by Colin Hyde

If we took a poll, it’s a good bet that 70% or more of our intellectual class who have thought about it, would vote for us to dump our Parliamentary System for the Republican System. For clarity here, when I say intellectual I mean university graduates.

The Republican System is in play in countries that are called republics. The illustrious Britannica encyclopedia says, “Modern republics are founded on the idea that sovereignty rests with the people, though who is included and excluded from the category of the people has varied across history”; and, Britannica says, “The term republic may also be applied to any form of government in which the head of state is not a hereditary monarch.”

The famous Americans are said to practice the Republican System, and their financial success has made the system very attractive. You know that if you’re thinking money, a rich man’s word carries more weight than a poor man’s. I must put out there that there have been many Republican Systems that have been absolute disasters. Britannica says, “Despite its democratic implications, the term was claimed in the 20th century by states whose leadership enjoyed more power than most traditional monarchs…”

Of the Parliamentary Democracy (PD) system which our intellectuals malign so much, Britannica says it is a “democratic form of government in which the party (or a coalition of parties) with the greatest representation in the parliament (legislature) forms the government, its leader becoming prime minister or chancellor.” Britannica says, “The parliamentary system originated in Britain and was adopted in several of its former colonies.”

I have no examples of ugly parliamentary democracies. I guess that’s because no leader in a system like ours can approach the all-powerful monarchial status. I’m thinking as I write that a true difference of the systems is that the Republican can produce absolute brilliance, or absolute depredation and deprivation, while the Parliamentary system is steady, less exciting, consistently on the level.

Before I get to our dabbling in the Republican system, I will say to all that the local proponents of that system have never fully given PD a chance to see how successful it can be. Until we force a government to put in the proper checks in the system, we cannot with justification say that it has failed us. For sure, if we go Republican we’ll be able to put in those checks. But we shouldn’t overlook the risks. I say, that system gives too much power to one man.

Addressing a wikidnis, it’s unfair to say the parliamentary system is monarchial because we have a king. The king in our system, as everyone knows, is titular, ceremonial. I don’t like how intellectuals play these games. If we are sincere about the bread and butter of our people, the story must be about truth, not about who tells the story better. We are not about movies and novels.

Now, in the voting part, our municipal elections are Republican, unlike our general elections which are Parliamentary. In the municipal elections we directly elect a mayor, while in the general elections we elect a party, from which a PM is chosen.

When voting for a mayor we do not consider the councilor candidates. Indeed, they can be ignored entirely. When voting for a representative, we consider the person in the party most likely to claim the PM’s office. It was said that in George Price’s heyday the PUP could have run a broomstick in some divisions and still win, the broomstick helping to ensure that Price would be king. Ah, if the leader of the party is unpopular, party members vying for seats as representatives not only have to paddle their own canoe, they also have to carry the baggage of the one at their head.

A few have asked what the point is for a city/town council to have councilors. On the surface it looks like the case where somebody started something, and nobody has the interest or the courage to ask the why of it, because they are not going to try and do anything about it. It might not be the plan, but it works out as a grooming place for future political leaders. Candidates who show up well in municipals are up for consideration when a party needs to retire an older or a failing leader. That might be the only justification for councilors.

Choose songs that uplift over songs about ugly or rude reality

There’s nothing surprising about young people justifying smut songs with the claim that it’s reality. I know that, because I was innocent once too. The young are just fascinated with rudeness. Thank gudnis I had elders who put the cramp on me. They didn’t save me from hell, but they tried. Yes, I’m with my aunt who gently told me to do away with my dirty music when I dared to play it on her record player. That’s guidance from elders for young ones.

It is really shallow, the idea that a song is a good thing because it tells the truth, reality. Everybody noa dat noh everything weh gud fu eat gud fu talk. Some “reality” shouldn’t be out in the light. Are the thoughts you pen to a friend public business? Is your reality when you close your bedroom door public business? Is your reality when you shut your bathroom door public business? Are the thoughts that flit through your mind public business? Really, you have to be really young and naïve, or pathological to believe that everything belongs out there.

Do you know that if you play songs about shooting up people, that gullible minds will be influenced by the music you play? You might be able to resist the madness, but don’t forget the many weak minds who are copycats. We must be concerned about how “reality” influences weak, gullible minds. Not because it means nothing to you, means it is the same for someone else. The same way good art stimulates us to do better, ugly art encourages us to debase ourselves.

Is it art to burn down the building the carpenter slaved to make? The fire sure can be pretty, but only if you are a crazed pyromaniac should you be thrilled by the flames. What are the lessons in sleknis? And it’s redundant, because we all see the dogs going at it on the streets in rutting season. Human beings are animals. What is this good lesson to air out humans at procreation? Only in private we should be our animal selves.

This art, we must ask: does it build character; does it help build the nation? If it does, it gets a license for the daytime. If it doesn’t, it must be confined to the dark spaces.

We are all animals, so all of us that are healthy are tempted to be crude, lewd, and rude. Many of us fall. We must prize people who hold the fort, people who produce beautiful art, sing about reality that uplifts. They give us hope that we too can be great. Let what belongs to the dark, stay in the dark.

No easy decision

I’m torn between cursing, and yielding to the call for us to set out water jugs for the thirsty non-human members of the animal family who live in the wild. Me, save the coatimundi (quash) pack and the wicked squirrels and wild rabbits when they have devastated my cassava and fruit trees and coconuts? I had it down that I was going to eat plastic cake, and cassava with coconut oil or butter. I love those little bohgaz. But they ate all my food.

I don’t want those bad little beasts’ tongues to hang from their mouths until they drop; I just want them to go, to the reserves. I thought earlier this year of growing a few cantaloupes. And the thought made me shudder. Those bad little beasts would think I planted the crop for them.