By Yves R. Ephraim
I consider myself apolitical, in the sense that I have no allegiance to any of the existing political parties in Antigua and Barbuda.
I generally try very much to ignore the immature behaviour but in this instance I am forced to agree with a “speaker” who described the behaviour of some politicians as “political chicanery”.
Whereas I think that that “speaker’s” observation was correct, he however fell short by incorrectly and prejudicially ascribing that behaviour to the wrong politician in his particular reference.
In this season, we are being reminded of the setbacks to our national development as a result of the our history of slavery.
You would think that in this post emancipation era, that our black politicians would be passionately committed to the advancement of the descendants of the slaves of this country.
We have the OECD squeezing us from competing in the offshore banking industry and introducing NON-tariff barriers to keep our people from competing fairly with them.
They are still making it difficult for our people to have bank accounts and unfortunately our politicians are content to comply with their wishes so long as they do not lose their lives of comfort.
Regrettably what we have instead is a very pampered cadre of politicians who are not willing to teach the people how to fish but instead prefer to give the people a fish so that we, the descendants, would continuously return for handouts and largesse just like our forefathers’ did under Massa.
Creating such dependency makes these new “Massa” indispensable.
We, the descendants of slaves, are not aware that our dependency is what keeps some unproductive politicians in position of power, luxury and nepotism.
It is this power and the perks that these ruling politicians use for self-enrichment.
Most of these politicians if left to themselves could not achieve the good life they enjoy if they were not so close to power.
As I look around this country, there is evidence after evidence of the impoverishment of various, once-well-to-do communities, like Villa, Gambles, etc.
In contrast, we see the blindingly opulent life-style of the ruling politicians while many suffer.
As I look at the sheer child’s play going on in the St. Mary’s South constituency, we witnessed three resigning politicians, each for very interesting reasons:
1) One politician resigned so that no pecuniary benefit will be lost under the guise of family priority.
This politician wants to make sure that they continue to feed from the state’s troughs rather than sacrificially serve the people.
It is clear that is is not about the people but rather what the people can do for that politician.
This politician is afraid of what the people’s rejection would mean for their personal lifestyle.
2) A second politician resigned so that the WILL of the people would prevail, an honorable gesture in my opinion.
That politician knowingly put his own future at risk but was willing to subject himself to the people’s will.
3) A third politician resigned from his party and proved himself untrustworthy.
As someone who hold leadership roles, I would say that I would never trust a traitor and defector.
Today this defector and traitor would pretend that he is on my side then, when the price is right, he will stab me in the back.
A traitor will always be a traitor.
A leopard cannot change its spots. Remember Brutus and Julius Caesar?
It is amazing how you can really tell the character of a politician even in the way he resigns, ie whether it is genuine or it is “political chicanery”.