T. Coreentje-Phipps-Benjamin
DIVISIVENESS in our society is alive and well. One does not have to explore the crevices of the four corners of the Federation of St. Kitts and Nevis to come to this conclusion. Sadly, at the very helm of the ship that should steer our nation out of the murky waters that now flood our streets, are our leaders, elected and non-elected alike, who sometimes place party loyalty and personal agendas above the good of the people they serve. Instead of righting the ship, partisanship has stalled progress and has disenfranchised our people, especially our youth.
Broken Society?
We live in a society that speaks to unity and advancement, yet those at the fore of decision-making have seemingly warped views, often subtly, sometimes glaringly, that support the divisive behaviours that tear down the fabric of our fragile society. “But, how can our Federation be regarded as fragile?” one may ask. Admittedly, it seems counterintuitive when you consider our forefathers who fought for generations to attain freedoms that were off-limits. Their individual and collective efforts, indelibly etched in our history books, were the catalyst for our ancestors to break away from the burden of slavery, paving the road to the independence of a nation that no longer answers to Mother England. Indeed, for decades the toil and sweat of Kittitians and Nevisians oiled the engine that allowed King Sugar to put food on the tables of many families.
Today, our Federation competes with its neighboring countries for a stake in the highly competitive tourist industry. Despite our rich history as a nation of the politically astute who have for years devised methods to maneuver the direction of our Federation, who pioneered a path to financial prosperity by skillfully lobbying assistance from governments and agencies abroad, and who attracted scores of reputable investors to our shores, we are now faced with leaders charged with the responsibility of guiding the people of our nation from the perils of collapse, but many are seemingly unwilling to do so.
Service of the People rejects notion of Service of Self
Interest in leadership is an evolution of sorts. Many parents reminisce from photos of their budding politicians who may have led their school choir, captained a local football team, or who was the lead speaker on the school’s debating team. For parents, these fond memories evoked hope and promise that a child with innate skills to lead, move, and inspire people would blossom to one day command the reins of leadership in many aspects of life, including politics.
It is difficult to accept or believe that politicians aspire to serve the highest office in the land of their birth armed with a negative agenda. Men and women who truly respect the institution of public service would not yearn to ruin the Federation’s public purse, to practice nepotism, to disenfranchise non-supporters for their opposing ideologies, to acquire vast property and hefty pensions, to irresponsibly sell the nations’ lands to foreigners that might not have the Federation’s best interest at heart, to disregard the fundamental principles of stewardship, to be lax on the issues of crime and lawlessness or to be generally regarded as a text book example of “what not to be as a politician”. Simply put, politicians should not tout ill will or malicious intent as a premise for their public service aspirations.
Instead, in pursuit of a political career, throngs of politicians sing the chorus of unity and progress. They proclaim that their focus is to make the lives of others better, to provide better education, better jobs, reliable healthcare, more opportunities for small businesses to thrive, a safer environment, as well as respectable and transparent leadership, among other things. Politicians will declare without reservation that their love of people and serving others is “what drives them”. Their actions say otherwise.
Why then in many small nations like ours do politicians seemingly drive a wedge between their people? Why does the cloud of divisiveness loom ever so heavily over our communities even after an election for instance? In fact, why do some people refuse to engage their neighbors because of party affiliation long after elections have come and gone, so much so that our nation sits on the brink of yet another election with wounds of discontent from the previous one? As a people struggling to understand the confusion of many of our youths, do we realise that our leaders bear a great degree of responsibility for the divisiveness that is perpetuated between us? Do we realise that people can become so entwined in the hate spewed from political platforms that in some instances they would annihilate each other on the strength of this hate?
If we truly want to respect each other and live in safer communities, we must practice introspection. We must accept that no two people are alike and so no matter where our political allegiances lie, we are Kittitians and Nevisians first. We must become tolerant of the things we support that others do not. We must practice our politics with the utmost respect for those who may not share our views. We must demand that politicians, no matter who they are, aspire for respectable and responsible rhetoric in their pursuit of power. They are the icons of leadership from whom harmony must resonate, despite their differing views and issues. Much in the way that the American Patriot, Patrick Henry advocated, “I detest what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
Divide and conquer politics may reap enticing returns in the short run, but as the days turn into weeks, weeks into months, and months into years, the damning effects of divisiveness make for a stifled nation. Our leaders ought not practice “as we like it” politics without considering the impact this philosophy will have on the constituents they serve, and the Federation as a whole. The service of self pales significantly to the service of country.
Hope for our Future
Country Above Self! Others First! How can this philosophy be fostered in a world that says, “Get more than John Doe; a little is not enough; who cares about Jane Doe?” How can we rely on politicians who we believe enter the political arena as individuals seeking to address the plight of our people, as upholders and protectors of the law, and not merely idle promise makers? It is our leaders who swear on the Bible - the very book that we hold in high esteem - to serve us, the people, to ensure that our nation prospers.
Who will take up the mantle to slay divisiveness and put it to rest? Hope for our future should be more than an allegory, but a sovereign duty for all citizens to stand on the platform of human existence and discourage bantering and petty personal politics because of differences in opinions. All human beings are fallible but, despite the overwhelming challenges that accompany leadership, we still look to our leaders as the bearers of hope for our nation. We look to our leaders as the forerunners of democracy, who laud this system as a true haven for independent and forward thinkers. It is our leaders who we entrust with the responsibility of healing our lands. The responsibility of leadership is no stroll in the park. In fact, it was the great Marcus Garvey who declared, “Leadership is pain, blood and death.” Indeed, leadership is no easy feat, yet it hinges on the basic principle of service to others; not service of self.
Esteemed men and women who lead by example are the hope for our young people; the hope for our nation. As our leaders sow the seeds of accord and condemn those things that make us seething adversaries, we anticipate that together we can mold a future of great expectations for generations to come. We challenge our leaders to steer our Federation on the path of success, with a view to build up the walls of our nation…not tear them down.
