[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
#3742: GU's Creative Survivalism - Poincy replies to Antoine
From: Jean Poincy <email@example.com>
When a society is in disarray, poverty is the queen, non-respect for
human lives is the daily ritual, order is alien and the dismissal of
collective security is the king, there is no room for compassion. The
biggest muscle in the human body loses its elasticity to feel pity for
those who don't pity themselves and at any given opportunity would
butcher those who are reaching out to them. Just recall the fate of the
French in Jacmel and that of Jean-Dominique.
If we think with compassion we will rebuild Ayiti we are living the
Sisyphean myth. I am being objective in acknowledging practical ways to
retrieve Ayiti from the pit hole that it finds itself in. Unfortunately,
what's practical is the least to live easy with. Human history on
society building gives enough evidence of sacrifices and hardship
countries endure to better themselves.
Absence of order and respect for collective security are the common
characteristics, which create the necessity to build or rebuild a
society. Because the perpetrators are so powerful in doing their evil
deeds, only a strong authoritative government can curb such a state as a
prerequisite to make the society livable.
It amazes me after defining numerous times and clearly what an
authoritative government is that Antoine and others on the list are
still glued on the narrow ordinary meaning of authoritative government.
The political myopia they suffered from makes them lose sight of what's
ahead. They weigh heavily on the dangerous immediate path with no hope
of making things better in the long run. Where they are talking of
ideals, I lay out practical and verifiable means to bring relief to the
Ayitian plague. Not one of my posts does not contain some ways of
resolving the matter.
At any rate let's go back to basics and make further clarification. My
definition of authoritarian government does not mean autocratic or
dictatorial government, as most of us understand it. It does not have
the arbitrary mode of ruling they tend to associate it with. It is a
forceful government reposed on a body of law established and respected
by most if not by all to administer a society at its infancy or at the
stage that Ayiti is today. My borrowings of the term dictatorial to
explain it is more figurative to underline the forceful aspect it must
have, since it is the only form that Ayitians do respect.
Although I always reject the direct participation in the establishment
of such a government, the procedures by which it should operate within
the government to conduct the affaire of the State I advocate is by
essence democratic. My penchant for a coup d'Etat is that of preventing
the people's direct participation in the affaires of the State. However,
how business is to be conducted among government officials is strictly
democratic since issues will be debated among them and tolerance of
dissenting views within government will be effective and differences
will be ironed out for the benefits of all. I even give a time range (at
least a generation) where such type of authoritarian government should
remain in control and the kind of people that should take matters in
hands. During this period the masses should be prevented from direct
participation for their lack of judgment. Associating these practical
views with the narrow sense of arbitrary ruling at the desire of one man
is simply distortion and intellectual terrorism.
A body of law which I advocate and Antoine chooses to ignore is a very
authoritarian tool enabling a government to become strong so that it can
carry its utmost functions, ensuring collective security, protecting
one's property (not solely in terms of material possessions but in terms
of their right to life and to a well-being). The government would do and
undo according to the laws established on the land. It would be
government acting by law and not by the will of the people. The will of
the people is already entrusted in the government, therefore there is no
point to have them involve again in the execution of it.
What I am totally against is the participatory style of government that
is appropriate to a mature society in terms of organization and such
maturity is acquired after a long journey of experience in society
building. Unfortunately, Ayiti is at a point where stage zero is not
fully covered. Any attempt to implement an inappropriate form of
government due to its ideal is very destructive and today's situation is
a case in point.
Anyone who has been following my position on the list over the years
will see that I warned of this chaotic state as people were permitted to
have a direct participation in the democratic process. Those calling for
compassion are still on the same tune despite of what's going on that
prove them wrong.
There will come the time when such compassion can be expressed and acted
on. Then that will be a plus, a tremendous support to the government
that cannot do all. At this point we can say some balance is established
and everyone tolerates each other regardless their differences. They
will work them out through positive cooperation. Today no one tolerates
each other and no one is willing to debate the issues.
In such a society, strength and not compassion is needed. Yes the heart
and the bones are needed, but to pump clean blood and hold the body
strong respectively. Compassion makes beggars of Ayitians throughout
political and financial dependence. For almost 200 years Ayitians are
trying to build Ayiti and have tried different forms of government, to
end nowhere but to fail in all aspects of life.
Ayiti has lived, lives and will live