tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-91095591027674180222023-06-20T08:59:34.165-04:00MOHDCProfessional Emphasis of Select Articles, Addresses, Commentary and LiteratureRaymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.comBlogger25125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-13269550280939094352011-09-10T10:08:00.002-04:002011-10-10T10:13:59.671-04:00In Praise of Eloping: Romance & Caribbean Integration!<div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Part I: <i>Running Away</i></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">In the village where I grew there was marriage; and then there was <i>running away</i>! Marriage was about celebrating custom in comfort; but <i>running away </i>was bacchanal and story; the drama of challenge and change! In reflection <i>running away- </i>regretfully so, more than marriage, laid foundations for social progress. </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">As I think of it, yesterday’s village phenomenon of <i>running away</i> holds cues for doing Caribbean integration differently. Perhaps our burdened stagger towards deeper regional unity is right within our reach- embedded in our folkloric heritage and grounded in our indigenous life ways. </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Those Who <i>Ran Away</i></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"><i>Running away </i>was escape route for unsanctioned/unblessed collusions. It was only option for romances that dared cross strict racial divides- those heart<i> affairs</i> frown upon as highly undesirable, unsuitable, and downright untenable! Such consorting was strictly discouraged by way of family protest, severe beatings and threats of<i> disownment</i>. </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Running away was unfettered love adventure on collision course with clannish fear. . It was refusal of passion, desire and soul to be cowed by powers of prejudice, ethnic strictures and tribally located authorized versions. It was an odyssey into otherness, an embrace of difference; a conjoining of romance, uncertainty and courage. As I think about it, running away was a complex crossover driven by unavoidable desire. It was trapeze of the impetuous and serious; dalliance of the dangerous and verdant. <i>Running away</i> was bold daring born of authentic passion; not faint hearted pretensive love. The price was just too high, it had to be real! </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Just why it was called running away I was never sure; but perhaps is in itself revelation of village wisdom. Truth is, those cross racial suitors, opposite racial elopers seldom left or disappeared to another village, they simply moved in, shacked up, lived with each other right there in the village for all to see- regardless of family protests, fallouts and curse-outs. Yet it was termed running away. Their runaway, it would seem, was really a journey that repudiated tribal expectations and prescribed restrictions. It was in fact more a run from something old to something new, a different social dynamic- A staking out of new possibilities, new tomorrows, and new social structures born of bold adventure.</span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Celebrating <i>Runaways</i></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Appreciating running away requires understanding how it precipitated alliances and unity across racial lines in ways rules of permitted love never would, or more compliant lovers ever could. Running away forced unwilling accommodations, unglued world views, unleashed imagination, energy and innovation. It often forced cooperation between forces of the known and unknown, heard and unheard, ready and unready, thinkable and unthinkable, desired and undesired, willing and unwilling. Appreciating running away requires understanding how it brought to our village new conversation, new color; new texture!</span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Inexorably, persistence by <i>runaway</i> lovers saw incremental visits by siblings, then mothers; and finally fathers- all kissing hugging, walking and eventually owning <i>doughla</i> children. Back then, against the wishes and tide of elders and thought shapers, against handles of manipulation (wealth and heritage), against coded words of control (anathema, bastard and betrayal), these recalcitrant love voyagers through their acts of running away, were actually forerunners of societal evolution/expansion, and harmony. Yesterdays unsanctioned elopers are today’s praised romanticists. All hail to runaways!</span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px; min-height: 12.0px; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Part II: When Island States<i> Runaway</i>!</span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Throughout the Caribbean today, many individuals have boldly runaway across island boundaries and forged lives and families of their own in other islands. They have pushed against tides of financial, political and other prohibitive primordial currents; and have made it- albeit with test and trail; but they’ve made it. Our people have already shown they have the instinct to make it happen. What is now needed is for islands states to corporately runaway and shack up, live together, try something- right here in our midst for all to see. When will we learn that a prescribed formula worked out in custom and comfort may never emerge? My hunch is that it will take an impetuous runaway island romance, where two or three islands shack up out of sheer frustration with the status quo and merge across economic, political and other critical fronts before something authentic integration takes shape. In other words, one or two Islands have to force the wider Caricom community to look on and confront the uncertain; until we incrementally embrace the bliss of a doughla unity. Until we are finally all bold enough to bless a new tomorrow! </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Those of us who could be described as the Caribbean independence generation must now be totally frustrated with what remains our laudable but impotent attempt at regional integration. First there was Federation, whose epitaph is encrypted with Williams’ erudite dictum 1 from 10 leaves 0. Then came Caricom, OECS, CSME and finally the mockery called CCJ- headquartered in an island whose final appellate court (even in civil matters) yet remains the Privy Council. If it isn’t time for individual island states to runaway and form their own organic bonds, please tell me when is? </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">My argument is that as island states shack up and live together the larger Caribbean family will be forced to live with the bastard fallout until we embrace the new organic unions and become a part of something truly organically whole, though unplanned. Just as Edison did not discover electricity by tinkering with a flambeau, we’ll never arrive at true integration by pussy footing with institutions of pretensive grandeur but little heat. I sense that something new bold and daring is needed!</span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">That’s why I support the recent runaway by four brave island states: namely, Trinidad & Tobago, Grenada, St. Lucia and St. Vincent. Notice the rush by thought guardians and keepers of the status quo to put things in perspective. Recall the reach for the diplomatic lexicon and references as to which and every protocol and charter the move violated. Well great news, that’s exactly what running away did back in my village days. It violated prescribed formulas and authorized versions of inadequate strictures in preference to pursuing something bold, though uncertain. </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Those who think Caricom is enough won’t desire better. But for those of us who repeatedly observe various nation blocks forging stronger bonds of political unity and economic strength while our islands languish in solitary weakness must hang our heads in shame. Since the Seventies Might Stalin (Calypso <i>Caribbean Man</i>) asked our political principals: “how come you can’t unite 7 million?” </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">My one caveat regarding the recent elope attempt is its degree of genuineness in contrast to the psychology of politics it contains. Notably, T&T’s PM is beset with matters of UDecott and Rowley. St. Vincent’s PM with rape accusations. St. Lucia with Internal ramblings; and the new Grenada PM could be said to be looking to score with something bold and different to open his innings. </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">To be sure though, as was true of village runaway times, only the genuine survived and came through. The price of pretense is way too high. Running away is nothing to fool around with. Those matters of the heart are way too serious to play love and integration.</span></div><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #444444;"><b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b> President/CEO, MOHDC <i>http://www.mohdc.com</i> <i>Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</i></span>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-18528650905046510892011-02-16T10:56:00.001-05:002011-10-10T11:17:48.106-04:00Before You Can Say Cat lick Yuh Ears: Urgently Fixing Our Democracy!<div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">A witty parody amidst Egypt’s early rumblings portrays the myopic recalcitrance of dysfunctional systems. In the satire, President Obama hints President Mubarak should think of leaving. Said Obama “Hosni, it’s time for you to say goodbye.” Mubarak responded: “really, where are the people going?!” </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 12.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Yet, almost unbelievably, a dictatorship of 30 years was unlatched and blown away in a mere 18 days; fueled by people armed only with determination. The question that immediately jumps out is: How long will it take to fix diffident socio-political conditions so prevalent in our Islands state? The good news from Egypt to A&B is that we can undo and supplant well entrenched systemic contagions in the twinkling of an eye; yea even <i>before</i> <i>you can</i> say <i>cat lick yuh ears</i>!</span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 12.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">I raise this question because of sensed despair. Keen individuals often feel putrefied Island politics with shabby patterns and immature practices are immutable conditions from which we can never extricate ourselves. Although these patterns/practices undermine and stymie progress, many resign to accept nihilism and decadence in preference to vision and possibility of brighter better society. Well, whirlwind events in Egypt, of all places, the cradle of tradition, have certainly put a lie to such hopelessness. </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 12.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">The stark reality is it will not take generations; forever, to dethrone malpractices stifling our democratic flourishing. Will and resolve can bring rapid change. May Egypt’s story inspire us to redress our own democratic dysfunctions with an urgency matching our indigenous folkloric expression<i>- before you can say cat lick yuh ears</i>!</span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 12.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"> Of course both situations aren’t the same; any such parallelism immediately yields a tricky question: Which is easier, transitioning from dictatorship to democracy; or fixing a diseased democracy? </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 12.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">On one hand, in fixing a democracy the foundation is there; so it’s a matter of appetite for betterment, realigning values, relaying patterns, and altering bad practices. On the other hand, renovations can take longer and cost more than new construction; meaning it’s extremely difficult to unshackle deeply engrained decrepit practices. Still, the lesson out of Egypt is that quickly overcoming severe odds to socio-political improvement is doable once people’s will for betterment is sterling and determined.</span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 12.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">In thinking about local democratic institutions and practices, some that are over ripe and crying out for immediate revolutionary attention are:</span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 12.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"><b>The Electoral Commission:</b> Even sporting bodies now boast and safeguard respect by ensuring neutral referees officiate. Should any less integrity and sanctity apply to the institution that presides over how we elect those who rule over us? A better way to appoint electoral commissioners must be urgently found. We cannot continue to allow the mice to decide who guards the cheese. </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Political principals will always want trusted lieutenants on the ‘inside’, or even heading the commission; but such arrangements do not belong in a healthy respectable democracy. Satisfying public confidence is more important than appeasing politicians’ fancies. Further, if and when election systems fail, lines must never be blurred (in the public’s mind) between genuine bureaucratic malfunctions and deliberate facilitating of strategic political designs. </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">The elections commission must be honestly nonaligned, fiercely unbiased; and sanitized of all and any party activists/loyalists from either side of the divide. Urgent public displeasure should never rest until this critical aspect of democracy is treated with the reverential regard that our democracy deserves. </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"><b>The Media & Commentariat:</b> The role of the media in a credible democracy is public education. The media is not simply to relay messages from politicians; but also to investigate and reveal truth content of those messages. To what extent have media houses in A&B been faithful to their democratic function of educating public insight? Are they sufficiently analytical and exculpatory; or are they victims of the politics? Have they exchanged their role of public educator and become part of propaganda armada on either side? How and from where will objective public insight emerge in order to advance democracy?</span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">And where is the punditocracy, the objective commentariat that fosters evaluation of contending ideas? Where is the forum that says here are the UPP and ALP positions; but as citizens here is how to think about it from an A&B perspective? Where is that voice that walks down the middle; that stands in the gap and speaks for A&B’s interests- without an aligned agenda? </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">The intelligentsia appears to be open or shrouded mouthpieces for either side. Perhaps the promised university of A&B will provide more objectively evaluated public policy insight. In the meantime there is urgent need for a strong, objective, compelling revolutionary down the middle forum that forces both sides to improve their acts for the benefit of country.</span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"><b>The Church:</b> In most democratic jurisdictions churches remain above the political fray; and instead serve as society’s moral conscience. This allows an efficient spiritual suasion that forces political players to be mindful of moral, ethical and valuative aspects of their conducts and policies. Churches must not and cannot take this function lightly. It is a critical and sacred democratic staple. If however, public concerns appear to attract advocacy or silence from churches based on political color, efficacy of the ecclesiastical voice is severely compromised. </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Have churches in A&B bartered unique spiritual suasion for the allure of political platform s and/or handout of state privileges? Are churches openly or tacitly signaling political alignment? To the extent churches violate their unique role; to that extend they also lose respect in the minds of political players over whom they are supposed to exert spiritual suasion for societal good- And it is to that extent they also abscond as an agency charged with advancing democratic ideals. Churches can help revolutionize our democratic culture by ungluing themselves from the stigma of political color. They can regain the moral high ground; and recapture the effect of spiritual suasion.</span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"><b>Voter Bribery:</b> In this regard the people’s <i>goodness</i> is their own downfall. One thing unique about the practice of voter bribery in A&B is that people honor their take- and politicians know it. Truth is endemic practices of cold hard cash for votes on one hand or institutionalized voter buyouts on the other hand come with a price. Responsible obligations politicians have toward constituencies are replaced either by wanton neglect or attitudes of arrogant beneficence- often resulting in complete disregard for critical infrastructural and social development. It’s a simple equation really; people already paid are owed nothing more. </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">Voter bribery hurts democracy not only in terms of injustice felt by those not on the take; but also in the way they are made to feel unsold votes don’t count. Raw unabashed bribing of voters deals a crippling effect to democratic ideals and is another area that needs urgent revolutionary attention if democracy will better flourish in A&B.</span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;">In wrapping our minds around unseen dynamics that colluded to accomplish rapid consequential change in Tahrir Square, it helps to identify the ingredients of urgent socio-political transformation: </span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 12.0px;"><span style="font-size: small; letter-spacing: 0px;"></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;"><ul><li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><i>Creative Discontent</i>: Discontent is of course the impetus for change. However, in his epic Man and Superman George Bernard Shaw tersely observes “rational people see things as they are and accept them; irrational people do not. Therefore all progress is dependent upon irrational people.” An indictment against rational thought if you ask me. The Egypt revolution was driven by rational creative discontent; the stuff required for creating sustainable change. Notice how new modalities of social media were used to spread and glue interests; and then drive the force of traditional human presence.</span></li>
<li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><i>Pointed Focus</i>: A key hallmark of the social revolution in Egypt was pointed focus of the people. They doggedly refused to be put off by gimmicks or overtures of pretense from officialdom. In their determined calculus nothing less than desired change was acceptable. A quest for betterment does not get bogged down with histrionics and debates related to how and why things got to be the way they are. Such inertia is nothing but emotional manipulation meant to preserve the status quo. Energies should be concentrated on forging a better tomorrow. Haggling over the origin of a problem does precious little for improving the future.</span></li>
<li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Sacrifice: Because we can’t change all things doesn’t mean we can’t change some things at once. And yes, there is always a personal cost in aiding urgent socio-political change. Be it time, reputation, comfort, resources etc. As we saw in Egypt it will cost something! But the price for doing something is always monumentally less than doing nothing.</span></li>
</ul><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span><br />
<div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px; min-height: 12.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Let’s do it people. We have power within us to demand key aspect of our social order be conducted with aplomb. Let’s add determined focus and sacrifice to our discontent and turn A&B around. How long will it take? The lesson out of Egypt is that it can be done <i>before you can say cat lick yuh ears</i>!</span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b> President/CEO, MOHDC <i>http://www.mohdc.com</i> <i>Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</i></span></div>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-39865050929793841452011-01-13T11:36:00.001-05:002011-10-10T12:44:56.646-04:00The Elections Petitions Matter in A&B: An AnalysisA peculiar irony is how some things finish; but don’t end! The Elections Petitions matter will linger until adequately analyzed, responsibly distilled, and emotionally reconciled. Although a lot has been said some hard things remain untouched. And while fools venture where angels fear to tread; perhaps more will think me angel than fool. <br />
<br />
Authentic assessment of this matter requires honest professional disclosure at the outset. I have worked professionally for the ALP as well as for a few State agencies under UPP rule in A&B. Accordingly; my initial and preferred mindset was to avoid comment. However, since critical regional development is on the line passionate commitment overrides.<br />
<br />
Thoroughly treating with this matter while retaining reader interest dictates that thoughts be arranged and released in three installments:<br />
Part I: High Courts; Low Judgments: A Critical Review (Fri Jan 14)<br />
Part II: Missing the Bus: Redeeming the Time (Tues Jan 18)<br />
Part III: This Matter and the CCJ: Impact & Options (Fri Jan 21)<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><strong><em>Part I:</em></strong></div><div style="text-align: center;"><strong><em>High</em> Courts; <em>Low</em> Judgments: A Critical Review</strong></div><br />
<br />
The biting sarcasm of the OECS Appeals Court’s decision is that despite claims otherwise, the quality of its ruling strikingly resembles Judge Judy’s court; except that her inane findings appropriately suit a day time TV audience - Whereas the matter at hand remains imminently consequential; even with implications for regional jurisprudence, the CCJ!<br />
<br />
According to my reasoning, both high court and appeal court got it wrong; both lacked the requisite Solomonic wisdom that this adjudication beckoned. Still, Judge Blenman’s one headed high court appears wiser than the three headed EC appeals court. Charged with a need to be collectively insightful; the appeal court proved severely afflicted with group think jaundice. <br />
<br />
It’s no secret Judge Blenman found violations of elections rules significantly egregious and tantamount to disenfranchisement; and declared affected seats void - effectively ordering a rerun in those constituencies. <br />
<br />
Then along came the appeal court which effectively said: whereas we agree violations were significantly egregious, according to our probability forecasts the outcomes would be the same. Further, voiding the results punishes the declared winners when there is no led evidence to indicate they held responsibility for the violations. In other words the winners had no control over the violations that occurred; and likely suffered from them just as much as the other side. <br />
<br />
To undiscerning minds this thinking may appear reasonable; and is the very thing that makes it akin to a Judge Judy outcome. Truth is, while appearing strong in what it affirms it’s very weak for all that it concomitantly denies. Conclusions are insufficiently rigorous and woefully inadequate for the sophisticated affairs it purports to redress. <br />
<br />
Upon closer examination this ruling is marked by cacophony; if not schizophrenia. One is left wondering if the decision itself wasn’t made for other purposes and then feasible rationalizations sought and proffered as justifying cover. It is very hard to discern intellectual integrity in the appeal court’s ruling. <br />
<br />
Two separate but related conditions would have been necessary for the appeals court decision to be creditable. Neither condition existed; making the ruling mind boggling. <br />
<ol type="1"><li>The number of uncast votes would have had to be less than the margin of victory. <br />
<ol start="a" type="a"><li>(In each instance the number of uncast votes was two to three times the margin of victory). Or;</li>
</ol></li>
<li>The pattern established by those who did vote would have had to be an accurate or at least fair representation of the vast majority of those who did not get to vote. <br />
<ol start="a" type="a"><li>It’s impossible to tell if this was so; but more than likely this would definitely not be the case. Here’s why:</li>
</ol></li>
</ol>The last time I checked the course offering in reputable institutions was still called Probability <strong>AND</strong> Statistical Analysis. One cannot arrive at probability predictions without first engaging in rigorous statistical analysis. <br />
<ol type="1"><li>Predicting probability outcomes based on patterns established by the significantly late openings was poor analysis because it failed to realize those patterns would have been highly skewed due to outlier clusters (of voters) that would have pulled the patterns away from the mean. <br />
<ul><li>Persons who returned to vote or stayed to vote regardless of length of delay were more than likely individuals all of whom were unencumbered by:<br />
<ol type="a"><li>The allotted two hour time allowance for voting <br />
</li>
<li>Conveyance restrictions<br />
</li>
<li>Human exigencies (infirmity, hunger, indiscipline etc)<br />
<ol type="1"><li>In sum, such groupings would more than likely be government workers or well off individuals all of whom would likely disproportionately favor any incumbent government. </li>
</ol></li>
</ol></li>
<li>Please note, while the unemployed, elderly, and youth would normally be groups with time luxury, issues of hunger, infirmity, indiscipline etc can be expected to cancel their effective presence in cases of very extensive time delays.</li>
</ul></li>
</ol>Unless the voting apparatus in A&B is sufficiently sophisticated and allows tracking of nuanced voter demographics the courts could not have had sufficient statistical data at its disposal to make a sufficiently foolproof probability prediction. Instead it more than likely made a decision using highly skewed samples to predict how entire remaining pools would have voted had they the opportunity to do so. This is flawed analysis. <br />
<br />
In the prevailing circumstances, as long as the number of uncast votes remained higher than the margin of victory, all probability permutations should not only have been kept on the table; but also given equal weight. And that includes the probable oppositely skewed outcome that the vast majority of those disenfranchised would have voted for the opposition given the chance to vote. <br />
<br />
But perhaps the greatest flaw of the Appeals court decision is its myopic belief that probability can protect democracy. In the court’s reckoning it seems probability trumps principle. While probability is a prediction of likelihood it is a poor substitute for certainty- and should especially not have been utilized when samples for generalization were significantly compromised by flaws that likely pulled them away from the means. It seems the appeal court was flirting with the leisure of unsubstantiated likelihood rather than deciding based on principles of democracy.<br />
<br />
I’m afraid the appeal court took too lightly the transcendental purpose of elections: i.e. determining the sovereign will of the people. If the purpose of democratic elections is to enfranchise the people to express their desired choice of government; then any process that significantly compromises and retards that expression of choice must be deemed inadequate; and rightly voided. In this regard Judge Blenman got it right. None can be declared winner if the process of enfranchisement is <strong>significantly</strong> flawed; and it doesn’t matter whether or not such winner had anything to do with creating the flaw.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><strong>Part II </strong></div><div style="text-align: center;"><strong> Missing the <em>Bus</em>; Redeeming the Time</strong></div><strong><br />
</strong><br />
Ideally, the high court should have reserved handing down a judgment; and instead call both political principals in and say something like: “This court’s finding of fact is that election violations are significant and equivalent to disenfranchisement in affected constituencies. Yet the court is reluctant to proffer a judicial ruling. Accordingly, this court directs you gentlemen to put your heads together (along with colleagues) and come up with a political resolution acceptable to both sides, and the court by X date.” <br />
<br />
And what prevented the appeals court (especially since they concurred with Judge Blenman that significant violations had occurred); and Chief Justice as a very senior public servant of the sub-region from stepping boldly out of tradition and facilitating a salutary political resolution when handed the matter? Instead he chose to sit enthroned in hallowed precincts and full regalia muttering Judge Judy quirks before rendering an inglorious and intellectually decrepit verdict. <br />
<br />
Solomonic wisdom by either court would have effectively forced both parties to act in a politically mature way for the good of country. It would have also responsibly redressed flawed results while diplomatically avoiding perception of usurping the will of the people. Regrettably, things have only become more politically divisive; while sentiments of apathy, even antipathy have set in towards regional jurisprudence. <br />
<br />
Still, while censuring the courts, intellectual honesty demands equal blame is laid squarely at the feet of politicians. Truth is, not only the courts demonstrated low judgment; political leaders did also. The situation required political acumen and nobility- attributes demonstrably absent. <br />
<br />
It was obvious as daylight serious elections violations had occurred in some constituencies. Certainly the high court made its concern clear regarding the egregiousness of those violations and their undermining impact on enfranchisement. Further, length of time taken by the appeal court provided ample opportunity for politicians to come up with an acceptable resolution which would have preempted the courts having final say in the matter. Yet they never seized the initiative in a politically mature way.<br />
<br />
Mind you, both parties were absolutely correct in seeking relief from the courts (ALP at the high court; and UPP at appeal court); but this should have only been for purposes of establishing and leveraging negotiating capital (with the other) in the midst of an untoward situation - And never for the purpose of making the court final arbiter.<br />
<br />
It seems both leaders lacked the pragmatic insight and mature statesmanship needed to realize an urgent political resolution was needed; and was in fact the only viable and sustainable option. Both have enough experience and should have known that at best courts could only provide the right to rule; but can never confer emotional acceptance and goodwill needed to govern. <br />
<br />
While it was tactically correct to use the courts to maximize negotiating positions; the urgent task of both leaders was to prevent the courts from having final say in the matter. Sadly a situation requiring mature statesmanship was served only by juvenile one-upmanship; to the eventual disadvantage of all. In the end the bus was missed due to failure of leadership.<br />
<br />
A negotiated political resolution was always going to be far superior to any final ruling the courts could render. And there were many worthy options for consideration: <br />
<ol type="A"><li>Agree to hold fresh general elections immediately <br />
</li>
<li>Agree on by-elections in the constituencies under review; but include any other held by the opposition which might have been equally affected by excessive delays, though not contested by the government due to statutes of limitation.<br />
</li>
<li>Agree to let results stand but also agree to earlier than usual general elections (by mid-term for example).<br />
</li>
<li>Take elections off the table and go for a power sharing formula instead. For example: the opposition gets deputy prime-minister-ship and control of some ministries etc.<br />
</li>
<li>Combinations of any of the above.</li>
</ol>Failure to reach for political compromise is a classic shortcoming of our Island politics. All too often at crucial times power, greed, and narrow adolescent leadership get in the way of imaginative, noble politics. At vial moments political leaders must demonstrate a mature, self regulated, cooperative capacity for putting national good front and center. This was one such time! <br />
<br />
Regrettably, failure of leadership and the courts have left an outcome that is for all intents and purposes legal; yet not intellectually, emotionally and politically kosher. The only solace is that it’s teachable. <br />
From this object lesson politicians should reflectively examine where their thresholds lie regarding political decency, democratic piety and leadership integrity; not to mention imaginative statesmanship. I am not at all suggesting we baptize politics. There are times strategic gamesmanship is necessary, and commendable in advancing political advantage. Equally, leaders must be mature enough to appreciate and respect; none can win if democracy must lose. <br />
<br />
Pedantically suggesting folks simply forget it and move on is a further fickle leadership response to this matter. Intellectual and emotional catharsis begins by recognizing and owning the courts did not serve the matter well; but also that political leaders failed to exercise mature nobility at a crucial national moment. <br />
<br />
Yet I firmly believe in redemptive notions, and the unrelenting pursuit of greatest good. I have had the opportunity of private conversations with both political leaders in A&B. Both unquestionably possess the capacity for mature responsible reckoning. Perhaps it’s not too late for them to sit at what MLK liked to call the table of brotherhood and come up with a political accommodation concerning this matter that lends for greater intellectual and emotional acceptance across a wider spectrum of A&B society. The critical challenges presently facing this twin island deserve, demand no less! <br />
<strong><br />
</strong><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><strong>Part III</strong></div><div style="text-align: center;"><strong>This Matter & the CCJ: Impact and Options</strong></div><br />
<br />
At a public rally following the EC appeals court decision, the Opposition Leader in A&B let fly deep reservations about the emergent CCJ. In pertinent part he is reported to have said that if this is the best regional courts can do; then he promises no one A&B will be “going down that road” under an ALP government. <br />
<br />
Clearly both tale and tail of this matter have an impact on the wider quest for a final court to serve all of CARICOM. Apathy and antipathy resulting from this verdict have trickled down towards the embryonic CCJ at a time when it could least afford downsides to its image. <br />
<br />
Ordinarily one may classify the Opposition Leader’s statement as knee jerk reaction to disappointment, except that it must be added to a list of similar echoes from Kingston to Port-Of-Spain that seem to indicate an existing crisis of confidence regarding the quality of decisions to be expected at CCJ. <br />
In general the problem affecting CCJ is the problem of Caricom itself- an institution paid lip service but not backed by substantive political commitment, will and action. The problem undermining CCJ is the hypocrisy and disingenuousness so prevalent in Caricom itself. <br />
<br />
How does one begin to explain the glowing report given by the Caricom observer team to A&B’s 2009 elections when said event has since been declared as having significant violations of the rules by both high court and court of appeal? I suppose we must await a ‘Wiki Leaks’ version of what was truly submitted to the Secretary General. <br />
<br />
And yet, even when one subtracts the insularity and distrust among Caricom; even when one factors out hypocrisies and disingenuousness, the CCJ initiative is still clearly afflicted with a crisis of confidence that is itself directly related to anecdotal experiences people have suffered regarding miscarriage of justice in local and appeals courts across the region. <br />
<br />
A major stumbling block to embracing the CCJ is what psychologists call Projection. People are projecting their current judicial fears and suspicions unto the CCJ; and they seem to remain unconvinced that factors unrelated to justice (politics, corruption, class, race etc) will not influence judicial outcomes at the CCJ the way they apparently do in local and appeal courts across the region. <br />
<br />
And it is in this regard the disgraceful ruling of the EC appeals court did nothing to boost much needed confidence in the CCJ. Some of you may recall reading this in Part I: “One is left wondering if the decision itself wasn’t made for other purposes and then feasible rationalizations sought and proffered as justifying cover. It is very hard to discern intellectual integrity in the appeal court’s ruling”. <br />
<br />
Eventually however, I’m not sure we have any option but the CCJ. Recently the presiding chairman of the Privy Council said that in the best scenario all former colonies (that still do) will establish their own final appellant courts and not continue to burden the Privy Council with their matters. Suggestion: close the door on your way out. Notice: door may remain closed on your next visit. A hint that’s a warning if you ask me! How many of our leaders are listening?!<br />
<br />
Besides the onerous economic cost for going to the Privy Council (given exchange rates); how does one quantify the cost in ‘shame’ terms that such a hint has on our independence in the region? <br />
Against this backdrop, it was very interesting to hear an eminent Jamaican jurist (as have many others) recently argue the urgent need for the region to buy-in to the CCJ, and have true judicial independence compliment our already established political independence. In a passionate plea he went on to quote the late great Marcus Garvey as saying “it is better to govern or even misgovern yourself than be governed by someone else” <br />
<br />
I wished the matter was that simple! But honestly, no amount of pride or shame can adequately soothe the gripping pains that accompany the miscarriage of justice. Besides, for all its sentiment on autonomy, Garvey’s statement will not move people in this post information age Caribbean. They simply do not have the long suffering it takes to be misgoverned- particularly in matters relating to miscarriage of justice. <br />
<br />
For all these reasons and more our people still go trekking off to the Privy Council despite that it remains tarnished with the residual drippings of colonialism. <br />
<br />
Our predicament is: on one hand we are being ‘shoved off;’ and on the other ‘we aren’t ready yet’. Summarily, the CCJ has to work; but we have to get it right, and quickly so. There are no other options; plain and simple! <br />
<br />
Anyone still asking: CCJ or not; is not just asking a wrong question; but clearly a non-question! Rightly, the only question is: Under what conditions can we swiftly get the CCJ to become what the Privy Council is in terms of being a repository of our confidence in matters of justice? <br />
<br />
I think embracing the CCJ begins with accepting that even the Privy Council in its formative stage must have undoubtedly endured quite some measure of suspicion itself. And must have made mistakes before emerging the bulwark of jurisprudence it presently is perceived to be. Look, as our final appellant court the CCJ will render good judgments as well as bad ones; of that I am sure. <br />
<br />
Still all such acknowledgments are not good enough. We much proactively build in the best practices for assuaging reliance on the CCJ as our final appellant court. <br />
<br />
To this end I can readily think of at least three elements, even if short term, that must be in place to hastily move the CCJ towards redressing its crisis of confidence. <br />
<ol type="1"><li>Aggressive Dispassionate Intellectual Push Back: It must be openly agreed the court is not too sacrosanct to be responsibly censured by word or pen. The idea is not to pull down or disrespect; but to keep judges aware their decisions are being observed and evaluated by alert, capable, public minded guardians of regional society. <br />
</li>
<li>Aggressive Caricom Oversight: There must be an appropriately qualified panel in place to provide quality control reviews of CCJ performance. This body can also act as a clearing house for vetting concerns regarding how dynamics related to size; wealth, ethnicity etc are perceived to be impacting CCJ dispensed justice.<br />
</li>
<li>Aggressive Clandestine Surveillance: Not only for Judges’ safety but the peoples’ jurisprudential safety as well. We must not only know who is threatening judges; but also which judge, if any, is threatening justice by way of corrupt proclivities, and/or political collusions etc. </li>
</ol>This list is by no means exhaustive; and though a little controversial, is but a starting point for getting things right.<ol type="1"></ol>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-14797341537915384822010-05-13T12:08:00.002-04:002011-10-10T10:19:56.075-04:00Kamla: Potential Prime Minister- A Critical Analysis<div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">As Ms. Bissessar seeks the highest political and executive office in the land, necessity and wisdom demand assessing potential outcomes under her leadership rather than regretful discovery under testing future circumstances.</span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">We live on a complex postmodern global landscape; these are consequential times! Too much is at stake for Trinidad and Tobago to passively accept a <i>boutique designed</i> leader. My sense is that Ms. Bissessar’s giddy progress towards the prime minister’s office is a dubious dynamic more happening around her than crafted by her; and far less controlled by her! </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Whose interests is served if a band of expatriate marketing experts hype and psyche us into electing a prime minister without critical scrutiny of her suitability and capacity? This exercise requires sober analysis and considered deliberation. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">What is worse, the foreign formulated, carefully Choreographed disguise of Kamla as- feminine power whose time has come- only lends indignity and insult to the many strong intelligent women who have already successfully and legitimately positioned themselves throughout our society. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Notwithstanding the hyperbole of her well managed ascendancy, perhaps it’s yet not too late for careful assessment of Ms. Bissessar’s leadership suitability and capacity. Pride in our independence, indigenous intelligence, and localized wisdom requires no less.</span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Kamla’s Leadership Suitability:</span></b></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">The study of leadership goes beyond the awed mystique of leaders on followers; and so must we. It includes analyzing and profiling how a leader will likely govern. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Before evaluating her particular leadership capacities (part II) I will attempt to help profile Ms. Bissessar in terms of overarching considerations that usually predict suitability to govern. I refer to physical wellbeing, philosophical grounding, and psychometric bearing. Invariably these will independently as well as interactively impact her ability in office- so some semblance of a serious peek into these areas is important. Regrettably with elections a mere two weeks this has not yet been done; and constitutes a major slip up by our local analysts and intelligentsia.</span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">At 57, kamla appears in good physical shape; but her job application obliges more than passing glance. She will do herself a ton of good to tender for public record a recent medical- especially relating to any current or imminent degenerative impediments. Crises surrounding leaders’ mortality are well documented as triggers for blurred judgments that produce urgent but un-salutary agendas. And since this is a Peoples Partnership we have to multiply this assessment times 6 or 7 and ask: How will unknown illness or demise of any player likely affect chemistry and/or agendas in the coalition?</span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Next, what is Kamla’s philosophy of life? What core values inform and chart her human outlook and interactions? What is her political philosophy? How appreciated is her regard for the inter-sect between legitimacy and democracy? How sacrosanct does she hold Separation of Powers and under what conditions does she view violations tolerable if at all? And very importantly, how does her grounding on these issues square with other key players in The Partnership? </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">For example, Jack Warner is known to both espouse and practice a political philosophy that claims “yesterday is yesterday, today is today and tomorrow will be tomorrow” – An ethic that allows him to unflinchingly use abuse and dump many significant bodies and change policies along the way as chips fall where they may. Does Kamla embrace this outlook? And what are the implications for stable governance, as well as her own longevity, given Mr. Warner is kingmaker in the coalition?</span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Still the biggest question is: Do Kamla’s philosophies as well as those of her federated partners square with the best interests of Trinidad and Tobago? The mischief of accommodations (notwithstanding general pledges to unison) is that each primary player silently retains un-surrendered sentiments of rights to leadership. This means the larger the coalition, and more disparate the philosophy of key players; the more difficult it will be to achieve coherent philosophies of governance to advance the country’s good. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Until their core values and philosophies of life and politics are clarified and reconciled with the nation’s greatest good, the People Partnership reminds of the two headed snake school children found and named Cute Little Harry. That was before tests revealed each head was capable of taking Harry in different directions simultaneously. As he spent most of his time going around in circles Cute Harry was soon renamed Poor Harry. One has to wonder, with multiple heads in this federation, do we have before us a structural and ideological schizophrenia? </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Third, in considering her psychometrics, the very nature of the federated beast Kamla leads suggests she needs a sterling psychological construct and healthy well assured emotions. Her psycho-emotional constitution is even more critical as one ponders the strong discordant personalities with whom she has surrounded herself under a euphemistic Peoples Partnership. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Does Kamla have the emotional confidence to contend, far less successfully manage these forces that potentially wait to engulf and overwhelm her? Does she possess the critical psychological bearings to lead while walking on egg shells? What is her emotional capacity for stress, threats and trauma? What evidence does the country have of Kamla’s psychological balance and emotional poise under duress or turbulence?</span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">It is also not unreasonable to inquire whether Ms. Bissessar’s ready embrace of foreign image consultants and easy decent into false accent, hairdo and clothing reflect an unhealthy sense of self and deep identity confusion? Does this not suggest she may be harboring serious unresolved complexes? One has to further ask: Is her quest for top office intended to camouflage or resolve deep seated psycho logic needs and/or serious inner conflicts? Are her actions sending reassuring psychological signals of leadership suitability? Ms. Bissessar will do well to help the nation better understand her inner self and develop confidence in her emotional bearings. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Of course the issue of her purported alcohol dependency does not help; it only serves to further complicate her psychological profile. What is the truth content of this rumor? Is she presently alcohol dependent, a recovering alcoholic; or social drinker with a tendency to overdo? And are there in fact embarrassing documented episodes of indiscretion that are likely to render her psychologically-politically vulnerable when necessary hard decisions must be made? </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Perhaps it was hypocritical, even disingenuous of Mr. Panday to raise this matter in run up to UNC leadership elections (given his own past challenges as well as the fact that he kept her in his cabinet under said rumored conditions). Yet short of unequivocal clarity from Ms. Bissessar, this issue discolors her psychological profile and sharply raises her leadership liabilities. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> Among others, these are some of the physical, philosophical and psychological considerations that challenge Ms. Bissessar’s suitability for high office. Clearly there are matters here she must urgently address and clarify in order to be seriously considered for the position to which she aspires.</span></span></div><br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b> President/CEO, MOHDC <i>http://www.mohdc.com</i> <i>Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-34366849995443732642010-04-21T11:21:00.002-04:002011-10-10T11:33:18.105-04:00Honestly Speaking: The Mischief of Truth & Value of Lies!<div style="font: 9.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px; text-align: center;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><i>From my lips will come what is right; for my mouth will utter truth.</i></span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Backdrop</span></b></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;">Imagine politicians reciting above preamble </span><span style="font: normal normal normal 9px/normal 'Times New Roman'; letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">(Proverbs 6:7) </span></span><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;">with passionate sincerity! Believe me, to the last one they will! Still, my politician’s Oscar goes to disgraced former Chicago governor Rod Blagojevich for looking into the cameras and quoting Kipling “…don’t deal in lies” before straight facedly declaring “I am confident I have the greatest ally on my side; the truth”! </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Recent egregious transgressions of lies posturing as truth in the public domain have aroused urgent integrity concerns among leadership scholars not seen since Watergate. Of course, our Caribbean Island States are themselves never short on the drama of lies as truth in public space. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">The Eagles’ popularized myth (<i>there ain’t no way to hide your lying eyes</i>) has long been debunked by leaders. We’re not far from standard dictionaries safely defining leaders in general and politicians in particular as- Persons adroit; even gifted in telling lies while claiming truth. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">But how do they pull it off with such ease while lying seems to torture the average person?</span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">This essay is about why politicians lie and how to fix it. While exploring <i>politics in the truth</i> and <i>politics of the truth</i>; it boldly examines the nature and role of truth in public spheres. In a subject crying for lucidity I’m challenged for parsimony. I trust your curiosity and crave your tolerance.</span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Insight but No Help</span></b></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">A bit of nuanced research out of Columbia University’s business school (Carney et al, 2009) helps shed light on how leaders are able to pull off searing incisive lies without the slightest outward appearance of dishonesty! </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;">In pertinent part findings claim the emotional satisfaction power yields produces anti-cortisol effects on the body- thereby shielding leaders from displaying physiological signs of stress and discomfort that lying normally produces in the average person. In other words,</span><span style="font: normal normal normal 9.5px/normal 'Times New Roman'; letter-spacing: 0px;"> </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;">power, it seems, enhances the same emotional, cognitive, and physiological systems that lie telling depletes. So don’t look for normal cues such as shifting eyes, nervous looks, fidgeting feet and hands etc to detect a leader is untruthful; you’d be fooled. The feel of power or the quest for power renders leaders immune to such nervous effects. They’re able to act <i>the lie-truth</i> with super calm efficiency!</span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">But is grasping mechanics that enable politicians to readily lie the same as understanding why they actually do? The answer is of course, no; and is something we will come to shortly. But first let’s examine what professor Carney and other experts suggest can rectify lies in leaders and result in greater truthfulness. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Carney thinks “reminding a leader that the behavior is bad can get the person to stop engaging in those transgressions” and also feels “more discussions on ethics and integrity can help throw some cold water on fibbing bosses.” Peter Cohan (Values Leadership) opines it is the role of oversight bodies to stop lying executives. Mary Gentile (Giving Voice to Values) suggests letting it be known that an issue is known and understood will help leaders know they “can’t fly under the radar with deceit.” Even Harvard Business School has a suggestion for getting leaders to be more truthful. It’s called the “MBA Oath” and is designed to make leaders pledge to be ethical and think of the greater good. They “want it to be more than just words on a page” so they give signers an MBA Oath card to carry in their wallets.</span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">I won’t be surprised if you’re chuckling- Reminds me of the Beatles famous <i>Imagine</i>. These specialists must be dreamers- and hope someday we’d join them so the world could be as one uh.</span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">A Dose of Honesty</span></b></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Leadership truthfulness in the public domain is messy, filled with drama; and does not come with easy answers. Honestly speaking why leaders and politicians lie so readily has very little to do with their ethical constructs, and a lot more to do with the <i>nature</i> and <i>role</i> of truth in public space. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;">That famous 16</span><span style="font: normal normal normal 7.3px/normal 'Times New Roman'; letter-spacing: 0px;"><sup>th</sup></span><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"> century counselor of leaders, Machiavelli, has long been posthumously warning those who desire survival not to speak the truth when doing would likely cost them <i>the kingdom</i>. And who can forget Jack Nicholson’s epic self righteous indignation in <i>A Few Good Men</i> as he bellows “you want the truth; you can’t handle the truth”! A modern day version of Plato’s timeless assertion that leaders should withhold truth from subjects out of concern for their own <i>good</i>!</span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">The irony is that despite the best concealment ploys, sooner rather than later truth seeps out; and people are forced to ‘handle it’. Time and time again they have demonstrated they can handle it. Wiser but sadder, it’s not that people can’t handle the truth; but more so that leaders don’t wish to be handled by the truth! And yet, it is still not that simple.</span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">It is not so much that leaders in and of themselves do not wish to be handled by the truth; but that they have come to learn it’s not in their best interest to be handled by the truth. Honestly speaking, one must further concede there is value and seemingly virtue in leaders telling lies while pretending to speak truth. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">What the Truth Has Become & How We Got Here</span></b></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">It seems inadequate to suggest truthfulness in leaders can be reduced to pedantic uttering such as <i>honesty is the best policy</i>, <i>truth you win</i>; <i>lie you lose</i>, or even <i>truth shall set you free</i>. Indeed it is also disingenuous to assume sitting in Sunday school and avowing to <i>speak the truth and shame the devil</i> is the same as standing on the pragmatic plains of real politick- where truth itself can be the <i>devil</i> with dangerous pitfalls and serious consequences. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Any honest discussion of truth and politics must be willing to acknowledge there is <i>politics in the truth </i>and <i>politics of the truth</i>; and that the notion we call truth is often just that, a notion; even a virtuously mischievous one. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Only a foolish politician falls for the calypsonian’s bait “<i>tell we de truth so we could fix we business to suit</i>” without realizing that <i>fixing business</i> likely includes voting out said leader for telling <i>de truth</i>. The Polish Prime Minister waited six months after his appointment in 2008 to finally come clean with compatriots. “In the run up to elections I lied to you morning, noon and night” he confessed. Pressed by journalists on this <i>alarming disclosure</i> he further explained “that’s how I got elected.” Hinting of course had he spoke the truth it would not have happened.</span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">To a large extent leaders in general and politicians in particular lie because publics often tend not to want to hear the truth as a first or primary recourse. As with any living organism the public tries to repel, or at least defer, stress caused by bad news or by any harbinger of discomfort. This is a subtly decided dysfunction, a conspiracy of convenience if you will. But there is more to the naughty dynamic of truth, and ultimately lies as truth, in public space!</span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">In order to facilitate our decided dysfunction or conspiracy of convenience, two simultaneous operatives of truth are made to coexist. On one hand there is mental expectation of bare knuckle honesty from leaders; truth as principle. On the other hand there is truth as notion, strategy, mischief; even game. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">In this duality our mental expectations regarding truth are often in diagonal conflict with actual conditions under which leaders are forced to operate. No surprise really that this double-sided or two faced interplay of truth produces our broken politics, with the brinksmanship that largely defines it. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Let me illustrate how our current political landscape of truth as bare knuckle honesty and truth as mischief bears testimony to <i>the</i> <i>politics in truth</i> and <i>the</i> <i>politics of truth</i>. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Notice how oppositions always want governments to <i>tell the people the truth</i>; but only while in opposition. Notice how once they become government they also become strangers to the very truth they previously clamored for in the name of the people. And notice how the people accept this truth charade! Truthfulness is celebrated as a principle to cherish; but not necessarily rewarded as a practice to honor. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">This stark dynamic explains how truth can be postured as bare knuckle honesty only in order to use it as deliberate strategy and mischievous notion. In this way truth is made to play <i>arsonist</i>, instrument or tool to effect professional derailment, expose psychological vulnerability and trigger political demise; while at the same time being used as <i>fireman</i> to propel and leverage power.</span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Of course governments know this only too well (after all they were once opposition) and therefore well understand their role regarding the truth is to be a great spin master- hedgy and untruthful enough to remain unexposed; while honest just enough not to be disgraced. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">In thinking about the leadership predicament of truth in public space, two separate but much related observations stand out: </span></span></div><ol><list-style type="1">
<li>Truth causes the same nervous effects in leaders/politicians that lies have on the average person. Accordingly, leaders/politicians are just as nervous about being <i>caught in the truth</i> as average persons are about being <i>caught in a lie</i>.</li>
<li>The dynamic interplay of truth as principle Vs truth as strategy and game forcibly yields <i>politics in truth</i> and <i>politics of truth</i>- Which invariably results in the <i>mischief</i> of truth, and the<i> value</i> of lies.</li>
</list-style></ol><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">The Way Out: Partners in Problem Solving</span></b></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">As we round towards the end, what are our options regarding leaders and truthfulness? First, a soliloquy-</span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">A young Caribbean minister recently admitted flawed oversight on his part and committed to preempt recurrence through robust care going forward. Immediately the opposition began shark like circles while the media activated feeding frenzy mode. Call in participants jeered. And of course, pundits pronounced <i>final rites </i>given public record confession. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Notice, not one sanguine sentiment praising honest public disclosure! Not one serious attempt to grasp an opportunity to engage a new social contract or telegraph a new leadership outlook between public and politicians! In preference for intrigue, mischief; game, a golden opportunity for fostering truthfulness- complete with structures of accountability including rewards/sanctions pertaining to a promised commitment of new carefulness went a-begging. It was disheartening.</span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Emerging from this entire expose on leadership and truth, a few options are available.</span></span></div><ol><list-style="1">
<li>Embrace Raw Pragmatism: In a bout of Freudian catharsis, a Caribbean politician went on record in suggesting we’d be all better off realizing and accepting politics has its own morality. That of course is not only an inadequate shortcut to resolving a critical dilemma; but also a dangerous precedent with far reaching implications for social order. </li>
<li>Officially <i>Anoint</i> Brinksmanship: In other words just be more open and accepting of our present order. A world in which the leader’s role is to develop adroitness in reading the public’s mood and rhythm for truth; while employing the requisite savvy for lies, half truths and innuendos, or at least incremental disclosure. We can keep this present order with its collectively conjured arrangement- In which we inadvertently conspire with ourselves against ourselves to create <i>misleaders</i>- Persons who lie enough to be liked while being truthful just enough not to be disgraced. In this milieu we can live with the intrigue if we’re also prepared to live with the discontent and chivalry of tomfoolery- in which truth forever remains mischief or vice but seldom benefit, victim or villain but hardly victor; even attack or defense but never triumph.</li>
<li>Build A Higher Ethic, More Sophisticated Reality, A New Order: I speak here of establishing a greater nobility, a more wholesome rubric to guide leader/follower intercourse in public space. A partnership of responsibility between people and leaders; partners in problem solving instead of deceit, deferment or avoidance if you will. When publics begin to value/reward leaders for disclosure as well as capacity/acumen for innovative problem solving; but more importantly for ability to inspire joint problem solving with followers, then we’ll be ready to build this new reality- where truth emerges benefit, victor; triumph. Until the public is willing to play an active role in repositioning truth from where it is presently (i.e. being a two edged game and strategy) to being what it ought to be (i.e. a principle and means to betterment) we should not expect executives or political leaders to be excited or trusting about calls for truthful disclosure.</li>
</list-style="1"></ol><br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b> President/CEO, MOHDC <i>http://www.mohdc.com</i> <i>Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-32847013183555328442010-02-11T10:38:00.000-05:002011-10-10T10:39:52.953-04:00Graceful Savagery! How We Retire Our Leaders<div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">As the legendary Basdeo Panday desperately soldiers on feet ajar, one in the grave, the other on a banana skin! I am surprised that most commentators are themselves alarmed he won’t go riding silent and graceful<i> into the sunset</i>. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Beyond this immediate dramatic interplay between people and a leader lies the larger painful reality that Island Politics has not yet found a healthy way to retire its leaders. Almost to the last one, we force each to either <i>die with boots on</i> or go as a pathetic disconsolate. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">The rapturous <i>When I Come to the End of My Way</i> is not an inspiring epitaph or of sufficient comfort to anyone who has whiffed from the chalice of power and is asked/forced to breathe ordinary air again. And yet that is the easy part; it’s not only about the power <i>thing</i>!</span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Perhaps if we pause long enough to have leaders interrogate us we will hear them asking: Is it fair/just to force a leader to give up his/her position without first understanding what that position means/represents to him/her? </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Of course leaders are themselves partially to blame for their ultimate inglorious endgame because they come offering bestowals of themselves with altruism and self sacrifice for greater human good as the legitimate front, with little or no self disclosure of their urgent underlying psycho-logic needs. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">On the other hand the public is to blame also. Not only for believing the altruistic rationalizations and platitudes leaders offer; but also for embracing leadership services offered without stopping to ask hard questions re what psycho-biographical underpinnings and deep seated emotional/identity needs leaders may be desperately seeking to satisfy under the guise of ‘service.’ </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Truth is, the worthy cause a leader champions seldom adequately explains his/her passions. On the contrary, the cause often provides justification for hidden powerful emotional states of inward hunger the leader is being overwhelmed by and must satisfy/reconcile. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">For example when Basdeo Panday speaks perennially of the people’s struggle to which he is so committed those who understand him to mean what he says are fooled as much as he also fools himself. The people’s struggle to which he is ever so committed is never the cause in itself. Panday is better understood as being in fact more committed to a psycho-logic quest surrounding his sense of self and internal validation. In other words the quest/cause is his search for meaning and value to his existence. The people’s struggle is his euphuism; a vehicle for his deep seated psychological needs – Needs which he discovered find fulfillment in pouring himself out on behalf of people; because in turn he derives greater satisfaction from having people beholden to him. </span></span></div><div style="font: 11.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Until we are willing to understand and grapple with the real needs of leaders and are also willing to engage in searching out transactions that allow them equally satisfying emotional substitutes, it is not only unfair; but graciously savage of us to force them into retirement without understanding we are in effect asking them to <i>ride off</i> into self proclaimed insignificance, psychological invalidity and emotional purgatory. Small wonder most prefer to die with their boots on, in pursuit of continuing to yet fulfill their psychological needs than accept and lend validation to their own ‘unvaluableness’ and <i>loss of self</i>.</span></span></div><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #444444;"><b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b> President/CEO, MOHDC <i>http://www.mohdc.com</i> <i>Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</i></span>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-30743008624808171852009-10-26T13:50:00.001-04:002009-10-26T13:50:55.589-04:00Vincie Sex Scandal & Caribbean Progress<i><b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Article</span></b></i><br />
Power, politics and sex have always been bacchanal territory. Factor justice into the mix and there is intrigue; perhaps passionate volatility. Typically I refrain from intra nation state issues because I view local intelligentsia more adept in explicating contextual pertinence. However, the matter at hand has tremendous import for regional evolution with particular reference to leadership development, social infrastructure; and more importantly, the CCJ.<br />
<br />
Across the Caribbean, the struggle powerful men have with their zip region finds no comfort as things unfurl around St. Vincent’s Prime Minister- who is clearly in a present dilemma, if not quagmire. The paradox of quagmire is that robust effort to extricate one’s self is exactly what aids faster sinking. In an aptly entitled novel, <i>Things Fall Apart</i> Achebe utilizes an indigenous village bird to dispense life related wisdom. The creature confesses “since men have learnt to shoot straighter, I have been forced to take fewer rest stops.” With notable exceptions, the quality of <i>shooting</i> related to this unfolding episode leaves much to be desired. Perhaps more careful distillation will enhance <i>flight patterns</i> as we seek sustainable systems on our journey to regional maturity.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Possible Scenarios- Wider Implications</b><br />
</div>Although essentials for arriving at truth are absent, many have chosen to subtly or openly cast direct aspersions and innuendoes. Though challenging, I think it’s not too late to have objective outlook and healthy debate for greater good. So what do we have before us in Vincie land? Allegation of rape against a sitting prime minister is never easy to imagine or digest. The burning million dollar question: is this claim of valid or frivolous origin? When the dust settles I suppose we will come to learn truth. From what is already known, similar high profile allegations usually fall into any of four possibilities: <br />
<ol><li><b>Political mischief</b>: wickedness in high places is not foreign to Caribbean politics. A woman suddenly appeared from Miami claiming paternal alimony from T&T’s PM for his long neglected ‘outside’ child. The moralizing PM who cherishes aspirations of being a pastor upon leaving politics was clearly stunned by the headlined allegation. Wisely he maintained his calm, suggesting it would be interesting to learn entities behind the accusation. Once the media began due diligence investigating, the lady disappeared as magically as she arrived. Although bananas are grown in the region, our islands are not banana republics. We do not change governments or prime ministers by bullets or bacchanal- maliciously designed. Newspapers and media houses must not only report sensational headlines; but equally must follow through with rigorous investigating to discover incriminating or exculpatory evidence. </li>
<li><b>Professional Desperation</b>: Public servants who lose faith in oversight and regulatory bodies are known to draw on preemptively concocted spurious allegations in order to offset unjustified impending censure or transfer etc. This tactic is also sometimes employed to deliberately forestall justified sanctions. If public servants will forgo this type of creative aggression as means of desperate defense, regulatory and oversight bodies/persons need to engender high levels of confidence in their capacity and agency to redress injustices and fears without prejudice and favor towards power.</li>
<li><b>Personal Indiscretion Fallout</b>: Unreserved triumphalism and exuberance by counsel aligned with the state does nothing to deny plaintiff and her advisers still hold all the marbles in this game- and may yet unleash them as a ton of bricks on the PM. This disquiet I am sure yet remains a frightful consideration in the power halls of Kingstown. </li>
<li><b>Pathological Tendencies</b>: While a few high ranking powerful persons are known to possess deviant sexual tendencies; it is also true that some accusers of public figures also possess tendencies for pathological prevaricating. One thing the allegation will eventually reveal is that either accused possesses tendencies for pathological sexual deviance or accuser possesses tendencies for pathological asservations. Beyond commentary on personal condition, public attention would be forced on the institution he/she represents as well as the organizations to which he/she belongs; and out of which he/she has come.<br />
</li>
</ol><div style="text-align: center;"><b>Adjusting Caribbean Flight Patterns</b><br />
</div>As hinted in my opening, this episode holds extrapolates implications for regional progress in three essential areas: leadership development, social infrastructure and the CCJ.<br />
<br />
Leadership: Of necessity our lopsided conversation must shift from descriptions of how our leaders lead and behave to include conditions under which we manage them. In an earlier piece (Spare a Thought for Politicians) I tried to highlight the greater role publics need to play in developing the leaders we want- instead of simply accepting/rejecting those we get. In this regard- <br />
<ol><li>There is urgency to clear up the double speak we give our leaders. To what extent are leaders clearly aware, as part of their development, that while we expect them to be normal individuals there are similarities to us we will not accept in them- In other words we must clarify for them the similarities and dissimilarities to which we will hold them accountable? This is an essential area in which the Caribbean can lead the world in showcasing mature partnered responsibility for leadership development. In other words, leaders must get that leadership hypocrisy is not only unacceptable; but that there are also public hypocrisies that we do not expect them to practice. This is something leaders must learn, understand and accept. </li>
<li>Organizations need to place greater premium on realizing if someone comes through their ranks and later reveals pathological deviance this transgression is not simply in the domain of individual dysfunction; but rather is commentary on system failure. Organizations, political parties and society must appreciate the role of effectively grooming and regulating leadership power. If power is allowed to increasingly go on the rampart unchecked, sowing the wind eventually yields the whirlwind of metastasized fallout- and responsibility for this outcome must rest squarely on the shoulders of organization and societal systems that facilitated and abetted this escalating dysfunction. In other words leaders don’t simply wake up one day and act in monster like fashions. They actions more accurately reflect escalating emboldeness based on public blindness, complicity and latitudes. <br />
</li>
</ol><b>Social Infrastructure</b>: Giving facts on a matter is not the same as speaking the truth about the situation. Last year standard dictionaries added a new word - truthiness. Interestingly, this word was first coined by a comedian who sought to illustrate the difference between factual accounts versus truly honest disclosures. Democracy is better served by truthiness; bureaucracy and power agendas are better served by so called factual accounts. If democracy will flourish greater strides toward truthiness must be pursued. The agendas of power driven selfish agendas are best concealed by factual accounts; it is the role of media houses, interest groups and grassroots organizations to move beyond factual accounts and authorized versions to hold feet to the fire under the searing lights of truthiness. While bureaucratic obfuscation may relish mere facts; democracy blossoms when electorates are educated and empowered by way of practiced truthiness.<br />
<br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-42910715377741537002009-10-26T13:50:00.000-04:002009-10-26T13:50:24.573-04:00Spare a Thought for Politicians- Response to Responses<i><b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Article</span></b></i><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Veranda Issues</b><br />
</div>Mr. Hurst’s response to my article, could at best, only be described as nothing but sundry noises. Comments aren’t remotely related to the central thrust of my article. One is left wondering what understanding of my thesis, if any, preceded his diatribe- I think none.<br />
<br />
Issues raised by Mr. Astaphan are more on track, though sometimes digressing into the peripheral. Prior to addressing emerging themes that relate directly to the seminal article, three concerns (about the discussion to-date) are appropriate:<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<ol><li><b>Armchair References</b>: As a social science researcher/theorist, I’m typically saddened, if not curious, when practitioners invoke the <i>armchair</i> handle. This cliché must be exposed and discouraged for what it usually is- a strategy designed to minimize criticism/review; and to carefully preserve preferred status quo ignorance. It is far more helpful to realize that the critical intersect between theory and practice is what advances our social order. In other words, theory informs practice and practice expands theory- they’re healthily correlated, inextricable and symbiotic. Suggesting otherwise by way of <i>armchair</i> labeling is cheap yesterday’s politics born of diffident reasoning.</li>
<li><b>Frequent/Liberal Naming of Politicians/Places</b>: While I appreciate the desire to give practical anchors to an idea/argument - How certain are we this indulged temptation isn’t counter productive to <i>add value</i>; a hurt more than a help? I suspect it is:</li>
<ol><li>Naming a person/place is more often an unfitting distraction (from the advanced idea) than an appropriate crutch or aid for thinking.</li>
<li>Readers are quite capable of making their own appropriate linkages according to prevailing conditions in their individual Island States. </li>
<li>Persons/places so named are often either unfairly advantaged or unfairly disadvantaged in comparison to related others not named. </li>
<li>It tends to discredit debate and suggests an agenda less salutary to exchanging noble ideas. Instead, it portends inkling for bacchanal, promotionalism or pandering- under such conditions <i>my heart has no desire to stay</i>.</li>
</ol>
<li><b>Absence of Critical Voices</b>: It would help if this important discussion is assisted through more direct participation by political practitioners as well as more voices from among public readers (as players in the political process). Perhaps they will yet quickly join in; unless of course their submissions have been made but are not yet posted.</li>
</ol><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Sitting Room Issues</b><br />
</div>A spinoff debate from my article (<i>Spare a Thought for Politicians</i>) surrounds whether the prevailing negative perception that the public holds about politicians (in general) is fact or fiction. To Dr. Newton it is more than fiction, closer to fact; Mr. Astaphan contends it is fictitious- grounded in public gullibility and misinformation. It is important to note from the outset, my article does not address whether or not the public’s perception of politicians is fact or fiction or for that matter right or wrong. Rather, my article is centrally dedicated to examining and accounting for the ways in which behaviors by politicians reflect ways in which the public itself grooms and elicits these behaviors from politicians. But we will come to that in the next section. Let’s return to the public’s perception of politicians: fact or fiction; right or wrong? <br />
<br />
Arguments are won or lost based on how they’re framed; so hair splitting is important. While Dr. Newton’s position seems clear, I’m not sure re Mr. Astapahn’s position. Is he saying there is no public perception that holds politicians in negative light or that what is claimed to be a public perception is really only a minority perception? If this is the claim, he simply needs to confront the overwhelmingly universal data; no discussion is warranted. On the other hand (from what I gather) Mr. Astaphan appears to hold:<br />
<ul><li>Yes, there is a prevailing negative public perception of politicians in general; but that’s all it is- a perception and not a fact. And further,</li>
<li>This perception is fed by public misinformation & gullibility; and does not reflect the formal record (charges, documented media exposures etc). And further,</li>
<li>To the extent this perception is fact, it is really factual only about a minority of politicians; not the majority.</li>
</ul>These arguments are valuable in what they affirm; but are misleading in what they subtly deny. Here are some considerations for further fleshing out this matter.<br />
<ol><li>Perceptions may not always equal facts; but they certainly do not equal fiction- Instead, they equal <i>reality</i>! The prevailing public perception that politicians in general are not to be trusted- is a perceptual reality that must be reckoned with. </li>
<li>Ubiquitous references about our dysfunctional political culture suggest public disgust with politicians is closer to perceived reality than fictitious sentiment. Further, it helps to remember culture is shaped by endemic and systemic behavior of the majority; not by arbitrary actions of the minority. A notion of a broken political culture is commentary on perceived behaviors of the majority of politicians, not the minority.</li>
<li>Politicians themselves understand and accept this reality. Why else do they (including Caribbean ones) pitch themselves to the public in caricatures that suggest “I’m one of <i>you</i>; I’m not one of <i>them</i>; I can be trusted.” Even when this posture cannot be adopted without causing greater suspicion, the pitch then becomes: “ok, I may be a politician; but at least I’m a different kind- one that can be trusted”. This positioning/imaging is meant to redress realities of generally held public perceptions re politicians and their image.</li>
<li>The difference between the factual record and the prevailing perceived reality is explained only in part by gullible misinformation. An equal important reason is anecdotal experiences of the public- as individuals and communities that interact with politicians. Often these lived out realities do not make their way to the formal record (for a myriad of interesting reasons) but do in fact shape the perceptions of the public in whose memories they are lodged. Beyond personal and community contact with politicians, people lives are also directly affected by actions that politicians take. What all this means is that even when we account for the effects of deliberate misinformation (and factor them out), there is still significant validity to the perception people hold re politicians based on the direct & indirect impact politicians have on their lives. Let us also remember public comment and other forms of expression (e.g. calypso etc) do not only shape, but also often serve to echo public sentiments (already held).<br />
</li>
</ol><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Kitchen Heat Issues</b><br />
</div>What my article (<i>Spare a thought for politicians</i>) highlights and centrally explores is this phenomenon: <br />
<ul><li>Interesting ways in which public postures help groom dysfunctional behaviors in politicians. The extent to which these behaviors by politician’s then work against the good of the public- causing the public to frown on politicians; and develop sentiments of distrust towards them- effectively putting all blame on politicians. </li>
</ul>Grasping this phenomenon is key to understanding that my article really addresses the two-edged sword that is our present political culture.<br />
<br />
What I am suggesting is that politicians in the main hold good organic moral values and possess upright individual ethical constructs; but that their untoward behaviors are invoked as strategies for defense, success or advancement in what is a vicious political order. In the face of this glaring phenomenon (in which good people appear forced to do bad things in order to succeed) I have called upon the public to spare a thought for politicians. <br />
<br />
Rightly understood my article was asking the public as political participants to accept greater responsibility for things as they presently are in the world of politics by pausing and asking: wait a minute! What have we been doing to cause these people (politicians) who are in the majority <i>good</i> at their core to conduct themselves in <i>bad</i> ways in order to win our support and endorsement? I suggested the public can begin to answer this question by examining three ways in which they help to contribute to what I term the <i>participative dysfunction</i> that is politics. <br />
<ol><li>The irresponsible psychological dependencies they place on politicians- which only encourage offered lies and unkeepable promises (better known as platforms, manifestoes, and other fancy sounding names)</li>
<li>The complicit, implicit & explicit endorsement/enjoyment of a <i>dog eat dog</i> political culture which encourages the <i>by any means necessary</i> desperation on the part of politicians.</li>
<li>Unreasonable stipulations on politicians that are counter to their legitimate human interests- which only serves to increase their short term avarice and/or likely dependence on special interests</li>
</ol>Put another way, the net byproduct of the phenomenon that describes our present politics is not simply that we get the politicians we vote for; but that we get to vote for the politicians we help create and groom. I believe it is in this light, Mr. Astaphan rightly asked in his initial response: who then is to blame, the public or politicians? I’ve argued that both the public and politicians are at once culprits and victims alike- equally, and no less so. It seems the more appropriate question ought to be: What is the way out; and how do we begin to change the course of things?<br />
<br />
Reading between the lines, whereas Mr. Astaphan does not discount public awareness and education in redressing the dysfunctions in politics, he seems less hopeful and therefore less inclined to go that route. Instead, he appears to more heavily favor additional legislation as the primary conduit/savior for reducing/reversing indiscretions by political practitioners. Unfortunately, history is not on his side here. Whether in the Caribbean or further afield, increased legislation seldom curbs excesses by political operatives. What emerges in fact has been the following:<br />
<ul><li>Unenforceable policy- often put together for inoculation effect; with deliberate loopholes </li>
<li>New crafty circumventions that maintain the status quo</li>
<li>The sum result: politics as usual; with an ever increasing apathetic public</li>
</ul>Certainly, Dr. Newton and I favor a focus on public reorientation and empowerment as a preferred approach for undoing dysfunctions in the political sphere. If at the end of the day politics is about securing public endorsement; then it seems terms and conditions both set and rewarded by the public are likely to cause culture change in the body politic more so than policy set by politicians. There is an increased role for the media, tertiary education bodies, and NGOs to play in grassroots enlightenment initiatives; and certainly a need for community centers to become universities of regular civic interaction and directional accountability by publics & politicians. A corollary to this must of necessity include resetting new mental models by politicians- mindsets that cherish openness and trust as new ways of interacting with the public. One correspondent (via email) also suggested the need for mandatory training for politicians in areas such as statesmanship and nobility- a worthy idea indeed. <br />
<br />
Let me say in closing, I do not think exclusivity of a preferred path is the way to set about repositioning and re-culturing politics in the region. A confluence of the best ideas should be packaged and pursued. The one thing that ought to be non-negotiable is our commitment/resolve to doing politics differently to how it is presently practiced.<br />
<br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-17960734097051313442009-10-26T13:49:00.000-04:002009-10-26T13:49:55.421-04:00The Manning/Hinn Affair: Wisdom Vs Folly- An Indigenous Bacchanal Slant<span style="font-size: x-small;"><i><b>Article</b></i></span><br />
Recently, international tele-evangelist Benny Hinn created quite a stir by alluding to Prime Minister Patrick Manning (before his worldwide viewership) as “the most foolish man he ever met.” Beyond providing ready made picong capital to political detractors, the pronouncement and its context lend for interesting review. <br />
<br />
In the case at hand, who is wise and who is foolish are ultimately relative designations dependent upon one’s interest. Just as beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, wisdom or folly is in the mind of the interpreter. Based on what has emerged to-date, I see aplomb consumer awareness exercised by the prime minister in what was in fact an indigenous decision making approach regarding a desired service.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Of course the PM has reserved speaking on the matter so all we have to go by is Mr. Hinn’s selective disclosure and Mr. Duncan’s (witness to the occasion) ambiguous commentary- which reading between the lines, appears to lend some corroboration to Mr. Hinn. <br />
<br />
In pertinent part, it seems the PM (given the nature of his job) was on the market for a spiritual advisor and/or some high powered spiritual coverage- which to be fair, on the basis of anecdotal evidence surrounding predecessors and other high office holders in T&T (and I dare say across the Caribbean), does not appear ludicrous or farfetched. <br />
<br />
Clearly, the PM had narrowed down his preferred service choices to Mr. Hinn and a yet unnamed lady. Presumably, they’d both earlier predicted his electoral victory; and the PM was now seeking something to separate their mystic prowess. He was on a search to decipher the strength and efficacy of the spirit that attended each as a basis for making his choice. What is enthralling about the PM’s approach, and so offensive to Mr. Hinn, is that the PM dared to exercise consumer choice in the matter- by setting up a high powered spirits showdown as a way of facilitating his final selection.<br />
<br />
If you ask me, this has nothing to do with wisdom or folly but sheer consumer bravery, and true Trini idiosyncrasy. That he was willing to be an immediate witness/participant in such high powered spiritual drama/fireworks says something about the PM’s personal confidence and constitution-if not also his penchant for boyish mischief- which suggests the PM is a real trini to heart. In true trini style he set up conditions for a spark off/show down to determine whose spirit packed more power. Only a Trini will dare think up something like that. After all, if you’re going to have a spiritual connoisseur, you’d want to be sure you have the strongest spirit at your disposal and in your corner. Mr. Manning is to be commended. As far as I’m aware, he is the first high ranking public official to test the bona fides of our local obeah brand against the claims of globe trotting religious sycophants such as Mr. Hinn. <br />
<br />
Regrettably we were robbed of a delectable revelation and high noon outcome in the spirit world- given as we now know, that Mr. Hinn backed out- electing instead not to be ‘touched’ or ‘tested.’ What is interesting is that as a bible scholar, Mr. Hinn should have known that Mr. Manning was just following scriptural advice that enjoins all spirits ought to be tested. It is also true (based on scripture) that when Jesus walked the earth he exercised authority over other spirits and gave his followers such dominion. <br />
<br />
In other words, there was no need for Mr. Hinn to back out/back down from being touched or to become defensive/offensive in the process. The truth is, based on similar scriptural episodes, if Mr. Hinn had a superior spirit, that woman would not have dared to touch him. In fact she would have been begging to be taken out of his presence. His energy and virtue would have made her uncomfortable; desiring the nearest exit. Mr. Hinn’s now famous grand stand boast of having said “don’t touch me; nobody touches me” is no substitute for the genuine spark off that was supposed to have taken place were he the real McCoy. Of course, the opposite would have also been true- regarding the lady’s spiritual efficacy. In summary, they both appear to be hoaxes- devoid of authentic spiritual power and presence. Seems they both failed the interview. I could only hope Mr. Manning dismissed both as potential spiritual suitors.<br />
<br />
Beyond Mr. Manning’s adroit set up of subjecting potential spiritual advisors to a rigorous consumer choice test, there is indeed the wisdom or folly question- but just in a more nuanced way than Mr. Hinn makes it out to be. <br />
<br />
Firstly, had Mr. Manning selected Mr. Hinn to be spiritual advisor/purveyor, I guess Hinn would have conversely been boasting to the world how smart and wise T&T’s PM is to have selected him as spiritual insider, guide & counselor. Clearly Mr. Hinn’s test of another’s wisdom or folly is tied to his own sense of self importance and solipsism. This is easily read between the lines; and rightly, the Prime Minister has elected to ignore Mr. Hinn- except extend forgiveness.<br />
<br />
Beyond Mr. Hinn’s immaturity, the bigger and more nuanced question facing the people of Trinidad and Tobago, and the Caribbean is this: is it wise or foolish for Prime Ministers or other high ranking public officials to seek spiritual advice/coverage from such providers? This is not an easily resolved question for many reasons; but let’s try. <br />
<ol type="A"><li>I think that most will subscribe to the view that like marriage and religion, seeking spiritual guidance/protection (from persons claiming to render such services) ought to remain under the purview of personal choice as long as:<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<ol type="i"><li>The public purse is not expended in such pursuits<br />
</li>
<li>The quality of public policy/direction is not compromised in order to comply or align with one’s spiritually derived mystical whims/fancies.<br />
</li>
</ol><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
</li>
<li>If my sense of the regional pulse is correct, it seems that in T&T and the Caribbean, we are still sufficiently sensitive and passionate regarding spiritual issues, that leaders who seek spiritual guidance/coverage are not likely to be viewed as negative or outdated, and therefore possessing a foolish leadership trait. As a rule, I also think the nation is sufficiently advanced to the point where although people expect leaders to be spiritually aware, they do not expect that awareness to become a fetish that clouds or determines public policy ventures and timing. <br />
</li>
<li>Truthfully, A and B are not easily noticeable and/or practicable, given that actions by political executives are usually filtered by professional spin doctors adept at rationalizing away true causal factors in ways that are likely to make it difficult to determine whether one’s public policy directions are determined by one’s private spiritual consultations. <br />
</li>
</ol><br />
Ultimately though, I think one’s wisdom or folly in this regard will be tested at the polls- and the outcome will not be based on whether one has or does not have a spiritual consultant/protector- but by whether or not one’s public policy directions have made a sufficiently positive difference in the quality of everyday life experienced by our citizens; and also by whether or not one’s public leadership behavior has engendered a sustainable confidence and trust by the people.<br />
<br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-45412656374405811852009-10-23T13:41:00.002-04:002009-10-26T13:43:15.602-04:00Spare a Thought for Politicians!<i><b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Article</span></b></i><br />
Spare a thought for politicians. The group that conveniently shakes hands hugs babies and makes un-kept promises. Those arrogant, self centered, sometimes corrupt individuals - Spare a though for them. Amidst loving to hate politicians we frequently loose sight of their humanity, the psychological traps, and job related pressures that collude to produce the <i>queer intelligence</i> that often defines their behavior. So spare a thought for them.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Psychological Factors</b><br />
</div>In a very real sense politicians are creatures of their environment- <i>reactioneers</i> to our demands and conditions. Famed Caribbean scholar, the late Lloyd Best opines even if there was no God, humans would have invented one. I imagine if there was no body politic, the public would have invented politicians: these popular kinsfolk upon whom we’ve come to depend. And haven’t we ably schooled/tooled them until there is now rightness of psychological fit between our felt needs and their fashioned/fabled offerings?<br />
<a name='more'></a>Collectively, humans cherish an <i>all we like sheep</i> syndrome that heralds a need for shepherds. The irony of this syndrome is its demand versus supply deficit. That is, we appear more badly in need of leadership, guardianship and guidance more so than politicians are <i>good shepherds</i>. It’s not so much that they know our best interests as much as we appear hopelessly lost re where lies <i>our promised land</i>. Under such conditions only offered lies and accepted deceptions will emerge and can suffice.<br />
<br />
Recently the prime minister of Poland, six months after inauguration offered his apologies to compatriots- confessing that in the lead up to elections “I lied to you morning, noon and night.” Pressed by journalists he offered “it’s what the people wanted… that’s how I got elected.” Interestingly, most political analysts concurred his fault was not his lies but his confession. We’ve asked of politicians what (both we/they know) they’re incapable of- and they’ve kindly obliged; albeit with prevarications. It’s as if we need their deception as much as they need our mistrust. This is a decided dysfunction.<br />
<br />
The bible alludes to locusts having no king yet going forth in bands- Insects far less intelligent, yet capable of self regulating their collective good. Are we so accomplished in our psychological dependence that we must ordain a <i>cherished</i> few to rule over the many? It’s as if we conspire with ourselves against ourselves to anoint misleaders (pun intended). In turn, they simply conspire to provide the <i>goods</i> our conspiracy of needs demand of them. Seems the collective <i>we</i> have divined a need for a scapegoated <i>them</i>. And while it is true no one asks them to volunteer; truth is we would have it no other way. So spare a thought for politicians- and their lies, half truths and innuendoes. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Job Related Pressures</b><br />
</div>Representative politics and high profile public office come laden with personal emotional risks and behavioral dilemmas. The nature of the competition and the stakes involved combine to create a win or survive <i>at all cost</i> disposition. Invariably, this evolves into <i>by any means necessary</i> rationalizing. I am not at all sure the public will ever grasp, let alone enter into the true <i>feel</i> of what it really means to suffer any of the following agonies: rejection at the polls, character assassination in high profile public office, derailment by equally ambitious competitors or a deliberate & deceptive take down by supposed allies. On top of all this is the constant pressure of maintaining standing and visibility in the eyes/minds of a public known for its short term memory and <i>what have you done for me lately</i> mentality. Despite claims and clichés suggesting otherwise, it is in fact impossible for politicians to separate the effects of public reaction from personal feelings. How do politicians react and survive amidst these exposures and dilemmas?<br />
<br />
Even among deceptive, tricky or vicious politicians - who appear readily willing to <i>betray their mothers</i> or <i>sleep with the devil</i> - my sense is that most, if not all, seldom set out to be who they eventually become; nor do they organically embrace deception and viciousness as personal values or ethical constructs. Instead, they incrementally develop or strategically deploy sinister practices for survival/protection and/or advancement purposes. Very few will ever learn the art of rising above the squalor and maintaining the dignity of bedrock principles in what is a <i>dog eat dog world</i> of fight or perish.<br />
<br />
In thinking about it, I am not too sure this is a world politicians have solely created; or isn’t in fact a world the public has helped assemble by way of varied complicit and implicit, even explicit endorsement. The world of politics, sustained by politicians as practitioners and the public as participants, has long become a theatre of illusion and flair- a stage where quality of program and substance of character have long been replaced by image and positioning. So spare a thought for politicians, they may be equal victims as they appear villains- creatures torn at the core of their beings by the anguish of ethical dualism. Spare a thought for them. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Crosswind Interests</b><br />
</div>Severe airport crosswinds can present harrowing landing discomforts. While wind effects are unavoidable hazards of flying, it helps to realize pilot adroitness is key to minimized anxieties. Similarly, some crosswinds in public thinking make the practice of politics particularly discomforting- and need to be more carefully balanced. Two of these stand out.<br />
<br />
<ol><li><i>Clamor for Term Limits</i>: Increasingly there is a groundswell for limiting tenures of political representatives. Not unlike other fads, politics in the Caribbean has not escaped this attraction. But spare a thought for politicians. Who among us likes and welcomes involuntary separation/termination and career derailment? The associated anxieties and fears are mind boggling- particularly if children and other family concerns are in the equation. Should politicians be mandatorily subjected to this discomfiture simply because they have chosen politics as a career? Understandably, politicians have not helped with legacies of arrogance, hubris, corruption and other forms of abuse- some quite egregious. Yet are term limits the answer and are they not in fact counter productive? Beyond human factor considerations hinted to earlier, term limits are likely to attract individuals with short term ulterior motives instead of those who otherwise are prepared to make a life time commitment of responsible representation and service. </li>
<li><i>Employment of Immediate Relatives</i>: As well intentioned as the conflict of interest argument is- spare a thought for politicians! Upon closer scrutiny it amounts to queer intelligence. One’s obligations and interest in family are inextricably tied into his/her own; and cannot be divided even when labeled as a conflict. The greatest conflict is trying to divide this legitimate and noble interest- the interest and concern one owes to his/her immediate family. To me it seems reasonable to give politicians some latitude to employ immediate family members within areas of purview in keeping with their qualifications, capacity and expertise (of course some other inherent issues will need tweaking). Denying this allowance renders politicians more dependent upon, and therefore more vulnerable to special interest than they may otherwise be. Forcibly dividing a politician’s interest through well intentioned but ill advised public policy only increases proclivity for granting special favors as indirect repayment (to special interest) for satisfying politicians’ legitimate concerns/interests. </li>
</ol><br />
In resolving these two concerns, it is important to spot their crosswind effects; and useful to realize that more adroit balancing (i.e. one which responsibly addresses the public’s concern without destroying the politician’s interest) is likely to provide the smoothest <i>landing</i>.<br />
<br />
Summatively, it seems politics, its contradictions and condemnations, result more from shared dynamics between politicians and publics than we’re aware, or even care to acknowledge. My take is that both politicians and publics are at once equal victims and villains alike- peas in a pod if you will. Unfortunately, politicians often bear the brunt of resultant misgivings; and <i>carry the cross</i> for what is in fact a participative dysfunction – To the extent they now hold the image, suspicion and derision of used car salesmen. Well, at least, let’s own the (used car) <i>lot</i> has been collectively conjured. So spare a though for politicians!<br />
<br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i><i><br />
</i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-29022642885682682182009-10-23T11:38:00.000-04:002009-10-26T13:49:20.902-04:00Politics Vs Democracy in Antigua & Barbuda (A&B): Critical Challenges<i><b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Article</span></b></i><br />
In many countries politics is viewed as necessary evil or inconvenient necessity; not so in A&B. There is natural affinity; even addiction between people and politics. It’s in the life blood, part of the savoir-faire; perhaps even in the water. But interestingly, democratic ideals seem to be falling victim to the way politics is practiced. <br />
<br />
While on the upside, voter turnouts averaging in the 80th percentile is a democratic envy; on the downside, thinking through political prisms seems to dominate most spheres of human interaction in A&B. When a citizen’s first instinct towards any act is the political message it sends; and/or the political cost he/she is likely to pay- that cannot be healthy for a nation’s democracy. Citizens must be free to live and breathe outside the shadow of their nation state’s politics. Rigidly conscripting the motif- politics is a way of life, robs existence of finer beauties and substantive values; but that’s another discussion.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>This essay probes four present political tendencies in A&B and analyses how they seem to undermine growth towards a more healthy democracy. Specifically, it examines institutions vital for sustaining a buoyant democracy and asks: Have they been impeded or compromised by robustness of the politics? In other words, has electoral politics in A&B colluded to produce its own paradox- Where the very thing elections are designed to preserve (democracy) is being weakened?<br />
<br />
Of course, democracy in A&B, like other regional Island States, is young and emergent and will only ripen over time. So the intention is not to cast aspersions; but to identify immediate areas that can sharpen and strengthen democratic ideals. Also, observations made here are no doubt equally applicable to prevailing conditions in other Caribbean Island States (even further afield).<br />
<br />
<b>The Electoral Commission</b>: Even sporting bodies now boost and safeguard respect for results by ensuring neutral referees officiate. Should any less integrity and sanctity be expected when citizens of A&B vote? The electoral commission is guardian of the process and referee of the game. Question is: How neutral and unbiased are persons on that commission? Electoral commissioners can hardly be conceived impartial if they are flag waving avid supports or known sympathizers of either party. <br />
<br />
Enthusiastic political principals will always think it in their best interest to have trusted lieutenants on the ‘inside’, or even heading the commission; but such arrangements do not belong in a healthy respectable democracy. For governance purposes, public confidence must attend election outcomes. Further, if and when system failures arise, lines must never be blurred (in the public’s mind) between genuine bureaucratic malfunctions and deliberate facilitating of strategic political designs.<br />
<br />
The courts will undoubtedly decide validity of the Opposition Leader’s claim that 4200 people voted in 391 minutes in one constituency- something he termed an arithmetical and physical impossibility. The larger point though is that traction for such claims is directly related to public confidence in authenticity of election results- something greatly enhanced (and democracy advanced) if and when the electoral commission is known to be honestly nonaligned, fiercely unbiased; and sanitized of all and any party activists/loyalists from either side of the divide. <br />
<br />
<b>The Media & Commentariat</b>: Politicians constantly seek to shape arguments in order to win public support; but truth content of these arguments is often multi-hued as arguments themselves. The role of the media in a credible democracy is public education. Therefore the media is not simply to relay messages from politicians; but also to investigate and reveal truth content of those messages. To what extent have media houses in A&B been faithful to their democratic function of educating public insight? Are they sufficiently analytical and exculpatory; or are they victims of the robust politics? Have they exchanged their role of public educator and become part of propaganda armada on either side? How and from where will objective public insight emerge?<br />
<br />
And where is the punditocracy, the objective commentariat that fosters evaluation of contending ideas? Where is the forum that says here are the UPP and ALP positions; but as citizens here is how you can think about it from an Antigua and Barbuda perspective? Where is that voice that walks down the middle; that stands in the gap and speaks for Antigua and Barbuda’s interests- without an aligned agenda? Sadly, the intelligentsia appears to be open or shrouded mouthpieces for either side, to the extent that there are little if any, fora that force both sides to improve their acts for the benefit of country. Hopefully the promised university of Antigua and Barbuda will provide for more objectively evaluated public policy insight. In the meantime there remains an urgent need for a strong, objective, compelling down the middle forum in advance of democratic ideals.<br />
<br />
<b>The Church</b>: Traditionally, in most democratic jurisdictions churches choose to remain above the political fray; and instead serve as society’s moral conscience. This allows churches to fully leverage their unique role of exerting an efficient spiritual suasion that forces political players to be mindful of the moral, ethical and valuative aspects of their conducts and policies. This is a sacred democratic staple churches must not and cannot take lightly. If however, public concerns appear to attract advocacy or silence from churches based on political color, then efficacy of the church in playing its role in the democratic process is severely compromised. <br />
<br />
To what extent have churches in A&B bartered that standing of unique spiritual suasion for the grandiosity of political platform appearances and/or beneficial handouts of state privileges? To what extent are churches in A&B openly or tacitly signaling political alignment? To the extent churches adhere or violate the standing associated with their unique role; it is to that extend they also loose respect in the minds of political players over whom they are supposed to exert spiritual suasion for societal good- and it is to that extent they also abscond on their agency as an institution charged with advancing democratic ideals. Perhaps it not too late for churches to unglue themselves from the stigma of political color, regain the moral high ground; and recapture the potent effect of spiritual suasion.<br />
<br />
<b>Voter Bribery</b>: One unique thing about the practice of voter bribery in A&B is the people’s honesty. i.e. they honor their take- and politicians know it. This means the people’s <i>goodness</i> is their own downfall. Truth is endemic practices of cold hard cash for votes on one hand or institutionalized voter buyouts on the other hand come with a price. Responsible obligations politicians have toward constituencies are replaced by either wanton neglect or gestures of arrogant beneficence. It’s a simple equation really; people already paid are owed nothing further. <br />
<br />
Voter bribery hurts democracy not only in terms of injustice felt by those not on the take; but also in the way they are made to feel their unsold votes don’t count. Additionally, critical infrastructure and social development often lag behind or are completely ignored- well after the effects of shambolic individual takes have worn off. Raw unabashed bribing of voters deals a crippling effect to democratic ideals.<br />
<br />
<b>Considerations</b>: I started by alluding the existence of challenges is testimony to the robustness of the politics within A&B. However robust politics should be made to ameliorate and not impede pursuit of a healthier democracy. The ubiquitous adage “only in Antigua” is certainly a healthy way for the country to laugh at itself; but is hardly a viable substitute for the sterling will required to move beyond talk to committed purposeful action in addressing these challenges- And purposeful action will require mature collaboration between and among political players and critical institutions.<br />
<br />
I am well aware that like most things political there is most likely a colorful history to the areas of challenge identified. Temptations to be unduly revisionist however must be avoided; instead energies should focus on the way forward. Origin of the challenges is less important than collective pursuits towards cultivating a healthier post modern democracy in A&B. <br />
<br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-68692077079444592702009-10-23T11:26:00.001-04:002009-10-26T13:45:11.278-04:00Harps on the Willow for Sir John? Please No!<i><b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Article</span></b></i><br />
It is said the shortest life lasts long enough to leave an impact. On the basis of length, reach and quality, the life and times of Sir John Compton brought torrential rapturous blessings to people of St. Lucia and beyond. Commemorating him requires even demands, perspectives of gratitude and celebration more so than mournful dispositioning. Without disregarding essential sentiments of mortality and loss, St. Lucians are better advised to mark the passing of their <i>father figure</i> (affectionately referred to as Sir John) with deliberate emotions of appreciation and acclaim than piety of sackcloth and ashes. His life was far too gifted, his affect too beneficial, for his death to be subjected to prescriptions and practices of customary mourning. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Last of the <i>Mohicans</i></b><br />
</div>In the scheme of life we never divine length of our spreadsheet; but certainly do determine the quality of line item contents that decorate our legacy. In this regard, Sir John’s ledger speaks for itself. What more can be said! He rightly belongs in the hall of fame of Caribbean greats, and must be included on our Mt. Rushmore of luminary leaders who championed independence initiatives across the Anglophone Caribbean: Norman Manley- Jamaica, Grantly Adams- Barbados, Eric Williams- Trinidad & Tobago, and Vere Bird Snr- Antigua & Barbuda. Sir John was the last of these <i>anointed great men</i> who dotted and defined the regional political landscape. Right in step with this stellar group, he was vision, passion and power embodied in an enigmatic galvanizing presence. His was a life of leadership. <br />
<a name='more'></a>Unfortunately, across the Caribbean, contemporary political leaders continue to reach (through contrived means) for the power and presence of yesterday’s gifted greats; albeit without the commensurate vision, passion and sacrifice of those exemplars. The region is poorer for absence of our by-gone heroes, and now Sir John. Perhaps present leaders in St. Lucia, if only as mark of respect for Sir John, will rise and demonstrate nobility of leadership that ably reflects his vision, passion and sacrifice for the Island.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Fitting</b><i><b> Send Off</b><br />
</i><br />
</div>Plato employs an allegory of metals to suggest the impact and quality of lives can be valued in denominations of gold, silver or tin. By this reckoning, unreservedly, Sir John’s life of leadership was pure gold through and through. He was golden in his commitment and sacrifice, golden in his passion, vision and insight; and even more golden for maintaining his ordinary civility though often entitled to much fanfare. St. Lucia, you may be tempted to hang your harps on the willow for Sir John? Please don’t! Neither leave your pans on their racks or drums in your closets. Instead, bring out all instruments and <i>play one</i> for Sir John! Celebrate a life well lived, a journey completed, a blessing received- And continue doing so as you live for your island and the memory of Sir John Compton.<br />
<br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-76278570510331507322009-10-23T11:21:00.000-04:002009-10-26T13:43:56.762-04:00On professionalizing Diplomatic Corps: A Rebuttal to Mr. Hurst<i><b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Article</span></b></i><br />
First, I wish you a comfortable and speedy convalescence; may God’s favor attend your recovery. Taking time to engage amidst your personal challenges is salutary. I am enamored by your sterling robust will; and honored to debate someone of your legacy.<br />
<br />
It’s impossible to miss the passion oozing from your response; endearment to the topic is un-betrayed. The matter at hand however, requires dispassionate distillation instead of emotional rapture/compromise; but given your lifelong involvement in the area, I understand. As a cricket enthusiast no doubt, I’m sure you can appreciate that your long-handled approach of coming out swinging, carries high incidence of being caught in the deep, stranded down the wicket, or bowled through the gap. I’m sorry my friend, but having chosen to <i>voop</i> on this wicket- yours is the ignominy of being summarily caught, bowled, and stumped all at once. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Caught in the <i>Deep</i></b><br />
</div>Interestingly, you characterize my article on the subject as laughable. I draw comfort from two points of observation. 1. George Bernard Shaw asserts “it’s the things in life we are most serious about, we laugh over.” That you take what I’ve said serious enough to laugh; and are courageous enough to confess it, is honorable. 2. More importantly and less amusing, you’ve arbitrarily selected sentences out of my text and attacked them without even once sharing my seminal thesis with readers. Please Mr. Hurst, even freshmen know text without context is pretext. Selective deflections may reveal political savvy; but do little to advance appreciation of your scholarship.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
In pertinent part, the thesis of my critique re Dr. Newton’s seeming lecture to politicians on the need for professionalizing diplomatic corps is that- once elected, political executives ought not to be prescribed to on diplomatic appointments. I argued in support of this position that the <i>left handed</i> undercurrents which often pervade diplomatic practice help to account for the apparently queer intelligence which seems to pre-dominate calculations of political executives in considering diplomatic appointments. I further asserted that by limiting his assessment of dynamics attending diplomatic appointments to the purview of intra nation state politics, Dr. Newton’s article strangled itself by its own definitional insufficiency; and as a consequence, lacked requisite sophistication needed to account for the complex left handedness in <i>foreign affairs</i> that often plays out among and between nation states - A dynamic which in fact is often primary in the calculus of political executives and cannot be ignored (an observation that even Dr. Newton rightly accedes he overlooked). <br />
<br />
So where do you stand on the critical issue Mr. Hurst? Should political executives be prescribed to on their diplomatic appointments? And if so what ought to be the prevailing consideration? I can only invite you to join the debate at its deep end, and not disparage the content. Readers deserve analysis of body line features instead of cosmetic, emotional flair.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Stranded down the wicket- and Stumped</b><br />
</div>But let me indulge your sidebar taste a bit. You mock my allusion to sinister agendas in elite multilateral bodies (as an example of left handedness in diplomatic practice) and claim that whereas that may apply to big players such as USA etc, CARICOM knows no such behavior. You paint CARICOM as an entity of pristine collective will and egalitarian bliss. Seriously, Mr. Hurst, where have you been? I would wager Caribbean entities and their pursuits have more relative diplomatic intrigue than wider multilateral organizations. The history of CARICOM, even OECS is replete with maneuvers of distrust, betrayal and even outright lies. If the minimum threshold is: have they done anything; the answer is of course yes. But raise the bar and ask: have they done their best or even enough to advance human flourishing and improve quality of life in the region; the answer is of course no. The reason in primary part is that nation state political executives have learnt to fulfill unilateral interests over and above regional interests; even when it means sacrificing the latter to accomplish the former. And just why you may ask? Because they are realists and pragmatists; and are less given to the ideals of career diplomats, as you. The thing about ideals is that they are often dependent upon illusions to be preserved- illusions that reality based political principals can ill afford. <br />
<b><br />
</b><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Bowled through the Gap</b><br />
</div>In your haste to defend the profession, I suspect you also overlooked a critical and germane linkage in my argument. I was not in the least suggesting (in what I termed) the <i>foreign relations</i> or <i>under the table</i> behaviors that attend diplomatic relations are born out of a caviler fetish or mischievous ilk for that which is dark, subversive and sinister. Instead my article pointed out that <i>left handed</i> diplomatic behavior can be accounted for by understanding the virtues of selfishness and benefits of self centeredness in the political sphere- over and above the virtues/benefits derived from bilateral/multilateral interests. Your straight and simple ideological bat leaves you vulnerable to the seam and swing of the ball that attends diplomatic appointments. <br />
At the end of the day all politics is local. Caribbean politicians are returned to office, not on the merits of their regional integration dossiers/pursuits; but on the strength of their preservation and advancement of national interests- and unilateral interests are not always in confluence with bilateral/multilateral interests but often are at variance with such interests. The crude hard fact of this reality is that political executives will always appoint diplomatic personnel who have the ability to <i>bring home the bacon</i> of unilateral interest over and above multilateral/bilateral interests, even if they have to do so under the pretext of operating under the latter. <br />
<br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-22522424908770790882009-10-23T11:16:00.002-04:002009-10-26T13:43:01.068-04:00De Wicket Takin Spin: Of Coha, Hurst & Seriousness<i><b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Article</span></b></i><br />
Some days, events; even issues, are unforgettable, unfathomable! <br />
<br />
Half our <i>side</i> was down for less than ten! It was clear we would cede bragging rights to village cricket supremacy. Crestfallen, we searched for answers on our way home. Teammates felt wily sophistry by a master craftsman of spin had <i>done us in</i>. To this day, I maintain our rueful infamy was due more to <i>right</i> conditions than bowler’s wizardry- <i>De wicket was takin spin</i>. <br />
<br />
Mr. Hurst’s frontal assault on the Coha article (Votes for sale) appears heroic. He stands tall, dressed in Caribbean colors, tugging at our heartstrings- a true defender of the archipelago’s pride- And in the process emerges an almost enviable recipient of honey dripping accolades. But seriously, is lampooning the Coha article justifiable? How did Mr. Hurst so easily succeed in <i>spinning</i> us out of considering more critical and consequential imperatives? And does his unchallenged polemics not provide troubling evidence that <i>de wicket takin spin</i>?<br />
<a name='more'></a>Unabashedly, Mr. Hurst deserves plaudits for his robust sense of regional pride/passion. He is a Caribbean apologist par excellence. At the same time we must not shirk critical assessment of consequential issues re regional development which the Coha piece addresses. In this regard, I find Mr. Hurst’s response to the article flawed in two separate but related primary areas. <br />
<br />
First, it is often true, as Mr. Hurst asserts that imbalance and condescension are replete in written works on international development that emanate from (so called) 1st world sources. However, in Coha I find these violations to be less evident. In fact, the Coha article appears balanced not only in implications; but also in its exculpatory and deliberate exposure of America’s inconsistencies, hypocrisy and unethical dualism in the conduct of its international diplomacy re the two issues addressed. Specifically Coha highlights:<br />
<ul><li>The curious way in which America’s once strong stance with Taiwan has weakened and become blurred in concomitant measure with its increasing dependence on China’s economic strength to support its economy and budget deficits. In other words the article has not failed to imply that desperate nations (regardless of size, America non the least) do desperate things- including adopting curious diplomatic postures- in keeping with their immediate needs/interests</li>
<li>The frequent and shameless ways in which America itself practiced and still practices (check book diplomacy) the buying of votes from need based nations- now so glaringly undertaken & exploited by China, Taiwan and Japan.</li>
</ul>What Coha is intimating is that these two present diplomatic hot potatoes (the China/Taiwan dispute & Japan’s unsavory whaling practices) are but latest victims of a less than decorous creeping <i>check book</i> diplomacy first championed by America. In the process they’re alerting to a developing diplomatic crisis in which critical and consequential issues are more and more likely to be settled by size of a vote getting check and fiscal expediencies of poorer nations rather than the merits of their moral/ethical and/or human/environmental underpinnings. What is touchy for us is that the article uses the present chase/buy of votes from our Island states to highlight the plight.<br />
<br />
The second flaw in Mr. Hurst’s response is that having treated these observations as if they were not already present in the article, he invariably proceeded to craftily spin us away from what ought to be more critical and consequential areas of regional import/concern coming out of the Coha article. Among others, three appear primary:<br />
<ol><li>What is the role of Caricom in shaping and defining a coherent foreign policy regarding international issue of critical importance? What is the preferred Caricom policy position on China Vs Taiwan & Japanese Whaling practices? For example, is the former issue one of sovereign land mass rights or one of self determination, independence and resistance to colonization? China/Taiwan, & Japanese whaling are matters with severe moral/ethical underpinnings directly related to human rights, quality of life and preservation of eco-cultures- They ought not to be left to the whims and fancies of economic needs of voter nations. In addition, we must ask- what greater benefits can the region derive by pursuing an en block voting approach to these issues based on a shared principled approach?</li>
<li>What is our collective responsibility as a region to foster, supervise and ensure accomplishment of sustainable development approaches in each Island state; and how are we performing in this regard? If the quality of life in the region is dependent upon the sale of our representatives votes at international bodies, that says something not only about our right to nationhood; but about our success at pursuing sustainable development. Under such conditions, the title of <i>check book diplomacy</i> appears a trophy of a name; quite a few less than flattering nomenclatures readily apply. </li>
<li>What regional structures/strategies surrounding rewards/sanctions are in place to ensure compliance of voting in keeping with agreed to Caricom will? How do we propose to dissuade potentially corrupt political executives and/or their representatives from besmirching their islands and the region by lining their back pockets by way of questionable and undesirable diplomatic postures? </li>
</ol>These are just some of the issues up for discussion coming out of the Coha piece. I find the article far more objective and therefore far less discredited than Mr. Hurst’s spin craft suggests. Any serious batters out there- Ones willing to get to the pitch of the ball, with level eyes, and pierce the <i>field</i> (issues)? Until then keep on spinning <i>Hurstie</i>. Conditions are right- <i>De wicket takin spin</i>. Sad thing is- Caribbean infamy lurks!<br />
<br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-12083858140399027022009-10-22T11:33:00.000-04:002009-10-26T13:48:29.787-04:00On Professionalizing Diplomacy: Response to Isaac Newton<i><b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Article</span></b></i><br />
I salute Dr. Newton’s honest premonition that his editorial, which argues for the professionalizing of diplomatic corps, invites critique (censure in my opinion). Self confessed inadequacy is virtuous boding for aficionados of public commentary. <br />
<br />
Reading Newton’s piece evoked keen recollection of Yogi Bear’s famed directions to a hapless inquiring traveler: “make a left turn at the one-way street ahead, after quarter mile the road becomes a Y, follow it”. Yogi’s directional ditty is an apt prism through which to view the issue at hand. At surface level, it suggests well intentioned directions may be so convoluted that one emerges more confused than before. Similarly, Dr. Newton (to his credit) re-posits an age old concern with robust cerebral energy; yet fails to provide directional clarity, and in the end is deficient in resolution content. At the sub terrain level, Yogi is also suggesting an intended objective may itself be unattainable- not only due to un-negotiable complexities; but also simply because such a destination does not exist as a practical reality- so that no amount of directions can get you there. Having failed at the surface level, it is small wonder Newton’s article ignores inherent sub terrain dimensions/complexities relevant to issue he takes on.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Left Turn</b><br />
</div>By failing to sufficiently reckon with the nature of the beast he engages, Dr. Newton turns left and goes south with his opinion. His primary failure is not accountably defining a de facto diplomat. The Left Handed Dictionary describes diplomats as people very good at saying come doggie, while looking around for a rock; or people good enough to make you believe who they say they are. Is it any wonder diplomatic practice is also referred to as <i>foreign affairs</i> (pun definitely intended)? <br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>In other words diplomats are amorphous <i>creatures</i>, individuals whose agendas forever remain in the left hand column or under the table- pursuing unilateral interests, while purporting notions of disinterest, mutuality and bilateralism. At best a diplomat is a disguise artist, versed in subterfuge; at worst espionage. One country was curiously denounced by the international community for ‘undiplomatic behavior’ when at the height of strained relations it accused another country’s embassy of being nothing but a <i>nest of spies</i> and <i>host of liars</i>. Diplomacy is a euphemism, all about <i>foreign relations</i>- the game of allowing countries to keep score on each other’s business under the guise or pretense of working together. Let’s be honest, even elite multi-lateral bodies with shimmering charters and open pretexts of egalitarianism, are not alien to covert disingenuous, capricious maneuvers that support sinister selfish agendas. A discussion on professionalizing diplomatic corps- with implications for their selection cannot ignore the nature and essence of the function. So how do you professionalize what ‘real diplomats’ do? <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b>Following a Y</b><br />
</div>By following a Y! That is, by realizing there are sub terrain complexities- best left undefined and unspecified- that inform so called ‘diplomatic’ appointments. In other words one must begin by recognizing it’s not in a government’s best interest to have so called career diplomats (people truly versed and schooled in egalitarian multilateralism, mutual bilateralism, multiculturalism and such good sounding terms) represent the country abroad when its real development/growth objectives may be best served by pursuing hidden unilateral interests. For example, when country X seeks to appoint a ‘diplomat’ to country Y, the foremost question is not (as Dr. Newton would have us believe): who can best/rightly represent our country in that particular context, negotiating wisely and even handedly on our behalf? The predominant consideration is often who among us we can trust to engage country Y in serious side bar overtures and so called bilateral agreements without even once letting on what we are really after by way of borrowing, stealing or buying- and to what extent does that person know the what, when and how particulars of the primary clandestine interest/target? Pointedly, so called career diplomats seldom fit the real needs that ‘diplomatic’ postings seek to satisfy both in term of the friendship/trust factor as well as expertise cover in terms of hidden desired outcomes. A key way of analyzing diplomatic postings is to determine the degree to which they appear to make no sense. i.e the extent to which they seem to follow a Y. Typically this will suggest that deeply hidden unilateral interests are deemed necessary, over and above bilateral & multilateral goodwill & interests. These are the real world calculations that often pre-dominate diplomatic considerations.<br />
<br />
For diplomats to do what they do best, i.e. be who they’re not- does not require professionalizing in the manner Dr. Newton postulates. Perhaps he may wish to revisit his notions of professionalism in what is in fact dark and sinister territory; a world, that to me, is best left unspecified, undefined and unrevealed- surrendered to the inner sanctum of executive prerogative. In my reckoning, the overarching principle surrounding so called ‘diplomatic’ assignments resides in the people’s governmental trust- an issue duly settled and determined by elections. To seek to tell governments under what conditions they’re to make diplomatic appointments is to seek to frustrate the real purposes of those appointments. <br />
<br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-68538522660014596392009-10-22T11:29:00.002-04:002009-10-26T13:47:07.158-04:00Of Ends & Beginnings: Implications for Leaders<i><b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Article</span></b></i><br />
According to our patterned way of reckoning, one 12 month period ebbs to a close and another peeps in. But have you thought about what, if anything ends or begins; and exactly what that means? Suddenly, what we don’t know seems more glaring than what we do know! Small wonder we depend on rituals to mitigate our unspoken wars between known and unknown. Perhaps with better answers we can make meaning of year end hullabaloos like a falling ball, gunshots, bursting bamboo, new curtains, painted homes; even sex at midnight December 31st. <br />
<br />
Despite various cosmetics conveying end and beginning sentiments at this time of year- truth is, nothing stops or starts except our patterned calendar designations. Life and time go on undisturbed, unbroken, and unabated. Nothing essential really stops or starts at the interregnum we call <i>old/new</i> year. So let’s be honest, there is nothing to put down at midnight on December 31 and absolutely nothing to pick up on January 1. Why then persist with resolutions that lack resolve, as rituals of New Year transitioning?<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Hoping to bring change to your life for the New Year? Hoping to ride the clock or falling Time Square ball into newness? The greatest New Year gift you can give yourself is to finally realize that one minute into the New Year you will still be the same person you were the last minute of the old year. No magic force attends a recycling calendar despite many handles of sentimental euphoria suggesting otherwise! <br />
<br />
I’m not necessarily discouraging resolutions for betterment at the restart of the calendar cycle. But understand that the greatest good will come from a deep seated continuing resolve to be a better person on a daily basis in your ongoing quest of life. Whether a year ends or begins matters very little with regard to personal change. The secret of personal change is to become a reflective practitioner of living. As convoluted as it sounds, a more helpful and critical element of genuine self improvement is to develop the art of <i>continuing</i> while <i>changing</i>!<br />
<br />
The unfolding Blagojevich scandal does not suggest an evil individual or someone worse than us. Instead, it signals what we’re all capable of (as leaders or persons of responsibility whose everyday lives touch others) if we don’t pause long enough to reflectively inquire what values drive our aspirations and interactions. <br />
<br />
A notable hindrance to behavior change in leaders and responsible persons is the <i>strange</i> situation they all seem to find themselves in. That is, surrounded by pretense opportunists only interested in providing genuflection and mind guarding feedback. What they really need (though not always want) are genuine colleagues/friends who adequately and caringly challenge them to personal development and growth in critical areas of need. <br />
<br />
This <i>strange</i> situation suggests that for leaders and responsible individuals to undergo personal change they must of necessity develop greater individual capacity and responsibility for self awareness, emotional intelligence and self regulation. For many interesting reasons (another discussion) help simply does not, perhaps cannot come from those who typically surround leaders or with whom leader often surround themselves. <br />
<br />
How then can leaders and responsible others increase inward awareness and extend self regulating capacity in order to arrive at more noble leadership behaviors? This is a loaded question that comes without easy answers (and unfortunately not even a New Year transition can bring add value!) In pursuing this loaded question, let’s first acknowledge any attempt by leaders to move from long held dysfunctional practices to more transcendental and noble behaviors is quite a challenge and nothing short. <br />
<br />
It is particularly challenging because leadership must often be exercised in complex environments. Further, it is particularly challenging because issues surrounding behavior change in leaders cannot be simply reduced to the domain of learning and unlearning leadership skills. Instead, personal behaviors are often intertwined with dynamics related to mental models, perceptual realities, long held habits and emotional constructs. In effect we are addressing the notion of managing personal change amidst complex realities. <br />
<br />
Sometime ago, Time magazine, in discussing the need for a major public figure to alter his abrasive self serving leadership style, concluded by lamenting that unfortunately there is no such creature as a changed human being. Can self serving leadership orientations be changed into more noble and transcendental leadership practices (bearing in mind the adage: <i>there is no right way to do the wrong thing</i>)? Despite the odds, I believe it is possible for leaders with long established patterns of dysfunctional behaviors to transition to more noble leadership practices. To deny this is to deny concepts of <i>essential goodness, individual renewal</i> and <i>transformative grace</i>. For leaders seeking transformation, I suggest two possible approaches as likely facilitators for desired change. Both approaches emphasize greater personal responsibility for individual change.<br />
<br />
In the first scenario I suggest a silent project of personal transformation. Here leaders pursue quiet but steady incremental change by developing the discipline of early rising for libation exercises. That is, the pouring out of themselves in deep self reflection. This reflection must include a review of the previous day’s conduct including self talk on how things may have been handled more nobly. Early morning exercises should also include projection. That is, a preview of coming events along with the noble leadership you wish to exhibit in each coming situation. Elements of trial and error are to be expected but must be accompanied by studied personal review and remedy. Eventually followers/others will come to see and appreciate your makeover. <br />
<br />
The second approach features assisted transformation. In this scenario the leader carefully selects a support group (a key qualifying criterion must be mutual non-dependency); and fully discloses a desire for a new direction to his/her leadership practice. The leader must spell out the feature values/characteristics that he/she desires and should entertain questions and suggestions from the group for implementation. Of course the leader must continue to seek out review and feedback support from this group regarding his/her transitional progress.<br />
<br />
In both approaches, it can be expected that the leader will move back and forth between behaviors to which he/she is accustomed and the noble behaviors to which he/she aspires. In other words, there will be good days as well as bad ones. Focus and commitment however must remain steady; and learning should result from missteps. One way of minimizing missteps is to frequently increase self reflective exercises and also catalogue instances/behaviors for review with support group. In this way, mindsets and behaviors to be avoided as well as developed are kept sharply in focus. <br />
<br />
Better leadership in Caribbean circles is possible! Happy New Year and blessings for success to all!<br />
<br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-50728098390534325242009-10-18T13:08:00.001-04:002009-10-26T13:16:02.247-04:00Upcoming Event: November 23rd to December 9th 2009<b>November 23rd to December 9th 2009</b>:<br />
<ul><li><b>Workshop 1:</b> <i>Modern Approaches to Mentoring Leaders</i>—Faculty and Staff, School of Theology University of the West Indies at Mona, Jamaica</li>
<li><b>Workshop 2</b>: <i>Rethinking Effective Pastoral Leadership</i>—Senior Students, School of Theology University of the West Indies at Mona, Jamaica</li>
<li><b>Workshop 3</b>: <i>Managing Personal Power in Sacred Space</i>—Senior Students, School of Theology University of the West Indies at Mona, Jamaica</li>
<li><b>Workshop 4</b>: <i>Modern Approaches to Mentoring Leaders</i>—Faculty and Staff, School of Theology and Religion, Northern Caribbean University, Mandeville, Jamaica, WI.</li>
<li><b>Workshop 5</b>: <i>Rethinking Effective Pastoral Leadership</i>—Senior Students, School of Theology and Religion, Northern Caribbean University, Mandeville, Jamaica, WI</li>
<li><b>Workshop 6</b>: <i>Managing Personal Power in Sacred Space</i>—Senior Students, School of Theology and Religion, Northern Caribbean University, Mandeville, Jamaica, WI</li>
<li><b>Workshop 7</b>: <i>Conflict Resolution and Leadership Negotiation: Successful Outcome Strategies</i>, West Indies Union Ministerial Association, Mandeville, Jamaica, WI</li>
<li><b>Workshop 8</b>: <i>Leadership Survival & Truth: The Pragmatics of Politics and Ethics in Leadership</i>, West Indies Union Ministerial Association, Mandeville, Jamaica, WI</li>
<li><b>Workshop 9</b>: <i>Improving the Quality of Lay Leadership</i>: Annual Lay Council, East Jamaica Conference of SDA, Kingston Jamaica, WI.</li>
<li><b>Workshop 10</b>: <i>Leadership Renewal: Secrets & Self Application Strategies</i>, Pastors & Administrators of East Jamaica Conference of SDA, Kingston Jamaica, WI.</li>
<li><b>Workshop 11</b>: <i>Power & the Pastor: Provoking Insights on Personal Power in Sacred Space</i>, Pastors & Administrators of East Jamaica Conference of SDA, Kingston Jamaica, WI.</li>
<li><b>Workshop 12</b>: <i>Improving the Quality of Lay Leadership</i>; Annual Lay Council, Northeast Jamaica Conference of SDA, Jamaica WI.</li>
<li><b>Workshop 13</b>: <i>Turnaround Leadership Approaches: Styles and Approaches to Leading Change</i>; Pastors & Administrators, Northeast Jamaica Conference of SDA, Jamaica, WI.</li>
<li><b>Workshop 14</b>: <i>Why A-Class Boards Make C-Class Decisions: Improving the Quality of Boards and Committees</i>; Pastors & Administrators, Northeast Jamaica Conference of SDA, Jamaica, WI.</li>
</ul><b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-67360021951255863172009-10-18T13:06:00.001-04:002009-10-26T13:16:15.498-04:00Upcoming Event: October 28th to November 6th 2009<b>October 28th to November 6th 2009</b>:<br />
<ul><li><b>Seminar/Workshop 1</b>: <i>Executive Competence & Courage</i> Mt. St. John’s Medical Hospital—L/ship Team, St. John’s Antigua</li>
<li><b>Seminar/Workshop 2</b>: <i>Executive Competence & Courage</i>—Bank of Antigua/Eastern Caribbean Amalgamated Bank Ltd. Leadership Team</li>
<li><b>Seminar/Workshop 3</b>: <i>Group Dynamics & Workplace Productivity</i>—Bank of Antigua/Eastern Caribbean Amalgamated Bank Ltd. Middle Managers</li>
<li><b>Seminar/Workshop 4</b>: <i>Improving Professionalism & Performance Management</i>—Bank of Antigua/Eastern Caribbean Amalgamated Bank Ltd. Supervisors</li>
</ul><b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-1123720478547035562009-10-18T13:05:00.002-04:002009-10-26T13:16:38.257-04:00Upcoming Event: October 26th, 2009<b>October 26th, 2009:</b> NYC Children’s Services: New York, NY<br />
<ul><li><b>Seminar for Consultants on</b>: <i>Improving Teaching Techniques for Children with Disabilities</i></li>
</ul><b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-75663723993047003502009-10-18T10:45:00.001-04:002009-10-26T13:25:55.154-04:00Radio Program Interview<i><b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Public Address</span></b></i><br />
<br />
(<i>Faith based partnerships: Capable mechanisms for crime reduction, prison reform and community empowerment</i>)<br />
<b>Power 102 FM- Trinidad and Tobago, WI.<br />
4/30/2006</b><br />
<br />
<b>Dr. Edwards what are your views on the current crime situation facing our country?</b><br />
<blockquote>There is no use in me belabouring the point that recent times have seen an upsurge in both the heinousness as well as the rapidity with which crimes have been committed in Trinidad and Tobago. The good news is that the rapid spate of crime seems to have abated within the last few weeks. The bad news is that the lull may be just that, abatement. The good news about the bad news is that if essential and innovative steps are put in place the slow down can be sustainable.<br />
</blockquote><b><a name='more'></a>How does your hopeful outlook square with the generally acceptable religious notion that things will only get worse in the world as a sign/omen of the end of time as we know it?</b><br />
<blockquote>Undoubtedly, eschatology or end time themes as proffered in the bible seem to suggest a breakdown of social and natural orders in the world as time progresses to eternity. The biblical picture is one of the world travailing under the weight of sin waiting to be delivered. That does not mean however that decay and disorder of social/moral conduct ought to be courted or not prevented or preempted under the guise of inevitability. On the other hand divine injunction advises that we occupy till the end. Jesus also prayed in what is rightly the Lord’s Prayer (john 17) that His followers be not taken out of the world, but be saved from the evil therein. This suggests that people who call themselves God’s followers ought to aggressively pursue agendas that support social responsibility and moral accountability in the societies where they live.<br />
</blockquote><b>You seem to be suggesting that there is need for a more active role by religious organizations in the quest to combat crime in our country; is that correct? </b><br />
<blockquote>Yes, very much so! For too long religious orders have worn blinders that foster disengagement; even civic irresponsibility. Now I’m not advocating that religious bodies begin to speak and act in political ways. That’s role confusion. But, I am saying that religious organizations need to put up their hands and be counted. Put up their hands and say we want to be included at the table of discourse that seeks to redress or preempt society’s ills. It is time government and religious bodies begin to forge partnerships of serious faith based initiatives as a means to reversing crime trends in our society. At the very core, criminal behaviour of the nature and pace we are seeing is a sure indication of broken and dysfunctional human spirits and deficient and decrepit moral compasses - especially among our youths. Mere social structures, even social strictures will always be inadequate, given the nature of the problem.<br />
<br />
I firmly believe the theme of pursuing values rich, faith based partnerships between government and religious orders is a capable mechanism for community empowerment and crime reduction.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<b>Usually people are reluctant to see government and religious alliances; is there some basis for your confidence that such an alliance on crime will potentially yield good outcomes?</b><br />
<blockquote>Yes a good place to begin our background thinking re partnered faith based initiatives between government and religious organizations re crime is to acknowledge that the concordat on education forged with denominational boards has served pretty well in delivering rich values based education that the government acting on its own is either prevented from, or is incapable of delivering. <br />
<br />
Of course there have been hiccups along the way, and on-going debate re remodeling the concordat for maximum good. The point though is that generally the benefits have served well. The larger point today though is that there is a strong history of government and faith based partnering in delivering essential social services. As such I feel a good case can be made for embarking upon faith based partnerships as key mechanisms in the pursuit of sustainable (emphasis on sustainable) crime reduction. <br />
</blockquote><br />
<b>Well let’s follow through and go down that road of government & faith based alliances on the issue of combating crime, what are some specific ways in which you can see that alliance bearing fruit?</b><br />
<blockquote>I think there are 3 Critical Areas for Immediate Partnered Engagement between Government and Faith Based Organizations Re Crime Reduction:-<br />
<br />
1. Is the area of Messaging!<br />
<ul><li>There has been much public outcry and politicizing of crime; and in the process casting of blame on the present government as well as the last. There has even been animated activism regarding crime by various community groups.</li>
</ul><ul><li>But by and large there is yet to be a concerted effort by religious groups and religious leaders in particular.</li>
</ul><ul><li>Let’s not forget that the ghastly crimes being committed suggest not only a break down in morality and values; but also a wanton disregard for the sanctity of life. After all, religion is supposed to provide national conscience.</li>
</ul><ul><li>To me this puts the issue of crime at the doorstep of religious orders who are supposed to be the groomers and guardians of moral and spiritual values and societal conduct. </li>
<li>Where is the adjustment of message by our churches to speak directly to crime in communities? Where are the crusades against crime in neighbourhoods? Notice I’m not referring to national spectacles such as rallies and symposia on crime (God knows we might just have had enough of those).</li>
<li>I think there is a need and a role for religious leaders in the fight against crime. Pastors, priests, pundits, Imams and others community religious leaders must get out into neighbourhoods and streets with moral energy and accost young people with piercing questions re their disregard for the life of one another. At the same time they must be willing to invest time and energy to build spiritual capital in the lives of our broken youths.</li>
<li>I think the government should seek the cooperation of all religious groups in the various communities; but especially in high risk areas, and ask them to step up moral and spiritual awareness initiatives. With special focus on youth emphasis; and youth outreach drives.</li>
<li>I may be going out on a limb here but I’ll be willing to tinker with the idea of governmental subventions to off set the cost of some of these endeavours. Of course this is a delicate area, because one does not want to encourage gov’t funding of religious programs; but the dire need for spiritual awareness in our communities (especially among our youth) require some flexibility (even on a short term) given the crisis situation. </li>
<li>I am saying there must be a messaging blitz re spiritual awareness and spiritual awakening and this upsurge must be of equal, if not greater, intensity than the upsurge attending that of crimes. And this messaging against crime and building of spiritual awareness but be decidedly local (in every village and hamlet on every street corner, in just about every nook and cranny).<br />
</li>
</ul></blockquote><b>You mentioned 3 essential ways of cooperation between government and religious bodies on crime. You have covered Messaging, what are the others?</b><br />
<blockquote>2. Partnership for Sustainable Community Empowerment: In addition to roles in spiritual awareness, allow various religious groups to act as centers for <b>Community, Social and Economic Empowerment</b><br />
<ul><li>Community reconciliation and emotional healing services</li>
<li>Techniques in mediation and conflict resolution </li>
<li>Adult learning centers </li>
<li>Formation of small business groups to redress financial and fellowship needs gang effect/bonds yields</li>
<li>Grooming of responsible community leadership and influence</li>
<li>Benefit of reduced corruption, values rich implementation and increased sustainable effect.<br />
</li>
</ul></blockquote><b>We have now touched 2 areas of partnership between government and religion on crime (Messaging and Community Empowerment); would you like to see faith based partnerships extending to any other area in the fight against crime?</b><br />
<blockquote>3. Yes, that brings me to the third critical areas for partnered faith based initiatives between Government and religious bodies: and that is - Prisoner Reform<br />
<ul><li>Its no secret that our dysfunctional prison system plays no small part in perpetuation of crime by way of turning out a very high percentage of repeat offenders (professor Deosoran and his group at UWI has been doing on-going work on recidivism among released prisoners to raise awareness re need for prison reform).</li>
</ul><ul><li>2 things are important to bear in mind as we consider faith based/government partnership regarding prison and prisoner reform.</li>
</ul><ul><ul><li>The high incidence of crime that takes place in prison (behind those secured walls) only serves to embolden prisoners and prepare them to commit even more daring crimes in open society. After all if they could live a life of crime behind prison bars and get by, why not in open society. It seems to me the present penal system to a great degree hones the skills of the criminal element sent there.</li>
</ul>
</ul><ul><ul><li>I’m not sure to what extent prisoner reform is a priority public policy. It seems to me the penal system emphasizes incarceration at the expense of reform. That is a prevailing formula for crime in perpetuity. </li>
</ul>
</ul><ul><li>In terms of remedies I suggest 2 areas of emphasis. </li>
</ul><ul><ul><li>1. Prisoner reform must be made of equal importance as incarceration as a matter of public policy</li>
<li>Each convicted prisoner must be placed on an individualized reform program reflective of his/her particular area of challenge. Each prisoner must demit prison a healed and whole person. Not someone seeking to exact revenge on society or someone waiting to execute criminally improved skills.</li>
</ul>
</ul><ul><li>These two agendas must be aggressively pursued if an immediate impact on crime reduction is to be realized</li>
<li> Religious groups can be co-opted to perform integral roles both in terms of membership on a prison reform oversight board as well as direct involvement in the design and implementation of individual prisoner reform programs. </li>
<li>Usually each person in our society conscripts to one religion or the other. This means prisoners are also affiliated with some religion. Individual prisoner programs are to receive spiritual awareness training and moral/character development training in keeping with a religious affiliation of choice. This means that all religious groups are to be included in individual prisoner reform programs. Of course careful thinking through of the plan is required but I believe the long term benefits far outweigh the pains of planning. </li>
</ul></blockquote><b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-24718206183616254652009-10-18T10:09:00.006-04:002009-10-26T13:36:47.097-04:00Educating with Soul: The Missing Ingredient<i><b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Public Address</span></b></i><br />
<br />
(Delivered at Pat-Kam School Annual Awards Ceremony)<br />
<b>Preamble:</b><br />
<ul><li>We thank Pat-Kam & its leadership for bringing together this commonwealth of gratitude and appreciation. This evening’s proceedings give a loud voice to the essential, thank you; we all long for but seldom receive. I dare say honorees, your plaques, bouquets and citations explain only a small percentage of the joy you are experiencing; the greater part comes from just the thought that someone recognizes your contributions and sacrifices.</li>
</ul><br />
<b>Transition:</b><br />
<ul><li>Ladies and gentlemen, it’s the notion of education that this evening is all about. The fact that honorees come from different fields account for the ways in which education concerns intersect with, and are supported by all aspects of life. </li>
<li>Passionate concerns and robust debate often attend school practice. The irony is that more concerns, debate and expense seem to produce lesser outcomes. Equally interesting is that ever pundit has a take on why solutions don’t work. I can do no more harm by adding my voice to the discourse. I’ve chosen to caption my presentation, <b>education reform: a missing ingredient</b>. <br />
</li>
</ul><b>INTRODUCTION: <br />
What’s Missing</b><br />
One missing element may best defined as <i>student conceptualization of school</i>. Envisage today’s average student en-route to school. What image/s of the destination called <i>school</i> informs his/her thinking? Maybe at best, a place to <i>hang-out</i> with friends or <i>make out</i> with lovers. Perhaps even a pastime venue for honing survival skills for the ‘hood’ or ‘street’. At worst, school connotes a place of insecurity, unwanted exposure, failure; even hopelessness. Too often this zero sum spectrum holds true. As educators, these may not be notions we care to acknowledge, let alone affirm. Nevertheless, on the basis of (at least) anecdotal evidence it is a prospect we cannot escape or deny. The sad reality is that the daily journey to school of far too many minority students is undertaken without a worthy image of the purpose for which they are making the trip.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Prominence given to disc man, cell phone, brands, durag, etc; in conjunction with conversation content, suggest the chilling absence of a compelling image of what school represents. Simply put, students within NYC inner cities are leaving home for school each day without a worthy, overriding and compelling purpose for making the journey. Reframing and reshaping students’ conceptualization of school remains the greatest challenge; but holds the greatest promise for truly reforming NYC education. <br />
<br />
Here’s another picture:<br />
<br />
A student turns up for after school (SES) program; the teacher tries to engage the child; but the child I reluctant. The teacher pushes for commitment to work from the child. Eventually the child blurts out; mammy said if I don’t want to do I work I don’t have to. What is the teacher’s most likely response? This is neither a commentary on the recklessness of parent or indolence of a child as much as it a reality commentary on the hopelessness that often constitutes schooling for minorities.<br />
<br />
A given fundamental of social science is that expectation predisposes experienced reality. Translated to the issue at hand- it means, the conscious or unconscious image or notion of school a student holds, to a large extent, determines his/her preparedness for learning. Many teachers turn up to teach each day only to find students with no appreciation or notion of school on their minds. The result is that Pygmalion effect feeds each other’s expectation and performance. <br />
<br />
Where does resolution lie? What is the way out for unengaged students, unbelieving parents, de-motivated teachers and underachieving schools?<br />
<br />
<b>The Answer: Education with Soul</b><br />
Performance driven cute sounding initiatives only go so far; but are inadequate. At any rate they often come with suspicious agendas. The history of mainstream educational objectives has not always been with clean hands. Industrial age required basic learning for the masses. Spell you name, count your money and know your place on the assembly line or smelting plant. Technology age requires more capabilities. Suddenly there is greater need for the poor to act smart. So what do we have? Standards of achievement and Core Competencies! <br />
<br />
By themselves achievement and competency are worthy but insufficient learning objectives. Of necessity education must include more and in fact must be entered into from a completely different paradigm. Education must be negotiated from a quality of life perspective and be driven with soul. It’s not what’s done <i>on</i> or <i>for</i> students; but what’s done <i>within</i> them that will ultimately make a difference. From this perspective, rethinking educational reform at this macro level ought to precede any structural initiative geared toward improving grades. The question is – How and under what conditions will students develop a true conceptualization of <i>school</i> and a deep appreciation for benefiting from their learning environments? <br />
<br />
As I reflect on my daily journeys to school many years ago, I seem to recall that, both at the conscious, but more often the unconscious level, there was awareness (though not in so sophisticated a fashion) that school was the place I was supposed to –<br />
<ol><li>Obtain and expand information and knowledge </li>
<li>Secure a foot hold for a successful career/future</li>
<li>Lay a platform for the next family generation<br />
</li>
</ol>Yes, I often wished significant players had made school more of a fun place. But that was a distinct aside to the central driving purpose for which I set off to school each day.<br />
<br />
To me, the main ingredient for students to develop a deep inner thinking and keen awareness that will harness the benefits of school must be focused around assisting them to grasp a sense of <i>future destination</i>. Each child must be possessed with a destination driven consciousness- a picture and purpose of destiny that drives the daily journey to school. To each child school must become the avenue to his/her future being. There can hardly be a sadder picture than a child heading off to school with no sense of destination and no driving awareness of a future outcome. The elements that will allow each child to develop and sustain a purpose of destiny are as follows:<br />
<ul><li>Parent and teacher reinforcement</li>
<ul><li>we expect something great of you; and will not let you become a failure or criminal justice statistic</li>
<li>story of middle school student whom another had hit and run off (I don’t care; I’m fighting this evening) No one stepped in the gap and said you don’t care but I do; lets find other options for resolution. </li>
</ul>
<li> Responsibility to the next Generation</li>
<li> Circles of Achievement</li>
<li> School Culture Reflecting Success and Expectation<br />
</li>
</ul>Together these elements represent an education with <b>soul</b>. <br />
<br />
These things are not new; they must be pulled together and interlocked around one theme. That is- the student’s destiny of purpose. No doubt it’s happening already in some places; but it needs to become a systemic purposeful action. <br />
<br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-83329536945546909182009-10-18T10:07:00.001-04:002009-10-26T13:22:22.210-04:00Riverview<span style="font-size: x-small;"><i><b>Public Address</b></i></span><br />
<br />
(<i>Delivered at Brazil SDA Church on Dedication Day</i>)<br />
A trickle down of Confucius thought famously claims that one cannot stand in the same river twice. Zen masters on the other hand emphasize the immutable standing of the river not only as a landmark but as a symbol of constancy. So is the river the water that flows with minerals, sediments and debris or the banks and physical pathway that the watercourse takes. If your definition of river is the water that flows then indeed you cannot stand in the same river twice. If to you the river is its banks and its physical course-way then every day the river is the same, constant. <br />
<br />
Whatever your definition of river maybe I remember standing in the Brazil River, Arena Road and baptizing over forty souls as a result of two simultaneous crusades conducted by Bro. Lennox Alicock in Brazil Village proper and Bro. Julian in Arena Village. Those were some days and nights I tell you. Though some of you may know what I’m speaking about others may not. Because that was then, some of you had already past and moved on; others were yet to come. That of course brings me back to the definition of river. So is the river the water or the watercourse?<br />
<a name='more'></a>Martin Luther King was always fond of says that truth lies neither in the thesis or the antithesis but in a synthesis of both. A memorable professor of mine untiringly impressed upon us that the pursuit of knowledge is best advanced by an appreciation of both and…To her both sides of an argument were always valid for informing discourse. It is in this context, the context of appreciating both definitions of river- that I stand before you today as someone who not only stood in the Brazil River but also in the brazil river-church. Yes this Brazil river-church does stir in me quite some reflections; from the lighthearted to the serious. <br />
<br />
I remember not doing so well in the sports day walking race but redeeming myself in the 100 meters. I remember the Sabbath morning we were about to begin communion service only to realize the deacons had bought alcoholic wine instead of grape juice- and the mad rush to Talparo that salvaged the service. In the milieu one deacon was still bold enough to remark its no sin to drink alcohol this once. Except of course I would not had had a job the Monday morning. But that’s Brazil! I also remember causing anger for canceling board meetings due to member tardiness; but mostly remember epic board meetings of back and forth candor where issues were made to rise or fall on the basis of their own merits. I fondly recall impassioned board and business meetings regarding the course, cost and design of this structure. I also recall rolling up my shirtsleeves at Caribbean steel mills with Joel, Emellio and the deceased Peter Hospadales to gather steel according to length from the odd length section in order to save on cost. <br />
<br />
I guess by now you’ve realized that to me the Brazil River is both the water and the watercourse; the substance and the structure. In a sense we actually get to stand in the Brazil river-church only once- the time we get to serve or spend with the Brazil family before time or tide moves us on. Brothers Daniels, Raybourne, DeCoteau, and James all stood in the Brazil River church to start things off. Many others came along and stood there as well, the Thomases, Williams, and many others including a host of pastors. We all placed our feet in the water of the Brazil river church at one time or the other and then moved on. And yet while on one hand the Brazil river church changed many times in terms of personnel appearance, on the other hand it has remained constant in terms of identity. It has always remained the Brazil church and this it will always be. So let us appreciate the movement of the Brazil river church, love and appreciate each other for the roles they have played and will continue to play. As the moving parts we are not to seek to become monuments for the only monument is the Brazil church in constant conceptual form. In this way whether we are members or pastors our tenures are not to be selfish and self centered but ought to be movement like with full appreciation that we are not the first or last sojourners in the river church but passersby in a dynamic flow whose only constant is its concept and the village to which it is tied. May our contributions be entered into knowing they are part of a continuous flow and not ends in themselves- tied to our personal identity or destiny! <br />
<b><br />
</b><br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-66990206949275015342009-10-18T10:04:00.001-04:002009-10-26T13:21:10.544-04:00The Search for Meaning<span style="font-size: x-small;"><i><b>Public Address</b></i></span><br />
<br />
(<i>Delivered at Brazil SDA Dedication Weekend Vesper Service</i>)<br />
One interesting way Jesus taught when he walked upon earth was the provoking way in which he questioned people. Jesus had this particular knack for asking hard questions and forcing people to think more than they planned to or were accustomed to. Hear Jesus one day:<br />
<br />
What do you think? A certain man had two sons. He said to the 1st go work today in my vineyard. He said I go sir but did not go. The 2nd said I will not go but later repented and went. Which of the 2 did the will of the father? Immediately you think you know the answer. But please, don’t be too quick to voice it. <br />
<a name='more'></a>Because, just like the people in His time you soon realize that you can’t answer it properly without 1st answering what really is obedience. Or, are there degrees of obedience? And if there are what is the most important part of obedience? Then you suddenly realize- for you to adequately answer the question; you must also think about the way you interpret life and the way you look at life.<br />
<br />
If you believe the big secret in life is to make people feel good by telling them what they want to hear; then the 1st guy is your guy. Like the 1st guy there are a lot of people who talk their way through life. Their rule of thumb is: It’s not what you do; just agree with what people expect and you’re cool. Why be stressed? Just say what important people want to hear so we can all go home and all get along. (Except of course, actions do matter a great deal. Because if you say you’re going to be here to tie the steel or pain the church for dedication and don’t show-up someone else will have to do it or dedication will have to go on without something done that could have been done.<br />
<br />
If however, the great principle in life for you is: it’s not what you say but what you do. Then the 2nd guy is your guy. Like the 2nd guy a lot of people who live by the notion that it’s not your words, but your actions that count in life. So you can say whatever you want because at the end of the day it’s your actions that ultimately matter.<br />
<br />
Of course if you’re someone who lives by the principle that you must both say what you mean and mean what you say- neither of the 2 sons will be your guy. <br />
<br />
But remember we are still talking about Jesus and his approach to questions as a means of learning. To me the most gripping type of questions asked by Jesus’ were ones that forced individuals to reflect on their emotional connections to issues or events. “Let’s look at the crowds that went to hear John the Baptist” Jesus said one day. Locate yourself as a person in that crowd and ask yourself the questions. What made me go out there? What did I really go out there to see? Could you answer that question for me in the quiet chamber of your heart? <br />
<br />
The notion of forcing people to emotionally give an account for their involvement in an event is a particularly intriguing line of questioning. It is a unique way of imposing personalized soul searching on group activities and events. Many times group effects and club-like behaviors dominate our thinking to the point where there is no sense of personal awareness. Why am I engaged in this or that event and where do I fit into the scheme of things happening around me are questions we seldom pause to ask ourselves. You see, group inclusion or clubability is a compelling human phenomenon.<br />
<br />
As I thought of this weekend dedication celebrations at Brazil with it string of ceremonies stretching from Friday evening to Sunday grand stone unveiling. I couldn’t help but wonder: How do present and past members of Brazil Church feel? What significance does this occasion hold for you as an individual person? What type of vibes are you experiencing and how emotionally connected are you with all that’s going on around you? <br />
<br />
How involved have I been and how involved am I planning to be in the future? How involved am I allowing others to be so that they could share the joy of engaged fellowship that I feel and the sense of accomplishment that I often glory in? <br />
<br />
<b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-24992638433361951572009-10-18T09:54:00.001-04:002009-10-26T13:19:59.637-04:00The End Depends on the Beginning<span style="font-size: x-small;"><i><b>Public Address</b></i></span><br />
<br />
(School building extension dedication address)<br />
Today we’re gathered to dedicate and commission the extended physical plant of Pat-Kam school of early education. Before proceeding further, I congratulate Ron and Geraldine. This undertaking is tribute to your pursuit of excellence as well as the good of others. I am fully aware that this completed edifice is etched with your perspiration and garrisoned with your perseverance; it’s a thrill to see the night of your toil give birth to this daybreak of celebration. It is equally clear that this project would be rendered impossible without the demonstrated team spirit of the faculty and assistance of many others. So I salute the entire school family here at Pat-Kam.<br />
<br />
As we commemorate the achievement let us be mindful that this institution is a player on a larger landscape and part of a wider backdrop. The function of education in society is held to be a critical element in human development and socialization. Almost every dysfunction and discomfort of society is often perceived as a deficiency in the educative process. Accordingly the sphere of education is a churning sea of discontent, debate and impending change. Public education particularly has maintained a surface of buoyant discourse with very little by way of achieved difference to show. Private education has long tried to provide a mediating role by attempting to bridge expectations and outcomes. Because of different terms of reference public and private education enterprises are not to be conceived as Siamese twins; neither are they to be pitted as archenemies. Both practices are affected and informed by going-ons in each other’s world. <br />
<a name='more'></a>Recently signed White House legislation (goals 2000 & reauthorization of the elem./sec sch. act) as well as the emerging slant of the looming presidential debates, suggest education issues remain a primary point of public focus. As we skirt the onset of the 21st century, hot potatoes occupying the grill of public education concern include:<br />
<ul><li>Gaps in equity, justice and possibilities of education regarding quality of resource, plant, and staff distribution. </li>
<li>Privatized pursuit of public education surrounding issues of profits and efficiency etc).</li>
<li>Values clarification & the spiritual/moral imperatives of education.</li>
<li>Learner mobility versus content mobility as education adjusts to benefits of technology.</li>
<li>Spiraling economic costs versus diminishing social returns. (Those of a penal persuasion argue for more sophisticated centers of incarceration. Those of a corrective/redemptive mindset must dissuade the proliferation of this uninformed social policy by pointing out that state of the art prisons are poor substitutes for state of the art schools).<br />
</li>
</ul>It is in the context of these ongoing dynamics, this institution is called upon to live out its mission and justify its existence. Dianne Ravtich and Sarah Lightfoot Lawrence have given themselves to documenting ‘as is’ of educational experiences of children. Out of this type of research they have check-listed descriptors of what they term “the good school.” To them the good school is characterized by: <br />
<ul><li>A diverse student population across ethnicity and social class.</li>
<li>Interactive student/staff and parent relations.</li>
<li>Disciplined embodiment of the school’s philosophy in each student.</li>
<li>Imaginative & creative learning experiences.</li>
<li>Safe and healthy environment</li>
<li>Adequate resources to support teaching & learning<br />
</li>
</ul>In other words the good learning environment not only expands life chances through accumulation of student knowledge but also provides exposures to enable human flourishing and quality of life pursuits. As I scanned the brochure of this institution, it would seem this campus (wherever practice matches profession) meets the criteria of a good school. I say this on the basis of your philosophy and mission; integration of student/staff/parents in learning; aggressive curriculum, creative appreciation; extra curricular activities; moral emphases; need based compassion. This salute is not meant to entice complacency, but as encouragement to pursue even better. This can be accomplished by asking the hard question: <i>What must we maximize and what must we minimize here at Pat-Kam in order to produce more relevant client centered Y2K educational services?</i><br />
<br />
Many centuries ago the wisdom literature in scripture known as Proverbs likened instruction and learning to rubies and diamonds- rare treasures. In today’s discordant and depraved society the analogy is even more applicable and pronounced. Accordingly, I challenge the directorship and staff at Pat-Kam to:<br />
<ul><li>Equip each child who passes through these walls with the essential treasures for navigating life as a means of vouchsafing his/her future.</li>
<li>Be faithful to the nobility of your founding principles ensuring that your every practice reflects your philosophy and mission.</li>
<li>Position the institution at the cutting edge of educational research and be committed to an agenda of robust adjustment and change in keeping with evolving demands of knowledge based practice. </li>
</ul><b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b><br />
President/CEO, MOHDC<br />
<i>http://www.mohdc.com</i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</span></i>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9109559102767418022.post-11994276956309213342008-12-19T10:14:00.000-05:002011-10-10T10:15:54.595-04:00Of Ends & Beginnings: Implications for Leaders<div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;">According to our patterned way of reckoning, one 12 month period ebbs to a close and another peeps in. But have you thought about what, if anything ends or begins; and exactly what that means? Suddenly, what we don’t know seems more glaring than what we do know! Small wonder we depend on rituals to mitigate our unspoken wars between known and unknown. Perhaps with better answers we can make meaning of year end hullabaloos like a falling ball, gunshots, bursting bamboo, new curtains, painted homes; even sex at midnight December 31</span><span style="font: 8.0px 'Times New Roman'; letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><sup><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">st</span></sup></span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;">. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;">Despite various cosmetics conveying end and beginning sentiments at this time of year- truth is, nothing stops or starts except our patterned calendar designations. Life and time go on undisturbed, unbroken, and unabated. Nothing essential really stops or starts at the interregnum we call <i>old</i>/<i>new</i> year. So let’s be honest, there is nothing to put down at midnight on December 31</span><span style="font: 8.0px 'Times New Roman'; letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><sup> </sup></span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;">and absolutely nothing to pick up on January1. Why then persist with resolutions that lack resolve, as rituals of New Year transitioning?</span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Hoping to bring change to your life for the New Year? Hoping to ride the clock or falling Time Square ball into newness? The greatest New Year gift you can give yourself is to finally realize that one minute into the New Year you will still be the same person you were the last minute of the old year. No magic force attends a recycling calendar despite many handles of sentimental euphoria suggesting otherwise! </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">I’m not necessarily discouraging resolutions for betterment at the restart of the calendar cycle. But understand that the greatest good will come from a deep seated continuing resolve to be a better person on a daily basis in your ongoing quest of life. Whether a year ends or begins matters very little with regard to personal change. The secret of personal change is to become a reflective practitioner of living. As convoluted as it sounds, a more helpful and critical element of genuine self improvement is to develop the art of<i> continuing </i>while<i> changing</i>!</span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">The unfolding Blagojevich scandal does not suggest an evil individual or someone worse than us. Instead, it signals what we’re all capable of (as leaders or persons of responsibility whose everyday lives touch others) if we don’t pause long enough to reflectively inquire what values drive our aspirations and interactions. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">A notable hindrance to behavior change in leaders and responsible persons is the <i>strange</i> situation they all seem to find themselves in. That is, surrounded by pretense opportunists only interested in providing genuflection and mind guarding feedback. What leaders really need (though not always want) are genuine colleagues/friends who adequately and caringly challenge them to personal development and growth in critical areas of need. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">This <i>strange</i> situation suggests that for leaders and responsible individuals to undergo personal change they must of necessity develop greater individual capacity and responsibility for self awareness, emotional intelligence and self regulation. For many interesting reasons (another discussion) help simply does not, perhaps cannot come from those who typically surround leaders or with whom leader often surround themselves. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">How then can leaders and responsible others increase inward awareness and extend self regulating capacity in order to arrive at more noble leadership behaviors? This is a loaded question that comes without easy answers (and unfortunately not even a New Year transition can bring add value!) In pursuing this loaded question, let’s first acknowledge any attempt by leaders to move from long held dysfunctional practices to more transcendental and noble behaviors is quite a challenge and nothing short. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">It is particularly challenging because leadership must often be exercised in complex environments. Further, it is particularly challenging because issues surrounding behavior change in leaders cannot be simply reduced to the domain of learning and unlearning leadership skills. Instead, personal behaviors are often intertwined with dynamics related to mental models, perceptual realities, long held habits and emotional constructs. In effect we are addressing the notion of managing personal change amidst complex realities. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Sometime ago, Time magazine, in discussing the need for a major public figure to alter his abrasive self serving leadership style, concluded by lamenting that unfortunately there is no such creature as a changed human being. Can self serving leadership orientations be changed into more noble and transcendental leadership practices (bearing in mind the adage: <i>there is no right way to do the wrong thing</i>)? Despite the odds, I believe it is possible for leaders with long established patterns of dysfunctional behaviors to transition to more noble leadership practices. To deny this is to deny concepts of <i>essential goodness, individual</i> <i>renewal</i> and <i>transformative grace. </i>For leaders seeking transformation, I suggest two possible approaches as likely facilitators for desired change. Both approaches emphasize greater personal responsibility for individual change.</span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">In the first scenario I suggest a silent project of personal transformation. Here leaders pursue quiet but steady incremental change by developing the discipline of early rising for libation exercises. That is, the pouring out of themselves in deep self reflection. This reflection must include a review of the previous day’s conduct including self talk on how things may have been handled more nobly. Early morning exercises should also include projection. That is, a preview of coming events along with the noble leadership wished to be exhibited in each coming situation. Elements of trial and error are to be expected but must be accompanied by studied personal review and remedy. Eventually followers/others will come to see and appreciate your makeover. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">The second approach features assisted transformation. In this scenario the leader carefully selects a support group (a key qualifying criterion must be mutual non-dependency); and fully discloses a desire for a new direction to his/her leadership practice. The leader must spell out the feature values/characteristics that he/she desires and should entertain questions and suggestions from the group for implementation. Of course the leader must continue to seek out review and feedback support from this group regarding his/her transitional progress.</span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">In both approaches, it can be expected that the leader will move back and forth between behaviors to which he/she is accustomed and the noble behaviors to which he/she aspires. In other words, there will be good days as well as bad ones. Focus and commitment however must remain steady; and learning should result from missteps. One way of minimizing missteps is to frequently increase self reflective exercises and also catalogue instances/behaviors for review with support group. In this way, mindsets and behaviors to be avoided as well as developed are kept sharply in focus. </span></span></div><div style="font: 12.0px 'Times New Roman'; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 10.0px 0.0px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Better leadership in Caribbean circles is possible! Happy New Year and blessings for success to all!</span></span></div><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #444444;"><b>Dr. Raymond S. Edwards</b> President/CEO, MOHDC <i>http://www.mohdc.com</i> <i>Raymond Edwards, Ph.D. Organizational Psychologist & Minister of Religion: is an international development consultant and executive Leadership behavior specialist.</i></span>Raymond Edwardshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08647155793285386781noreply@blogger.com0