Downwards into terrain of the beast?

THE EDITOR: On the anniversary of VS Naipaul’s death it seems appropriate to make reference to one of his comic characters, who in commenting on the upcoming elections in Elvira in Suffrage of Elvira would have pontificated that a candidate must have “cha’cter” and “sense ’a values.”

Even as the commentator is at the butt of Naipaul’s political satire in the novel, rubbing his pot belly as he swung in his hammock, in supreme contradiction to his lofty pronouncement in the politics, he may have been in fact articulating Naipaul’s truth that an aspiring political candidate should have “character” and “a sense of value.”

Both virtues seem to complement each other, with “character” meaning to be simply honest and trustworthy, and “sense of values” to have a sense of duty and service to those who elected you.

Such a yardstick may have been Naipaul’s measure in satirising the antics of the political aspirants in the text, such as one character running for rural Elvira even as he lives in the city. Which leads one to wonder at how many of our current lot would have passed the test in the text, as we consider the many facing the courts on allegations of corruption and the weight of suspicion surrounding the rest, from cook to captain.

One gets a sense that the “cha’cter” and “sense ’a values” of which the comic character spoke in that novel would hold no place here in our politics, for the idea of service to the people is the false exterior to service of the self, with the tribe deliberately but innocuously participating in their own subordination by looking for a handout for their unquestioning loyalty, and the leadership exploiting that “greed” to win and sustain their own power.

Which is why the cry of neglect resonates among those not tribally supportive of the Government, like in Carli Bay and Cedros, or with the Debe/Penal Corporation being starved of funds or, for the same reason, the water supply being cut off at the Caroni Visitor Centre, inter alia, whereas in “government” territory, you can get a pool, even under a cliff, or a play park or a basketball court for the youth. The latter motive is noble, but should it not be perceived as being for all the youth in the country?

But maybe the yardstick for the politician has changed and instead of the idea of service to the people there is a new paradigm of how much you can get out of the politics, both for the supporters and leaders, hence the “you scratch my back and I yours” syndrome.

Maybe this is the new way, for not only here but even in the most sophisticated democracy, allegedly, the US, not a single Democrat would support any of Trump’s policies, if even it were to the good, as some aspects of immigration, so much is their hate for the man. There is no moral, ethical, professional attempt at balance for the good of the country, only putting the President down at all cost.

So the “self” is the key in this new paradigm shift and the honesty and trustworthiness and sense of duty which Naipaul gave voice to in one of his satiric creations are all anachronisms.

But is there not one thing that is missing in this new paradigm shift in the politics: a sense of introspection, touching on your conscience, on your sense of ethics, of morality, of professionalism, of duty and service, that makes you feel badly about yourself, indeed, to feel a sense of shame? And not only in the politics, but because of it in its indifference to a sense of rightness, that our behaviour as a people in all forms is bereft of the character and sense of values which Naipaul parodied in his novel.

Is it any wonder that our leaders cannot rise above their tribalism creating the feeding frenzy which overwhelms us, that we enjoy our illicit gains without conscience or that we drive and kill without mercy? Are we evolving downwards into the terrain of the beast?

I leave that to your better judgment.

DR ERROL N BENJAMIN

via e-mail