EDITORIAL: The patriot and the partisan

“We would not die in that man’s company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.” – Henry V

IT is not for us to argue that the two concepts at caption are necessarily antithetical; indeed we readily concede that the partisan may equally be a patriot. It is just that he or she prefers to demonstrate their patriotism in limited and ideal circumstances – when his or her party holds the reins of government. The distinction is much clearer when his or her party forms the Opposition. Suddenly, any measure that even hints at a benefit for the nation is to be decried, lest it should inure to the electoral benefit of the governing party. The patriot, on the other hand, does not need any agreeable circumstance to demonstrate his or her love for the country of their birth. The existence of a crying need for their services alone suffices.

We posit these claims in the context of the recent reports that former Prime Minister in a Barbados Labour Party administration (1994-2008) and now Independent MP for St. Peter, Mr. Owen Arthur, has accepted the invitation of the currently governing DLP administration to serve Barbados in an advisory capacity on economic matters.

Reaction has been immediate and, for the most part, apparently negative. Some see it as simply a continuance of a perceived attempt by Arthur further to undermine the chances of the current leader of the BLP Opposition, Ms. Mia Mottley, to assume the mantle of Prime Minister of the country. Others wonder aloud, in seeming ignorance of the culture of political riposte and repartee, as to how Arthur could now align with a group that had, some years earlier, continually denied and denigrated his technical economic skills on the hustings and in debates on the floor of the Lower Chamber. They fail to recall, however, that Mr. Arthur frequently gave as good as he got in that specific regard. Others, perhaps of a more romantic bent, perceive it as nothing but a naked betrayal of their beloved party.

And while there has been no effusive outpouring of acclamation from supporters of the governing administration in response, we are of the view that this joint initiative can only bode well politically for Barbados. It is not that we consider that Mr. Arthur alone is capable of effecting the economic miracle that is required if Barbados is to escape from the current morass. Indeed, we consider the Arthur conscription as akin to a desperate last roll of the dice by the governing administration to save the country from impending doom.

Given the fluid nature of economic theory, we do not believe for a moment that any one expert, no matter how gifted, has all the answers. It is worth a shot, this current strategic intervention, nevertheless.

Should there be some inkling of success, however measured, all Barbadians who love their native land should stand in proud acclaim of this venture. If, as seems more likely, little difference is made to our economic fortunes as a result, we are all in the same boat. Barbados is currently in a state of economic warfare and therefore expects every man and woman to do his or her duty. As would any loyal son of the soil, Mr. Arthur is simply answering the call of his nation in its time of distress.

We commend him for that.