Often, I try to listen to the existing government as they lay out their policy plans and also take in the oppositions prospective on development, but sometimes wonder who has this country’s interest at heart.
I reflect on past governance and also question some of the policies that the former government wants to take credit for.
I watch the various ministers both past and present and compare their work ethics.
I watch the various constituencies and communities and can clearly decide for myself who was or is progressive.
I listen to the bashing and the frequent criticism as it relates to the past government’s policies and also listen to the opposition as they take aim at present-day ministers. Sadly, both have their tales and none is squeaky clean, but the ‘halay-kasay’ (pulling and pushing) seems to be non-ending. The mud-slinging goes on-and-on and frequently, it seems to me, that only one set feel they have the right to govern.
One of the biggest problems is when monies are obtained regardless of the source and who stands to benefit most. When projects and programmes are established, who are the ones who benefit most? And why it is never accepted that some decisions are in the interest of all regardless of party affiliation?
I also wonder why so many projects are discontinued on the basis that it was conceptualized by the former and should be demerited.
I also wonder why one never hears of an apology if there are projects that are deemed to be questionable, or need clarification on transparency and accountability, especially if there are allegations of mis-management or poor management.
Why can’t both parties think together about progress and not think that one should downplay the other’s efforts. Why can’t the legacy of both parties be accepted and acknowledged as progressive?
I wonder if opposition means condemnation at all cost, or if God has blessed only one set of political members, while the other is not fit to govern.
This brings me to international issues.
Do we or must we always side with the powers that be on the basis that they are always right, and ought not to be criticized or condemned if they perform actions that suppress some or infringe on the rights of others?
Should the aged die because of lack of support, or should the ghetto youths be condemned for life because of lack of skill or education?
Should progress be seen as a ‘she’ thing and men destined to see for themselves?
Should laws be put in place but only one group pays the penalty for their actions and transgression?
I am hoping that the time will come when the people should not be caught in the middle and forced to take sides or favour one group against another, but consider that government should be embraced by all regardless of who is in charge.
In other words, there should be less stone-throwing and more praise and let the better get the privileges to govern, if the people decide who should lead for at least five years.
I also think that the days of only one party should govern indefinitely should not be a consideration and change can or should be for advancement at all times.
I also think that when one falters or does not deliver, they should be held accountable — and if necessary, be barred from continuing as a representative. No job should be permanent and no politician should be installed for beyond a set period of time.
And finally, one should give Jack his Jacket, especially when it is clear to see their personal or governmental thrust when positive – in other words, like the old saying goes: ‘Hayi shien may di dan-li blanc. (Hate a dog but admit its teeth are white).
Mr. Ishmael, the reflection in the mirror you hold up in the face of humanity reflects all that is contained in utopia.
Since hell was pushed down to earth, the gift of equilibrium in the human psyche became so diluted that those further from its source were deprived of common sense.
What we see; everywhere; from generation-to-generation is this imbalance in the ways of man.
The vile man produces villainy and the liberal soul ameliorates the afflictions left from the trampling of the villain.
None has been able to discover the algorithms, neither produced both sides of the equations whose coefficient results in absolute utopia in human relationships.
The thing is as it is – inherently flawed.
Except for intervention by the CREATOR who holds; and is able to break down and reconfigure new sentiments that return equilibrium to the hearts of man, one can expect to hear the continuous echoes of villainy and liberality that beset human beings living on earth.
Maybe, Mr. Ishmael, some caveman might have stood at the entrance of the rock and, like you, wonder at similar frailties of the human condition on earth.