than people who share the same country, the same streets, the same future and, for Muslims, the same bond of faith. Our children are watching us. They are learning how adults disagree. They are learning whether disagreement requires hatred, whether it is acceptable to insult someone because of the colour they support and whether winning an argument matters more than preserving a relationship. We often speak about building a better Maldives, but a better Maldives cannot be created only through roads, buildings, economic development or political change. A better Maldives also requires better citizens: citizens who think critically, verify information, understand psychological manipulation, regulate their emotions, disagree without hatred and hold leaders accountable without losing their own character.

So today, after looking at the political situation again after a long time, I am not writing this as someone supporting one political side against another. I am writing this as a human being trying to understand human beings. I am asking myself, and perhaps asking all of us, whether we have allowed the political game to become more important than the values we claim to live by. Have we become so attached to colours that we have forgotten the person standing behind the colour? Have we become so determined to prove that our side is right that we no longer care whether we are being fair? Have we become so emotionally invested in political personalities that we have forgotten that our ultimate accountability is not to a politician, a party or a colour, but to Allah?

Politics will change. Leaders will change. Parties will rise and fall. Alliances will form and break. Colours that dominate today may become irrelevant tomorrow. But our character remains our responsibility. Perhaps we need to step back from the political battlefield occasionally and look at ourselves. Before sharing the next political post, perhaps we should pause. Before insulting someone, pause. Before believing an accusation, pause. Before defending someone simply because they belong to our side, pause. We should ask ourselves whether what we are sharing is true, whether it is just, whether it is beneficial and whether it reflects the way Islam teaches us to behave.

Because perhaps the greatest victory is not seeing our political colour win. Perhaps the greater victory is being able to participate in politics without allowing politics to take away our humanity, our brotherhood and our principles. We do not have to agree with one another to remain one nation, but we do have to remember that we are one nation before we are different political colours. And if we forget that, perhaps the question we need to ask is not who is winning the political game, but what are we losing while playing it?