Electoral choices?

My analysis of the link between crime and politics on Sunday, September 11 ('Both the PNP and JLP needed Dudus') drew much comment. Two were particularly noteworthy.

An online reader ('Gene') wrote:

"The arguments put forward in this article seem to suggest that neither the PNP nor the JLP is fit to govern because some of their deeds are dirty ... . It begs the question, is there an untainted set of people who can provide good governance ... ?"

No, Gene. None of us are "untainted". Religious leaders will preach that from the moment of the 'First Commandment' (Eve commanded Adam "eat the fruit") we've been 'broken people'. I'm not looking for "untainted" leaders. I want a system of government that doesn't actively encourage corruption and will punish anyone who engage in corruption. Neither is possible when Parliament and executive are one.

A private correspondent expressed similar sentiments.

"I realise that the vast majority who'll elect the next government will do so on the basis of nonsense and don't read Gleaner opinion pages, but I suggest you do (an) article(s) analysing the basis on which and the things that the Jamaican people should take into account to make the decision, who to vote for, if anyone and why?

"Whether you and I vote, there'll be a government, so ... it's always a choice between two evils ... . One may offer slightly better prospects than the other?"

My reply (edited for family newspapers) was:

"I can't vote for someone I believe to be corrupt without any check and balance in place to prevent him/her from acting on their urges. I won't. And I won't tell anybody else to do so or how to do so.

"If Mahatma Gandhi had taken your position, India would still be a colony. If Martin Luther King had taken your position, Georgia would still be segregated. If Mandela had taken your position, South Africa would still be governed by apartheid."

Don't get me wrong. I'm none of these men. But I'm a stubborn man who thinks he knows what's right for Jamaica and who won't stop advocating for the change to happen until it does. And I won't take one single step to encourage the status quo to remain.

Separation of powers

Such a step would include voting for any of these until there's a system in place of true separation of powers so they can't do as they like. It'd also include telling anybody else to vote for any of them."

This 'choice' argument reminds me of one of Haemorrhoid's shaggy-dog tales told to liven up a boring domino game. One slow Saturday afternoon, after The Dunce had arbitrarily chanted, "If a macca mek it jook yu" once too often, Haemorrhoid told the story of 'When Harry Met Sally'.

Harry, 95, lived in a seniors' home. After dinner, he habitually sat and meditated in a secluded garden behind the facility. One evening, Sally, 87, wandered into the garden. They chatted for hours.

Suddenly, Harry asked Sally, "Do you know what I miss most?"

"What?" she enquired.

"SEX!" he replied.

Sally exclaimed, "Why, you old liar, you couldn't get it up if I held a gun to your head!"

"True," admitted Harry, "but it would be nice if a woman would just hold it for a while."

"Well, I can do that" said Sally. She unzipped his trousers, removed what she found therein and held it tenderly. Afterward, they agreed to meet each night. They would sit and talk. Sally would hold Harry's 'hand'.

One night, Harry didn't show up. Worried, Sally searched for him. Eventually, she found him sitting by the pool with another female resident, Mabel, who was doing Sally's work. Furious, Sally yelled, "You two-timing creep! What does Mabel have that I don't have?" Harry smiled contentedly and replied, "Parkinson's."

"Mind Jah lick you with diseases

the most dangerous diseases.

I'm talkin bout the elephantitis (sic).

The other one is the polo (sic) myelitis,

arthritis and the one diabetes."

We all make choices. Sometimes, we choose what feels good. In elections, we must make national choices. What's best for Jamaica? PNP? JLP? But, if both prospective partners refuse to offer protection before electoral intercourse, who knows what dreaded economic or social disease might follow? Remember, abstinence is a viable choice. We can abstain unless and until protection from possible adverse sequelae is guaranteed.

If we give what we have without protection, we get what we deserve. Parkinson's might be pleasant by comparison. Ask Michigan and Smiley.

Peace and love.

Gordon Robinson is an attorney-at-law. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.