Rational choice in post-Christmas elections

Wilberne Persaud, Financial Gleaner Columnist

Let me wish for you my readers, a peaceful, comfortable and enjoyable Christmas day. For almost immediately after, for those 18 years and over, a big decision looms.

I am sharing with you today, not an attempt to deliver a persuasive argument either way, JLP or PNP. Rather, I figured I would discuss stuff, preferably randomly, that really bother me about our electioneering and the processes we embrace.

Campaign financing

Shakespeare's Henry IV in 31 lines of exquisite soliloquy laments the fact of his insomnia. Kingly burdens, war, complex matters of state, all render him incapable of sleep:

O sleep, O gentle sleep,

Nature's soft nurse, how have I frightened thee,

That thou no more will weigh my eyelids down,

And steep my senses in forgetfulness?

Sure, we can wholeheartedly agree, sleep is nature's soft nurse and sunlight is nature's perfect, most powerful bleach and disinfectant. Our prime minister admits: were campaign financing subject to mandatory reporting in the current political environment, funds would dry up. We need no more than this frank admission to insist that such an important pillar of our striving for freedom, justice, equality and democracy be open to sunrays.

In crime drama stories and the real world too, detectives follow the money. Watergate's 'Deep Throat' insisted that Woodward and Bernstein follow the money if they were to unearth wrongdoing in the Nixon White House. They did. Nixon ultimately resigned.

Chicken Hawk to Harpy Eagle

Much as I dislike sullying by analogy, one of the finest winged predators of the Guyana interior — the world actually — the comparison works. The donor contributing to campaign financing does not want his/her name adorning a stadium. As PM Holness agrees, such an idea causes them to run for cover. Why? Because the secret financier wants and expects something back — the quid pro quo.

Here's the hawk/eagle analogy: the up and coming donor, businessman, enforcer, baby don, whomever, may begin as a minor predator but our Jamaican politics soon transforms him into the eagle with the widest wingspan of all birds of prey gone berserk. Case in point: our recently extradited Don. Readers may contemplate others from whatever sphere of interest, falling into a similar category.

Once secret millions of dollars fund T-shirts, bussing, curry goat, white rum and entertainment, then no-bid contracts, duty waivers, positions on boards of directors, situations of influence in government apparatus and statutory bodies, etc. become dictated not by criteria emphasizing capacity, judgment, competence and the like. Rather, decisions follow dictates of the money source. These sources become unaccountable deciders. They may become more powerful than the politicians who acted as midwife to their transformation. The process entrenches the 'winner-take-all' syndrome of our politics. The best candidate, process, equipment etc is almost guaranteed, never to be appropriately matched to the society's needs of fulfilment. This is unbridled corruption. In our environment, almost invariably, negative economic consequences follow. Elections have consequences we know, but this should relate to sharing of philosophy, ideas about how to achieve the good life for the greatest number, not money shared in anticipation of cost overruns and diverse forms of 'bandooloo' once the elections are over.

Logically, another set of harmful consequences follow. Campaign contributions are likely to come from moneyed groups in the society. Jamaica boasts not only superb reggae and athletes. It also possesses one of the worst cases of income inequality in the world.

This fact has been demonstrated to be so from the late 1960s.

While I'm not privy to recent studies on the matter, if anything has changed, my guess is that it has got worse. This issue does not get the level of focused attention it deserves.

Even among the group of countries we call 'developed', those with greater income inequality, exhibit the highest rates of a raft of social problems.

In other words, consider homicides, drug and alcohol abuse, life expectancy to name but a few, the countries with greater inequality exhibit a higher incidence of these problems. On this test, countries like Sweden, Denmark and Japan score better than USA, Portugal and Singapore.

Campaign financing in darkened shadows is likely to enhance income inequality and therefore make worse, the problems we insist we want to solve. We have no space to explore these issues here, but do the mental laps for yourself, trust me it's not a marathon.

Truth in campaign advertising

In the United States, Proctor and Gamble dare not malign its competitor's product with untrue or cleverly manipulated facts and sequences. They don't even try. They don't because the litigation that would flow could bankrupt a company.

Yet, in US political campaigning, false impressions created by adding or removing context and even outright lies are allowed. So the Republican spin machine portrays Barack Obama saying that Americans are lazy. The quote is taken out of context, but there's nothing he can do but hope a majority of the population gets exposed to the whole interview.

We should never borrow this kind of politics from big brother to the north.

Youth, age and wisdom

I can't recall either the Shakespearean or Bob Marley ('stiff-necked fools'?) quote, but know they exist. I know you're itching to, but please, don't compare me to Senator Dwight Nelson. He is past master at his craft and well beyond the tape. There's no catching him.

Here's my feeble attempt at a quotable line: Wisdom comes only with age, alas, there are too many foolish old people.

Though he may want you to believe he is, Bruce Golding is not among the latter. The former prime minister's argument that he is stepping aside for youth is a non-starter. Anyone but the last diehearted JLP supporter knows this is spin. This is Ramadin without long sleeves; a move comparable, at the height of his powers, to a mid-game Bobby Fischer queen sacrifice. The only difference is that Fischer refused handlers and advisers.

Again, happy holidays and do keep safe.

wilbe65@yahoo.com