THESE past weeks have been turbulent, in large part stemming from the current political fallout following passage of the no-confidence motion and the operations of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM). There exists no interest in this editorial to get into the nitty-gritty and back and forth, save to saying that the expectation is that the Appeal Court will adjudicate on the matter expeditiously.
What has been most instructive in this period is how much civility has been disregarded in our public sphere. Last Thursday’s crass behaviour by leader of the opposition (LOO) accusing the government of fraudulent behaviour and also attacking the President personally, referring to his religion, was the most vulgar we have seen from this former president in recent times. Known for this kind of behavior, Mr Jagdeo’s hasty conclusion as to the motive of the President sending two letters to the chairman of GECOM without properly reading them is most unfortunate. Despite being exposed, he refused to acknowledge his wrong and proceeded to make other wild, unfounded claims, even threatening to boycott a meeting proposed by the President.
Guyanese were known for and took great pride at being a civil people. Respect shown for others was not singularly due to familial relations, but also for the office persons held. There were ethics, nurtured and ingrained from infancy, such as “manners maketh man.” Ethics, according to the online dictionary, is synonymous with “moral code, morals, morality, values, rights and wrongs, principles, ideals, standards (of behavior), value system, virtues, dictates of conscience.”
It was this universal culture that set the tone for acceptable standards, norms and practices, by which persons are judged, accepted or rejected. The blurring of lines or unconcern to retain these values did not start yesterday, but instead of making determined efforts to halt the erosion, there is a sense that this is no longer considered important.
There was a time when adults, particularly those in public and influential offices, were ever so mindful of how society sees and judges them, often feeling compelled by such observation and critique to be on their best behaviour or put their best foot forward. Equally of value was not to disgrace the family or do anything that would cause children — including theirs– to see them in a less than positive light. When these values are no longer considered sacred or are being discarded, condemnation of any untoward behaviour of the younger generation comes hypocritical.
Children learn what they see and model themselves after their elders/seniors. Society bemoans the fall in education standards and expresses concern about school drop-outs, functional illiteracy, rising illiteracy and juvenile delinquency, attributing these dysfunctions to the education system. Learning is holistic, i.e. formal and environmental. Even with the best of educators/teachers and full complement of teaching aids, best techniques and physical environment, children are not insulated from what happens outside of the classrooms.
When persons holding offices of esteem behave in undignified manner as did our LOO, their decisions and actions impact children– including theirs — in deciphering right and wrong behaviours. In this school or university of life, this creates confusion in the minds. Some will emulate and others reject, setting in train clashes of influences, re-defining new ‘norms’ and ‘ethics,’ invariably contributing to lowering standards in society by making unacceptable behaviour acceptable.
Of concern too is the seeming or determined behaviour of being unable to separate not liking the leaders to respecting their offices and right to discharge their responsibilities. Correspondingly, leaders have a responsibility to conduct themselves in a respectful manner, given that uncivil behaviour lowers ethical standards, thereby bringing shame and disrepute to the offices they hold.
Public and influential office holders play a very significant role in society and it would help should they reflect on their importance and live up to society’s expectations of them. They are not only there to serve the public good, but also to be role models for others. And where civility is losing its pre-eminence in society, our children suffer, given that they can only be what they learn, see and are exposed to.
Our education was once touted among, if not, the best in the Caribbean. It was an education not necessarily that of achieving higher formal learning such as attending university or college, but that of the pre-eminence placed on knowing and practising the three “Rs”- i.e. reasoning, writing and arithmetic- regardless of the level of education attained. While reiterating no interest in getting into the intricacies of the GECOM issue, it cannot go unnoticed that the three “Rs” are no longer held in esteem or are being totally disregarded.
For instance, the world has been socialised to see the Rule of Law as intrinsic to democracy. Thus, it is more than passing strange that applying the letter of the law in government utilising the courts to challenge the no-confidence vote there is loud rejection, accompanied by accusation of undemocratic behaviour and a violation of the constitution. It needs not be repeated here, the uncivil manner with which such expressions are being accompanied.
Current bombardment from leaders and influential voices and organisations can be likened to a drone, making it difficult for a climate to facilitate reasoning and civility to shine through. This is why it is so important to have the court expedite soonest, what it has been asked of soonest. Hopefully, its decision could help restore some semblance of civility to the public sphere, but in the meantime, it is not too much to ask of each and every one of us to make a commitment to do so.
