Tweet
Discord (this is a good read)
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><SPAN class=TopStory>We have to rid ourselves of the perpetual discord</SPAN>
<SPAN class=Subheadline></SPAN></TD></TR><TR><TD>Christopher Burns
Monday, February 05, 2007
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width=70 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>
</TD></TR><TR><TD><SPAN class=Description>Christopher Burns</SPAN></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><P class=StoryText align=justify>It is as foolish to expect a convergence of views on every single issue of national importance as it is frightening to have a divergence of views on every issue, however unnecessary.
The mere fact that we are from different backgrounds and share different interests makes absolute consensus impossible. However, as rational human beings, most of us have the ability to evaluate things, and based on our evaluation we make appropriate decisions whether to cooperate or not. However, if we accept this ratiocination, then we might also want to accept that we have the ability to know when discord threatens our survival and when harmony enhances it.<P class=StoryText align=justify>So, even though no one needs to remind us of the consequences of dissent or the intrinsic worth of concurrence, divergence seems more banal in the Jamaican society than elsewhere, and what makes it troubling is the fact that more often than not the disagreement appears superfluous. One gets the feeling that some of us are motivated by the desire to create problems for every solution than to finding solutions. Take the announcement by the prime minister of a programme to clean up Jamaica, for example, before the words left her lips, sections of the media had already launched a premature opposition and pronounced her plan dead on arrival. Now, all of a sudden they are falling over themselves to highlight the filthy state of the nation's towns and streets. So, what was the initial opposition about?<P class=StoryText align=justify>Sadly, our proclivity to oppose and create conflicts where none is necessary is the single most salient hindrance to our progress and we need to stop it. It is ironic that some seem to believe that "unity is strength" only when the objective is to either tear down, "badmouth" or create mayhem, but never in pooling resources or energy. The fundamental question that comes to mind therefore, is why we continue to be unnecessarily disagreeable and do so in the most detrimental way. If, as Albert Einstein put it, "You cannot do the same thing over and over and expect different results", then it remains unfathomable why we continue to promote disharmony; even in instances where building harmonious relationships is not analogous to the pursuit of individual and collective happiness. Despite that, we must begin to reconcile the value of maintaining this gratuitous attitude of disagreeability, which has not served us well.<P class=StoryText align=justify>The divisive nature of our politics is also a big obstacle to national development efforts and a powerful causal factor for this culture of perpetual discord. Take national security, for example. This is a matter we ought to approach with unity of purpose; instead of as an armada of enemies fighting to erect barriers of distrust and walls of political opportunism every step of the way. Speaking of political opportunism, it is as clear as mud that this was exactly what the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) had in mind when it placed Derrick Smith, Ken Baugh and the affable Pearnel Charles in front of television cameras to make asses of themselves last week. Frankly, this pre-emptive political move was unnecessary. If, as I believe, the intention was to score political points, the public relations effort made all three men looked comically clumsy. It would have been better had th
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><SPAN class=TopStory>We have to rid ourselves of the perpetual discord</SPAN>
<SPAN class=Subheadline></SPAN></TD></TR><TR><TD>Christopher Burns
Monday, February 05, 2007
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width=70 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>
</TD></TR><TR><TD><SPAN class=Description>Christopher Burns</SPAN></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><P class=StoryText align=justify>It is as foolish to expect a convergence of views on every single issue of national importance as it is frightening to have a divergence of views on every issue, however unnecessary. The mere fact that we are from different backgrounds and share different interests makes absolute consensus impossible. However, as rational human beings, most of us have the ability to evaluate things, and based on our evaluation we make appropriate decisions whether to cooperate or not. However, if we accept this ratiocination, then we might also want to accept that we have the ability to know when discord threatens our survival and when harmony enhances it.<P class=StoryText align=justify>So, even though no one needs to remind us of the consequences of dissent or the intrinsic worth of concurrence, divergence seems more banal in the Jamaican society than elsewhere, and what makes it troubling is the fact that more often than not the disagreement appears superfluous. One gets the feeling that some of us are motivated by the desire to create problems for every solution than to finding solutions. Take the announcement by the prime minister of a programme to clean up Jamaica, for example, before the words left her lips, sections of the media had already launched a premature opposition and pronounced her plan dead on arrival. Now, all of a sudden they are falling over themselves to highlight the filthy state of the nation's towns and streets. So, what was the initial opposition about?<P class=StoryText align=justify>Sadly, our proclivity to oppose and create conflicts where none is necessary is the single most salient hindrance to our progress and we need to stop it. It is ironic that some seem to believe that "unity is strength" only when the objective is to either tear down, "badmouth" or create mayhem, but never in pooling resources or energy. The fundamental question that comes to mind therefore, is why we continue to be unnecessarily disagreeable and do so in the most detrimental way. If, as Albert Einstein put it, "You cannot do the same thing over and over and expect different results", then it remains unfathomable why we continue to promote disharmony; even in instances where building harmonious relationships is not analogous to the pursuit of individual and collective happiness. Despite that, we must begin to reconcile the value of maintaining this gratuitous attitude of disagreeability, which has not served us well.<P class=StoryText align=justify>The divisive nature of our politics is also a big obstacle to national development efforts and a powerful causal factor for this culture of perpetual discord. Take national security, for example. This is a matter we ought to approach with unity of purpose; instead of as an armada of enemies fighting to erect barriers of distrust and walls of political opportunism every step of the way. Speaking of political opportunism, it is as clear as mud that this was exactly what the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) had in mind when it placed Derrick Smith, Ken Baugh and the affable Pearnel Charles in front of television cameras to make asses of themselves last week. Frankly, this pre-emptive political move was unnecessary. If, as I believe, the intention was to score political points, the public relations effort made all three men looked comically clumsy. It would have been better had th
Comment