My Take: Can President Ruto Really Move Kenya Toward First-World Status?

Every few months, Kenya finds itself in a national debate that reveals more about us than about the politicians we’re discussing.

This week, it’s been all about Ruto’s statements on moving Kenya toward first-world status.

I don’t really think it’s a straight up ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ question. It’s more like holding up a mirror and asking:

Where are we as a country – and where do we think we’re capable of going?

In my observations, six things have stood out:

The Glass Half-Full Crowd

Nearly half of the people genuinely believe the President has the energy, ambition, and long-term mindset needed for serious transformation.

I get where they’re coming from.

We’ve seen movement in infrastructure, agriculture, housing, digital services, and healthcare.

Some people look at this and see the foundation of a future Kenya – not a finished product, but groundwork.

Even those who support him aren’t naïve; many admit that first-world status is a long game, probably bigger than one presidency.

The Skeptic Quarter

A section of Kenyans have a different energy:

Cautious, frustrated and sharply realistic.

They raise concerns that aren’t emotional; they’re structural. For instance:

Incessant corruption still eating away at progress, the cost of living pushing people to survival mode, rampant job scarcity and glaring gaps in security.

These fuel doubts about leaping from third-world to first-world without passing through the normal development curve.

Honestly, these concerns are valid.

Kenya can have ambition, but ambition doesn’t erase the basics. And a vision that ignores the basics becomes theory, not progress.

The Comical

There’s the 10% who’ve responded as the typical Kenyans: Humour.

From “start with Sugoi” to Hollywood jokes, satire became the outlet for deeper economic frustrations.

People laugh, yes – but behind the memes is a simple message: The dream feels far from the ground we’re standing on.

Humour has always been Kenya’s polite way of saying, “We hear you, but we’re not convinced.”

The “Yes, But…” Group

These are the conditional believers who state that the goal is achievable – if the right structures fall into place.

They speak the language of conditions:

• Fight corruption seriously.
• Long-term planning beyond politics.
• Consistency in implementation.
• Fewer interruptions caused by political chaos.

Some deem that the dream needs 30 years and maybe a constitutional amendment. Basically, it’s possible – but, not overnight.

The Philosophers

A small but interesting group has shifted the debate entirely. To them, first-world status isn’t about expressways or shiny towers.

It’s about:

• Discipline.
• Public ethics.
• Accountability.
• Citizens doing the right thing even when no one is watching.

They aren’t entirely wrong, because a country is its people before its infrastructure.

The Religious Faithful

A small religious group has carried the debate to a spiritual dimension.

They’ve compared Ruto to Moses – someone who may start a historic journey even if he doesn’t live to finish it.

It’s a perspective rooted in belief, not economics.

Whether one agrees or not, it reflects how deeply faith shapes political interpretation in Kenya.

In a Nutshell ….

I don’t think this debate is about Ruto, but more about Kenya’s relationship with ambition.

We are a country that desperately wants progress – but also deeply aware of our contradictions.

We stretch toward big dreams, but we’re still tackling basic issues.

We want first-world outcomes, but we still struggle with systems that behave like they belong to the 1980s.

We want transformation, but we’re still negotiating with corruption, politics, and survival.

So the question “Can Ruto make Kenya first-world?” is really a proxy for a bigger question:

Do we believe Kenya can transform within our lifetime?