Tweet
A political sense of entitlement
published: Friday | November 10, 2006
Colin Steer, Associate Editor - Opinion
About four years ago, the American C-SPAN cable network broadcast a speech by former U.S. president Bill Clinton in which he addressed supporters of the Democratic Party at a fund-raising dinner. In analysing the attitude that accompanied the 1994 Newt Gingrich-led "revolution" that led to Republican control of both Houses of the U.S. Congress, Clinton said they had brought with them a sense of entitlement - a sense that they were the "rightful rulers" of America and final arbiters of public policy.
This sense of entitlement of which Clinton spoke has not been restricted to U.S. domestic policy, but has clearly been most evident in the foreign policy of George W. Bush - namely that the world and its peoples exist primarily to serve U.S. interests, narrowly defined. Other peoples' institutions and what they have to say don't really matter. In effect, as far as America is concerned, they are the world.
Jamaican politics
This sense of entitlement is not far removed from Jamaican politics. There is a thin line between a sense of entitlement and arrogance. Political landslides and overwhelming personal popularity tend to carry in their wake the seeds of self-destruction. Leaders who get elected to office on a tidal wave of popularity tend to think that public sentiment will remain in their favour for an extended period, if not forever, and often govern with an attitude that they can do no wrong or that people inevitably will endorse what they do. It is this kind of perspective which led Beverly Manley, then head of the PNP's women's movement, in urging then Prime Minister Michael Manley at an NEC meeting in the late 1970s, to move the party in a particular direction to say: "Comrade leader, we can get these people to do anything."
It is this sense of entitlement which led the Seaga administration after its overwhelming landslide victory in 1980 to govern with a heavy dose of arrogance. And it is this sense of entitlement which is dogging the incumbent People's National Party government.
At times when Audley Shaw or some other JLP officers bring to public attention some aspect of government mismanagement, supporters of the Government will say: "Of course we need a vibrant Opposition." Usually, what they mean is, "We don't mind the Opposition exposing what is being done wrong, just as long as they remain in Opposition and we in Government."
The fact is, no one party in Jamaica has a monopoly on good management, policies for social advancement, intellect or integrity. Persons from both major parties have served Jamaica well and both parties have also done things to lead us along a path of ruin. Conventional wisdom, which is not always wise, was that there would be no difference between a JLP-led KSAC and a PNP-led municipality. Certainly in his initial forays, Desmond McKenzie's activism made nonsense of that notion.
Counterbalance
In the U.S. case, during the times when there is a counterbalance in the American government - a Republican majority in the Senate or presidency and a Democratic majority in the House of Representatives or presidency - there is a more effective system of checks and balances. While there is the danger of gridlock, the greater good is that runaway arrogance is kept in check.
In our local politics, the fears that some of the persons waiting in the wings in the Opposition to take state power are barely-disguised crooks may not be invalid. We would do well to consider, however, whether Jamaica's democracy and system of governance are best served by reinforcing a sense of entitlement in the minds of the leaders of the governing party which has been in office for more than 17 years. The arrogance among some members of the government is now in "a state of chronic," as Ezroy Millwood once said of the public transportation system.
Political landslides and overwhelming personal popularity tend to carry in their wake
published: Friday | November 10, 2006
Colin Steer, Associate Editor - Opinion
About four years ago, the American C-SPAN cable network broadcast a speech by former U.S. president Bill Clinton in which he addressed supporters of the Democratic Party at a fund-raising dinner. In analysing the attitude that accompanied the 1994 Newt Gingrich-led "revolution" that led to Republican control of both Houses of the U.S. Congress, Clinton said they had brought with them a sense of entitlement - a sense that they were the "rightful rulers" of America and final arbiters of public policy.
This sense of entitlement of which Clinton spoke has not been restricted to U.S. domestic policy, but has clearly been most evident in the foreign policy of George W. Bush - namely that the world and its peoples exist primarily to serve U.S. interests, narrowly defined. Other peoples' institutions and what they have to say don't really matter. In effect, as far as America is concerned, they are the world.
Jamaican politics
This sense of entitlement is not far removed from Jamaican politics. There is a thin line between a sense of entitlement and arrogance. Political landslides and overwhelming personal popularity tend to carry in their wake the seeds of self-destruction. Leaders who get elected to office on a tidal wave of popularity tend to think that public sentiment will remain in their favour for an extended period, if not forever, and often govern with an attitude that they can do no wrong or that people inevitably will endorse what they do. It is this kind of perspective which led Beverly Manley, then head of the PNP's women's movement, in urging then Prime Minister Michael Manley at an NEC meeting in the late 1970s, to move the party in a particular direction to say: "Comrade leader, we can get these people to do anything."
It is this sense of entitlement which led the Seaga administration after its overwhelming landslide victory in 1980 to govern with a heavy dose of arrogance. And it is this sense of entitlement which is dogging the incumbent People's National Party government.
At times when Audley Shaw or some other JLP officers bring to public attention some aspect of government mismanagement, supporters of the Government will say: "Of course we need a vibrant Opposition." Usually, what they mean is, "We don't mind the Opposition exposing what is being done wrong, just as long as they remain in Opposition and we in Government."
The fact is, no one party in Jamaica has a monopoly on good management, policies for social advancement, intellect or integrity. Persons from both major parties have served Jamaica well and both parties have also done things to lead us along a path of ruin. Conventional wisdom, which is not always wise, was that there would be no difference between a JLP-led KSAC and a PNP-led municipality. Certainly in his initial forays, Desmond McKenzie's activism made nonsense of that notion.
Counterbalance
In the U.S. case, during the times when there is a counterbalance in the American government - a Republican majority in the Senate or presidency and a Democratic majority in the House of Representatives or presidency - there is a more effective system of checks and balances. While there is the danger of gridlock, the greater good is that runaway arrogance is kept in check.
In our local politics, the fears that some of the persons waiting in the wings in the Opposition to take state power are barely-disguised crooks may not be invalid. We would do well to consider, however, whether Jamaica's democracy and system of governance are best served by reinforcing a sense of entitlement in the minds of the leaders of the governing party which has been in office for more than 17 years. The arrogance among some members of the government is now in "a state of chronic," as Ezroy Millwood once said of the public transportation system.
Political landslides and overwhelming personal popularity tend to carry in their wake
- T.K.
Comment