By Arch Dr. D.K. Gitau| The Diaspora Times Evening News

“Speaking Kikuyu Isn’t Tribal—But When Gen Z Naivety Turns Revolutionaries into Parrots, It Plays Right Into the Hands of Those Dividing Mt. Kenya”

In a packed Baltimore town hall, what was intended as a youthful reckoning with Kenya’s political establishment turned into an unfortunate display of intellectual inconsistency and political amnesia. Valentine Wanjiru Githae, a representative of the youth-led 625 Movement, boldly chastised former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua for allegedly promoting tribal politics. Yet in doing so, she unwittingly parroted the very narrative crafted by President William Ruto’s handlers—one designed not to build national cohesion but to fracture the Mt. Kenya political bloc ahead of 2027.

Let us be clear: Gen Zs must speak truth to power. But truth is not simply what feels righteous in the moment—it requires memory, logic, and a firm grasp of political context. On those fronts, Wanjiru’s critique fell embarrassingly short.

She accused Gachagua of fanning tribalism by using the Kikuyu language to open the Maryland meeting, and for referencing the Kikuyu community’s economic industriousness. But where was this indignation when Gachagua was the chief mobilizer of the Mt. Kenya vote in 2022, delivering an overwhelming bloc to William Ruto? At the time, no one—including Wanjiru—saw tribalism in his methods. His Kikuyu identity, cultural fluency, and regional networks were not only tolerated; they were instrumental. Ruto and his handlers exploited that loyalty, celebrated it, and reaped its electoral dividends.

Now, in 2025, the very man who helped carry Kenya Kwanza to power is being dismissed as a tribalist by the same system he helped establish. The sudden moral awakening from critics like Wanjiru is not born of national interest—it is a doubtful political convenience.

Moreover, her interpretation of Gachagua’s language choice at the Baltimore event was disingenuous. Yes, he opened with a brief greeting in Kikuyu, but he quickly switched to English and spoke in it to the end. This was a culturally sensitive gesture—not an act of tribal exclusion. The audience was predominantly Kikuyu. Just as one would expect a Luo leader to open with “Amosi” in Kisumu, or a Swahili greeting in Mombasa, Gachagua’s linguistic choice was situational, not sectarian. Language, in this context, was used to affirm identity—not to erase others.

On the issue of Gachagua’s remarks in Boston, where he acknowledged the Kikuyu as major drivers of the Kenyan economy, Wanjiru again misfires. That statement was not an invention; it was a factual observation. The Mt. Kenya region is a hub of entrepreneurial activity—dominated by small traders, farmers, real estate investors, and exporters. This economic muscle has been widely acknowledged by economists and political analysts alike. To recognize this is not to deny the contribution of other communities. Rather, it is to present a data-driven truth. Leadership requires the ability to affirm specific realities while embracing broader national unity. Dismissing facts as tribal arrogance is both intellectually lazy and politically dangerous.

What’s more concerning is how easily Wanjiru echoed the Kenya Kwanza propaganda script without scrutiny. The labeling of Mt. Kenya assertiveness as “tribal” has become a calculated tool of suppression. Any leader from the region who questions the government’s direction is swiftly branded as an ethnic chauvinist. This tactic, perfected by Ruto’s media surrogates and strategists, seeks to isolate Gachagua and neutralize his growing influence. Wanjiru’s words, whether knowingly or not, served that strategy.

The irony is bitter. While Ruto routinely uses language, religion, and class to consolidate his base and alienate dissenters, it is Gachagua—who defended and served Ruto without compromise—who is now portrayed as the face of division. The hypocrisy is staggering.

Gen Z voices like Wanjiru must be nurtured, not silenced. But they must also be challenged. Activism without historical memory becomes noise. Critique without context becomes propaganda. Leadership begins where emotion ends and strategic clarity begins.

Wanjiru’s intervention was bold, but boldness is not enough. Kenya does not need another generation repeating the mistakes of the past—amplifying government scripts in the name of revolution. If she truly wants to hold leaders accountable, she must first understand who is scripting the lines she recites and who benefits when Mt. Kenya is divided.

You don’t unite a country by dividing its regions. And you don’t build a future by forgetting the past.

DISCLAIMER
This opinion piece is published under the constitutional right to freedom of expression, thought, and the press. The views expressed herein are those of the author, Arch. Dr. D.K. Gitau, and do not necessarily represent the views of all members of The Diaspora Times editorial board or affiliated entities. The intent is to provoke constructive dialogue, political accountability, and historical clarity among Kenyan citizens worldwide. Truth-telling is not tribalism. Critique is not hate. Silence, however, is complicity.

The Diaspora Times — Where Freedom Still Speaks.