by Stella Ramsaroop
(Originally published in Guyana's Kaieteur News on 31 August 2007)
Gather round boys and listen to Aunty Stella as she schools you on some good leadership traits. Heavens know there could be some decent lessons on leadership lately. Whoa, not that close Smart and Sharp Robert – but I admire your eagerness to learn because education is the foundation upon which humans will continue to flourish, Mr. MBA.
All right boys (I say boys because most of those who like to take up so much space in the news lately are the guys. Surprise, surprise), its like this, of late there has been quite a bit of confusion from all directions when it comes to defining a leadership style that both puts the people of Guyana first and effectively runs the nation.
Don’t you worry your little heads though, I completely understand how difficult it must be to lead a nation since it is no easy job to pretend to care about the people and jerk them around at the same time. Never fear little ones, Aunty Stella has done her homework and will help you to define a cohesive leadership style that I promise will work brilliantly.
I have quite a few books on leadership, but my smallish library does not come close to exhausting the references on this topic. I have Plato (of course) and Machiavelli (to study how not to lead). I have books by old philosophers as well as new authors with contemporary thoughts on leadership.
However, I was stumped when I read a letter in the Chronicle yesterday where someone compared President Jagdeo’s leadership style with an ancient Swedish king named Aun. I had never heard of this Aun character so – being the student of leadership styles that I am - I did a little studying on the life and leadership of Aun.
It seems Aun did not like to wage war. That much is good. However, it seems when he was 60 years old he decided to sacrifice one of his sons to Odin (the chief Norse god) so that he might live to lead for another 60 years. These sacrifices continued through another eight sons (Poor guy got gypped. He only received an extra ten years for each additional son sacrificed to Odin) until the people stopped him from killing his last son.
Of course, without any further sacrifices, King Aun finally died. It is said that he was so old when he died that he could only eat by sucking mush from a horn like a baby. Personally, this association of Aun to President Jagdeo in the PPP propaganda newspaper is a bit perplexing for me.
Is this the PPP’s way of letting the country know that Jagdeo will be around for quite a bit longer than any of us anticipate? I suppose if Jagdeo plans for these sacrifices, he might have to offer some of your sitting at my feet to Odin since metaphorically speaking you are his political sons.
Hmmm, it seems the President’s new leadership path may not bode well for some of you, but never you mind that, it is all for the good of Guyana. And that is all that is truly important to every single one of you anyhow – the good of Guyana – right? (Wink, wink)
Before you boys start visiting Norse temples with the President, please give Aunty Stella a chance to tell you how I would define a good leader. Or rather, allow me explain how I quickly pinpoint poor leadership from just few telltale signs. Sometimes it is easier to weed out the bad rather than digging around frantically to find the good.
Now boys, here is how Aunty Stella weeds out the power hungry gluttons from the real leaders. If you treat the people who work in your office like the only reason they are on earth is just to serve you – Bam! You are a power hungry glutton.
If you think more about yourself on a daily basis than you think about the people to whom you are obligated by your office to serve – yep, you are a narcissistic stooge. Oh, and by the way, in case there was any doubt, a narcissistic stooge does not a good leader make.
If you begin each day knowing you will make more money than what your paycheck and lawfully gained investments allow – you are not a good leader. Instead you are a criminal that could end up being be some toothless fiend’s very good friend behind the privacy of jail bars.
If you are obsessed with power and money and if you are completely consumed with making it to the next rung on the political ladder – well, I have some very bad news for you. Not only are you not a good leader, you are the worst leader society could ever produce.
To be honest, boys, if you want to know if you are a good leader, just ask those who work with you (yes, boys, I said with you – not for you. A true leader understands the tremendous value of the input and contributions of others). If those who work with you are not afraid to tell you the truth, their honest feedback will help you grow as a leader and make them feel appreciated.
If you cannot “lower” yourself to the level of asking someone who works “for” you to assess your leadership capabilities – once again, you are not a good leader. If you intimidate your co-workers into giving you a dishonest answer just to build your ego – oh brother are you a sick person who needs a lot of psychological counselling.
Listen boys, Aunty Stella is just tired of the ego clashes. It is just pathetic to watch you boys try to outdo each other in personality brawls. The question at hand is not who has the biggest personality – the question is about who has the biggest personality disorder.
Why do boys always have to have the biggest toys? Guyana does not need big personalities from egotistical leaders; it needs some down-to-earth leadership from guys who know how to be humble and can work well with others for the good of the people of the country.
That is all for today’s lesson. You were all such good boys. Tomorrow’s lesson will be on leaders who have to manipulate or scare people into supporting them so they can stay in power.
School is out for the day, boys. You are dismissed.
Email: StellaSays[at]gmail.com
Friday, August 31, 2007
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Stella Says…And Jagdeo comes to Corbin’s rescue
by Stella Ramsaroop
(Originally published in Guyana's Kaieteur News on 29 August 2007)
As much as we might like to do so, we cannot conveniently overlook the magnanimous generosity exhibited by the President of Guyana this week when he granted Mark Benschop a Free Presidential Pardon and set the man free after years of imprisonment on the charges of treason.
At the same time, I am forced to ask some obvious questions that just do not add up. For example, how can we say Benschop was freed from his charges of treason since he was never given a trial? How do we know he was in fact guilty of anything at all if no court said as much?
Moreover, how can a president of any country pardon someone who was not found guilty of a crime? Is it just me (I am a long way away from Guyana) or are some pieces missing from this puzzle?
I suppose Benschop, as well as Corbin and the PNC, are not willing to look a gift horse in the mouth. After all, Corbin could use all of the help he can get from the PPP to look like a reputable leader nowadays.
To say the PNC is hobbling along would be kind after all of the many telltale signs to show just how much of a beating Corbin has taken from the whole Team Alexander fiasco. Whispers of rigged party elections and announcements of disciplinary actions against those in the party who ran against Corbin certainly did not help the PNC’s already spotty reputation.
I did expect Corbin to start pretending like he was a leader. I expected to see the ego posturing and veiled intimidations in hopes that the world would be impressed and finally believe he was a good leader. Things could not have been worse for Corbin in the past few weeks.
It sure is a lucky thing that Jagdeo came to his rescue. Just when Corbin’s situation was going from bad to really, really, really bad – Jagdeo came riding into a press conference on his white horse and saved Corbin just in time.
Just in time for what you may ask? Just in time to save Corbin from yet another failed leadership move. Never mind that all Jagdeo did was pardon a man of treason who was never convicted of treason. I told a friend weeks ago that Corbin would have to feed his ego and in the process would make yet more decisions that would be detrimental to his party and the nation.
Political pomposity is at an all time high right now and as usual it is nauseating. It is always such a hoot to watch people who think more of themselves than they ought as they behave in such a manner as to assume the rest of the world thinks as highly of them as they think of themselves. This would include almost every politician.
These types of people are so predictable, especially when they get their little feelings hurt. I am quite sure the PPP also knew to expect Corbin to do something drastic to prove that he should be taken seriously – like take to the streets in protests.
I have absolutely nothing against street protests to get the government’s attention concerning important matters. When I lived in the Midwest, I travelled over 800 miles to DC and protested the war in Iraq with tens of thousands of other people before the war had even started. Obviously, our efforts were in vain.
However, Guyana’s history with street protests has left a dark cloud over this form of demonstration. As such, when Corbin says his party will take to the streets in protest – the words can sound intimidating instead of like a healthy mode of democracy at work.
Enters President Jagdeo on his white horse with a freed Benschop and takes the wind out of Corbin’s sail. There is a national collective sigh of relief as fear of a street demonstration is quelled yet one more time.
Quite honestly, these back-and-forth movements by Jagdeo and Corbin seem mechanical and staged at times. Sometimes I cannot help but wonder if these leaders, both of whom are parasitically reliant on the other, have the history of Guyana planned out years before it even happens.
In the end, political posturing (or rather throwing a fit because your party is falling to pieces) does not make Corbin a good leader and pardoning a man who has not been convicted of a crime does not make Jagdeo kind-hearted – as the events of the past weeks are suppose to make us all believe.
The one thimble of truth in all this is that Benschop is finally free. All the rest is just pomp and circumstance.
Email: StellaSays[at]gmail.com
(Originally published in Guyana's Kaieteur News on 29 August 2007)
As much as we might like to do so, we cannot conveniently overlook the magnanimous generosity exhibited by the President of Guyana this week when he granted Mark Benschop a Free Presidential Pardon and set the man free after years of imprisonment on the charges of treason.
At the same time, I am forced to ask some obvious questions that just do not add up. For example, how can we say Benschop was freed from his charges of treason since he was never given a trial? How do we know he was in fact guilty of anything at all if no court said as much?
Moreover, how can a president of any country pardon someone who was not found guilty of a crime? Is it just me (I am a long way away from Guyana) or are some pieces missing from this puzzle?
I suppose Benschop, as well as Corbin and the PNC, are not willing to look a gift horse in the mouth. After all, Corbin could use all of the help he can get from the PPP to look like a reputable leader nowadays.
To say the PNC is hobbling along would be kind after all of the many telltale signs to show just how much of a beating Corbin has taken from the whole Team Alexander fiasco. Whispers of rigged party elections and announcements of disciplinary actions against those in the party who ran against Corbin certainly did not help the PNC’s already spotty reputation.
I did expect Corbin to start pretending like he was a leader. I expected to see the ego posturing and veiled intimidations in hopes that the world would be impressed and finally believe he was a good leader. Things could not have been worse for Corbin in the past few weeks.
It sure is a lucky thing that Jagdeo came to his rescue. Just when Corbin’s situation was going from bad to really, really, really bad – Jagdeo came riding into a press conference on his white horse and saved Corbin just in time.
Just in time for what you may ask? Just in time to save Corbin from yet another failed leadership move. Never mind that all Jagdeo did was pardon a man of treason who was never convicted of treason. I told a friend weeks ago that Corbin would have to feed his ego and in the process would make yet more decisions that would be detrimental to his party and the nation.
Political pomposity is at an all time high right now and as usual it is nauseating. It is always such a hoot to watch people who think more of themselves than they ought as they behave in such a manner as to assume the rest of the world thinks as highly of them as they think of themselves. This would include almost every politician.
These types of people are so predictable, especially when they get their little feelings hurt. I am quite sure the PPP also knew to expect Corbin to do something drastic to prove that he should be taken seriously – like take to the streets in protests.
I have absolutely nothing against street protests to get the government’s attention concerning important matters. When I lived in the Midwest, I travelled over 800 miles to DC and protested the war in Iraq with tens of thousands of other people before the war had even started. Obviously, our efforts were in vain.
However, Guyana’s history with street protests has left a dark cloud over this form of demonstration. As such, when Corbin says his party will take to the streets in protest – the words can sound intimidating instead of like a healthy mode of democracy at work.
Enters President Jagdeo on his white horse with a freed Benschop and takes the wind out of Corbin’s sail. There is a national collective sigh of relief as fear of a street demonstration is quelled yet one more time.
Quite honestly, these back-and-forth movements by Jagdeo and Corbin seem mechanical and staged at times. Sometimes I cannot help but wonder if these leaders, both of whom are parasitically reliant on the other, have the history of Guyana planned out years before it even happens.
In the end, political posturing (or rather throwing a fit because your party is falling to pieces) does not make Corbin a good leader and pardoning a man who has not been convicted of a crime does not make Jagdeo kind-hearted – as the events of the past weeks are suppose to make us all believe.
The one thimble of truth in all this is that Benschop is finally free. All the rest is just pomp and circumstance.
Email: StellaSays[at]gmail.com
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Stella Says…Power always regards the population as a danger
by Stella Ramsaroop
(Originally published in Guyana's Kaieteur News on 26 August 2007)
As I was listening to one of my favourite radio news shows this week, a clip from a show called, “The Time is Now” was played and instantly my sensibilities were touched and I knew I was listening to a treasure. The interviewee was noted scholar Noam Chomsky and the subject was dissent.
The interviewer began the segment with Chomsky by insisting that a prophet is one who speaks truth to power regardless of the consequences – someone who loves his or her country but will not shy away from pointing out the nation’s shortcomings so as to encourage the nation to live up to the better angels of their nature.
I had no idea Chomsky was about to be a guest on the show, but as captivated as I was by this introduction, I had no choice but to continue listening. It is refreshing to see segments of the American media finally break free from the nonsensical notion that to dissent against the wrongs of the nation’s leaders is akin to supporting terrorist activity.
I had never heard Chomsky speak before and was intrigued as to what he would have to offer on the subject at hand. I was not the least disappointed. He briefly touched on the fact that a dissident fringe has always existed throughout history – sometimes to their own peril depending on the state at the time – and how today’s governments have public relations machines that manufacture consent to keep the masses inactive.
Chomsky mentioned the affect commercials have on people. This made me think of Guyana’s Government Information Agency (GINA). When a person watches any commercial, one does not expect to be informed. The expectation is to be diluted.
However, with an endless bombardment of government engineered news and information, is it any wonder why the people are so compliant and inactive – even in the midst of crime, flooding and the introduction of VAT taxes? The aim is to keep the people marginalised and living in ignorance because, as Chomsky maintained, “Power always regards the population as a danger.”
The short interview was very enlightening. Although it seems I shared the same sentiment as Chomsky on topics such as government engineered consent and the dire need for dissent in every democracy, it was encouraging to hear these topics discussed in such an eloquent manner.
As the interviewer closed the discussion he added one last thought as he thank Chomsky for his efforts in trying to awake the people from their inactivity. Then saying he was a spiritual man, he went on to acknowledge that “without a serious understanding of the currents in my own nation and the way we impact the world, there will be a hollowness to that spirituality.”
This statement applies to so many people in Guyana. As a nation of very spiritual people, it is near to impossible to pretend to be blind to the government’s actions (and inactions) without making a serious indictment on your own spirituality. The pretences make that spirituality hollow and worthless.
In other words, the government is accountable to the people. What the government does, it does as if the people were doing it because the government is simply a group of representatives of the people. Therefore, when government officials practice racial politics, it is as if the people themselves were committing the act.
When the judicial system fails to convict rapists – over and over and over again – it is the people of the nation who are responsible. When crime runs rampant, when children are left in abusive homes, when schools become dilapidated, when food cost more than many families can afford – it all comes back to the people.
A person can claim to be spiritual all day long, but if that person wears a blindfold so as not to have the conscience seared by the horror all around or be forced to care about others – that spirituality means nothing. To wear ones religion on the sleeve is useless if compassion is not on the other sleeve.
In a country where the government tells the people what they should think about almost everything through the radio, television and newspapers, can it be more evident that the people need to take back control of their lives – and their minds?
I return to the thought that a prophet is someone who will speak the truth to power in spite of the consequences. Guyana needs more brave prophets who love their country but also clearly see the shortcomings and will persuade the nation to raise the standard of expectations from government representatives.
It is time to remove the blindfolds.
Email: StellaSays[at]gmail.com
(Originally published in Guyana's Kaieteur News on 26 August 2007)
As I was listening to one of my favourite radio news shows this week, a clip from a show called, “The Time is Now” was played and instantly my sensibilities were touched and I knew I was listening to a treasure. The interviewee was noted scholar Noam Chomsky and the subject was dissent.
The interviewer began the segment with Chomsky by insisting that a prophet is one who speaks truth to power regardless of the consequences – someone who loves his or her country but will not shy away from pointing out the nation’s shortcomings so as to encourage the nation to live up to the better angels of their nature.
I had no idea Chomsky was about to be a guest on the show, but as captivated as I was by this introduction, I had no choice but to continue listening. It is refreshing to see segments of the American media finally break free from the nonsensical notion that to dissent against the wrongs of the nation’s leaders is akin to supporting terrorist activity.
I had never heard Chomsky speak before and was intrigued as to what he would have to offer on the subject at hand. I was not the least disappointed. He briefly touched on the fact that a dissident fringe has always existed throughout history – sometimes to their own peril depending on the state at the time – and how today’s governments have public relations machines that manufacture consent to keep the masses inactive.
Chomsky mentioned the affect commercials have on people. This made me think of Guyana’s Government Information Agency (GINA). When a person watches any commercial, one does not expect to be informed. The expectation is to be diluted.
However, with an endless bombardment of government engineered news and information, is it any wonder why the people are so compliant and inactive – even in the midst of crime, flooding and the introduction of VAT taxes? The aim is to keep the people marginalised and living in ignorance because, as Chomsky maintained, “Power always regards the population as a danger.”
The short interview was very enlightening. Although it seems I shared the same sentiment as Chomsky on topics such as government engineered consent and the dire need for dissent in every democracy, it was encouraging to hear these topics discussed in such an eloquent manner.
As the interviewer closed the discussion he added one last thought as he thank Chomsky for his efforts in trying to awake the people from their inactivity. Then saying he was a spiritual man, he went on to acknowledge that “without a serious understanding of the currents in my own nation and the way we impact the world, there will be a hollowness to that spirituality.”
This statement applies to so many people in Guyana. As a nation of very spiritual people, it is near to impossible to pretend to be blind to the government’s actions (and inactions) without making a serious indictment on your own spirituality. The pretences make that spirituality hollow and worthless.
In other words, the government is accountable to the people. What the government does, it does as if the people were doing it because the government is simply a group of representatives of the people. Therefore, when government officials practice racial politics, it is as if the people themselves were committing the act.
When the judicial system fails to convict rapists – over and over and over again – it is the people of the nation who are responsible. When crime runs rampant, when children are left in abusive homes, when schools become dilapidated, when food cost more than many families can afford – it all comes back to the people.
A person can claim to be spiritual all day long, but if that person wears a blindfold so as not to have the conscience seared by the horror all around or be forced to care about others – that spirituality means nothing. To wear ones religion on the sleeve is useless if compassion is not on the other sleeve.
In a country where the government tells the people what they should think about almost everything through the radio, television and newspapers, can it be more evident that the people need to take back control of their lives – and their minds?
I return to the thought that a prophet is someone who will speak the truth to power in spite of the consequences. Guyana needs more brave prophets who love their country but also clearly see the shortcomings and will persuade the nation to raise the standard of expectations from government representatives.
It is time to remove the blindfolds.
Email: StellaSays[at]gmail.com
Friday, August 24, 2007
Stella Says…Listen to a tale of my brief regression into a submissive woman
by Stella Ramsaroop
(Originally published in Guyana's Kaieteur News on 24 August 2007)
I have always been intrigued at the socialisation process that expects women to defer to men. Then the other day I was in a conversation with a man who challenged something I said and I responded with a news piece to prove my position. The man dogmatically stood his ground and I decided it was not worth the fight – over dinner no less.
In retrospect, I know I should have continued the dispute, but I did not want to bruise this man’s ego. In other words, I had acted just as I had been socialised to act. I might as well have said, “Of course, you must be right, after all you are a man and I am just a woman.”
It occurred to me that when a woman is trained to defer to a man, she is actually being trained to protect his ego. I have a difficult time believing men have such fragile egos. Moreover, one cannot help but wonder why very few have ever given so much as passing thought to the female ego.
It would seem the female ego carries no more value in many cultures than the female intellect, the female aspirations – or in some cases, even the female herself. In some drastic cases, a woman can be killed if she bruises her husband’s ego too much by having an affair.
Yet that same husband can carry on with whomever he wishes and her ego should never feel the sting. She is to defer to him in this case and all others until death (or murder) do them part.
In my case, I merely allowed a man to feel he had bested me. I rationalised that it was dinner and why would I cause a stir at such a peaceable time? Of course, he obviously had no problem with a stir, but the others at the table might have not enjoyed it as much. I also reasoned to myself that the point at odds was nothing more than a piece of information, which was not as important as a relationship.
It is amazing the hoops an intelligent woman will jump through to justify a wilful act to submit to the stereotypical female role. I was simply acting according to societal expectations. What could possibly be wrong with that? As I type that question I have a million answers to it.
The first and foremost question is why on earth would I pretend to be less intelligent than the male sitting next to me just so his ego could be stroked? The next important question is why society expects me to swallow my pride so that a male can walk around with his feathers cocked?
This is not the first time I have deferred to a man for the sake of societal propriety. When I think of the times I have stepped aside to allow a man to do a job in which I could have done much better, it makes me sick. On numerous occasions I have held my tongue and pretended to be uninformed or uneducated about a matter just so a man could feel more important.
I cannot count the number of times I have consciously stopped at a door and adjusted my countenance to portray a less confident and more submissive representation of myself. This is nothing but a lie to the world though, because my footsteps are not light and my confidence is not shaky.
I would wager an entire year’s salary that every single woman reading this column has deferred to male when it was unnecessary. It is a sad indictment on society that it forces women to lower themselves to such a despicable position just so men can feel as if they are on a higher plane.
I have promised myself time and again that I would not act like someone less intelligent or less capable just to appease a male ego, yet here I find myself feeling guilty for knowing I am at equal but acting like I am less just because society demands it.
Unguarded moments, like the one I had at dinner, are the most treacherous for me because they steal my resolve and force me to behave in a manner that I would never willingly act. It is at these times that my knee jerk reaction is to revert to my conservative upbringing that demands female submission.
I write this very personal essay for one reason and that is to show other women that regardless of the number of times we mindlessly fall in line with patriarchal socialisations, we must not give up.
It is more important than ever to continue to allow our real selves shine through – the intelligent, strong and confident women. Otherwise, our daughters will spend their lives pretending to be lackeys instead of leaders too - and the world simply cannot wait much longer for women to take their rightful place of leadership.
Email: StellaSays[at]gmail.com
(Originally published in Guyana's Kaieteur News on 24 August 2007)
I have always been intrigued at the socialisation process that expects women to defer to men. Then the other day I was in a conversation with a man who challenged something I said and I responded with a news piece to prove my position. The man dogmatically stood his ground and I decided it was not worth the fight – over dinner no less.
In retrospect, I know I should have continued the dispute, but I did not want to bruise this man’s ego. In other words, I had acted just as I had been socialised to act. I might as well have said, “Of course, you must be right, after all you are a man and I am just a woman.”
It occurred to me that when a woman is trained to defer to a man, she is actually being trained to protect his ego. I have a difficult time believing men have such fragile egos. Moreover, one cannot help but wonder why very few have ever given so much as passing thought to the female ego.
It would seem the female ego carries no more value in many cultures than the female intellect, the female aspirations – or in some cases, even the female herself. In some drastic cases, a woman can be killed if she bruises her husband’s ego too much by having an affair.
Yet that same husband can carry on with whomever he wishes and her ego should never feel the sting. She is to defer to him in this case and all others until death (or murder) do them part.
In my case, I merely allowed a man to feel he had bested me. I rationalised that it was dinner and why would I cause a stir at such a peaceable time? Of course, he obviously had no problem with a stir, but the others at the table might have not enjoyed it as much. I also reasoned to myself that the point at odds was nothing more than a piece of information, which was not as important as a relationship.
It is amazing the hoops an intelligent woman will jump through to justify a wilful act to submit to the stereotypical female role. I was simply acting according to societal expectations. What could possibly be wrong with that? As I type that question I have a million answers to it.
The first and foremost question is why on earth would I pretend to be less intelligent than the male sitting next to me just so his ego could be stroked? The next important question is why society expects me to swallow my pride so that a male can walk around with his feathers cocked?
This is not the first time I have deferred to a man for the sake of societal propriety. When I think of the times I have stepped aside to allow a man to do a job in which I could have done much better, it makes me sick. On numerous occasions I have held my tongue and pretended to be uninformed or uneducated about a matter just so a man could feel more important.
I cannot count the number of times I have consciously stopped at a door and adjusted my countenance to portray a less confident and more submissive representation of myself. This is nothing but a lie to the world though, because my footsteps are not light and my confidence is not shaky.
I would wager an entire year’s salary that every single woman reading this column has deferred to male when it was unnecessary. It is a sad indictment on society that it forces women to lower themselves to such a despicable position just so men can feel as if they are on a higher plane.
I have promised myself time and again that I would not act like someone less intelligent or less capable just to appease a male ego, yet here I find myself feeling guilty for knowing I am at equal but acting like I am less just because society demands it.
Unguarded moments, like the one I had at dinner, are the most treacherous for me because they steal my resolve and force me to behave in a manner that I would never willingly act. It is at these times that my knee jerk reaction is to revert to my conservative upbringing that demands female submission.
I write this very personal essay for one reason and that is to show other women that regardless of the number of times we mindlessly fall in line with patriarchal socialisations, we must not give up.
It is more important than ever to continue to allow our real selves shine through – the intelligent, strong and confident women. Otherwise, our daughters will spend their lives pretending to be lackeys instead of leaders too - and the world simply cannot wait much longer for women to take their rightful place of leadership.
Email: StellaSays[at]gmail.com
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Stella Says…What does it mean to be pro-West?
by Stella Ramsaroop
(Originally published in Guyana's Kaieteur News on 22 August 2007)
In yesterday’s Kaieteur News, our dear Sweet and Sensitive Freddie challenged my assessment of any politician using a pro-West platform to garner support for office. I said it was political suicide to do so and used the recent Lebanese elections to prove my point in part. Freddie maintained that Guyana does not feel the same about the West as those in the Middle East.
Far be it from me to encourage anti-West sentiment. Now anti-Bush sentiment - that is a whole other story. I’ve been against this president’s so-called foreign policy initiatives since it was clear that he intended to attack Iraq no matter what. Moreover, his charade of wanting to spread democracy causes me great ire.
I love chocolate cake. However, if it is shoved in my face because someone is trying to force it on me, even chocolate cake will taste horrible. I feel the same about democracy. Introducing democracy in a nation is a decision that should be brought about by the people because they want it. A nation that has democracy forced on it will despise this idea that is by and large very good.
Bush has done whatever he pleases during his terms in office and America has paid for his insolence in so many ways – including, but not limited to the loss of freedoms, the lives of thousands of servicemen, the compromise of America’s national security and by making the US a laughing stock around the world.
It is amazing what one poor administration can do to change such a strong nation in such a short amount of time. If democracy has one Achilles' heel, it would be the fact that poor leaders can find their way into office and use their power to wreak havoc on the nation – and in America’s case, the world.
Freddie said in his column from yesterday, “Guyana has always been in the orbit of the West.” In the respect that the Guyanese people demand to be governed by representative leaders (as demonstrated by Freddie’s point on their refusal of communism), I would never argue the veracity of this choice. Moreover, there are actually many aspects about the West that I enjoy and would encourage.
However, I also feel the past few years have seen Western democratic principles compromised because of the same leaders elected to protect the people’s inherent freedoms. Likewise, Western corporate leaders have introduced a whole new level of corruption to society. Therefore, at this point in history I think it would be wise for any developing nation to be careful of the Western traits it chooses to emulate.
Bear with me, Freddie dear, as I make a short list of recent Western behaviour that a developing nation should guard against. Firstly, no country should ever attack another country in a “pre-emptive strike” in modern days. It is my position that humans have evolved beyond the need for such primitive actions.
Just imagine if I went to my neighbour and slapped her just because I thought there might be a possibility that she would slap me at some point in the future. Nonsense. Humans are a far more advanced species than to behave in such a manner.
This type of behaviour is childish and would be found on the playground with a bully trying to gain more power through intimidation techniques. Rational thinking adults do not strike before being struck and most certainly a modern society should be above this type of conduct.
Another Western trait I abhor is global ignorance. So many Westerners spend their lives totally oblivious to the plight of the rest of the world. Like the Classical Romans, their gluttony consumes them and they give nary a thought to the millions of starving children around the world, the AIDS overrun regions of Africa or the women who die every day because of the patriarchal sexism so ingrained in our cultures.
However, it is the Western corporate attitude of “step on others before they step on you” that completely repulses me. I love watching my husband do business because he is one of the shining examples of a corporate executive who cares about the people who work in his company.
Meanwhile, I get a kick out of watching the voracious, mean-spirited businessmen/women sink their companies because they pilfer every dime for their own personal gain and leave nothing but a shell to run the business.
In short, I like the free-market, but despise American greed. I would fight tooth and nail to defend my freedoms, but I loathe elected officials who squander those freedoms for malevolent agendas. I give an affirming nod to the predominantly effective judicial systems, but I know there are loopholes and therefore do not trust the system fully.
It seems we are at a point in history in which there are many negative Western traits that are on display for the entire world to see. Freddie insists that Guyanese do not care much about these harmful characteristics. I can understand this thinking because most Americans do not care either.
I suppose I have the ability to put myself in the shoes of an Iraqi woman and can feel her pain. I know that if another country destroyed my country the way Iraq has been decimated, my feelings would be strongly negative toward the destroyers. As an American woman, I find it contemptible that I am connected to the atrocious behaviour of the Bush Administration by association of citizenry.
Be that as it may, I do hope any politician who decides to run on a “pro-West” platform in Guyana has the good sense to draw a line of distinction between the ugly Western traits I have listed (and others) and the Western principles that could be good for the nation.
Also, a politician who simply claims to be pro-West leaves too much to interpretation. For example, my interpretation of pro-West did not leave a good taste in my mouth. Clearly there should be some clarification of the Western principles a politician believes to be important for Guyana.
Even more importantly, I hope the Guyanese people understand that not all Western traits are good traits and can discern between the good and bad traits when choosing “pro-West” leaders. Obviously, the American people were not able to make this distinction.
Email: StellaSays[at]gmail.com
(Originally published in Guyana's Kaieteur News on 22 August 2007)
In yesterday’s Kaieteur News, our dear Sweet and Sensitive Freddie challenged my assessment of any politician using a pro-West platform to garner support for office. I said it was political suicide to do so and used the recent Lebanese elections to prove my point in part. Freddie maintained that Guyana does not feel the same about the West as those in the Middle East.
Far be it from me to encourage anti-West sentiment. Now anti-Bush sentiment - that is a whole other story. I’ve been against this president’s so-called foreign policy initiatives since it was clear that he intended to attack Iraq no matter what. Moreover, his charade of wanting to spread democracy causes me great ire.
I love chocolate cake. However, if it is shoved in my face because someone is trying to force it on me, even chocolate cake will taste horrible. I feel the same about democracy. Introducing democracy in a nation is a decision that should be brought about by the people because they want it. A nation that has democracy forced on it will despise this idea that is by and large very good.
Bush has done whatever he pleases during his terms in office and America has paid for his insolence in so many ways – including, but not limited to the loss of freedoms, the lives of thousands of servicemen, the compromise of America’s national security and by making the US a laughing stock around the world.
It is amazing what one poor administration can do to change such a strong nation in such a short amount of time. If democracy has one Achilles' heel, it would be the fact that poor leaders can find their way into office and use their power to wreak havoc on the nation – and in America’s case, the world.
Freddie said in his column from yesterday, “Guyana has always been in the orbit of the West.” In the respect that the Guyanese people demand to be governed by representative leaders (as demonstrated by Freddie’s point on their refusal of communism), I would never argue the veracity of this choice. Moreover, there are actually many aspects about the West that I enjoy and would encourage.
However, I also feel the past few years have seen Western democratic principles compromised because of the same leaders elected to protect the people’s inherent freedoms. Likewise, Western corporate leaders have introduced a whole new level of corruption to society. Therefore, at this point in history I think it would be wise for any developing nation to be careful of the Western traits it chooses to emulate.
Bear with me, Freddie dear, as I make a short list of recent Western behaviour that a developing nation should guard against. Firstly, no country should ever attack another country in a “pre-emptive strike” in modern days. It is my position that humans have evolved beyond the need for such primitive actions.
Just imagine if I went to my neighbour and slapped her just because I thought there might be a possibility that she would slap me at some point in the future. Nonsense. Humans are a far more advanced species than to behave in such a manner.
This type of behaviour is childish and would be found on the playground with a bully trying to gain more power through intimidation techniques. Rational thinking adults do not strike before being struck and most certainly a modern society should be above this type of conduct.
Another Western trait I abhor is global ignorance. So many Westerners spend their lives totally oblivious to the plight of the rest of the world. Like the Classical Romans, their gluttony consumes them and they give nary a thought to the millions of starving children around the world, the AIDS overrun regions of Africa or the women who die every day because of the patriarchal sexism so ingrained in our cultures.
However, it is the Western corporate attitude of “step on others before they step on you” that completely repulses me. I love watching my husband do business because he is one of the shining examples of a corporate executive who cares about the people who work in his company.
Meanwhile, I get a kick out of watching the voracious, mean-spirited businessmen/women sink their companies because they pilfer every dime for their own personal gain and leave nothing but a shell to run the business.
In short, I like the free-market, but despise American greed. I would fight tooth and nail to defend my freedoms, but I loathe elected officials who squander those freedoms for malevolent agendas. I give an affirming nod to the predominantly effective judicial systems, but I know there are loopholes and therefore do not trust the system fully.
It seems we are at a point in history in which there are many negative Western traits that are on display for the entire world to see. Freddie insists that Guyanese do not care much about these harmful characteristics. I can understand this thinking because most Americans do not care either.
I suppose I have the ability to put myself in the shoes of an Iraqi woman and can feel her pain. I know that if another country destroyed my country the way Iraq has been decimated, my feelings would be strongly negative toward the destroyers. As an American woman, I find it contemptible that I am connected to the atrocious behaviour of the Bush Administration by association of citizenry.
Be that as it may, I do hope any politician who decides to run on a “pro-West” platform in Guyana has the good sense to draw a line of distinction between the ugly Western traits I have listed (and others) and the Western principles that could be good for the nation.
Also, a politician who simply claims to be pro-West leaves too much to interpretation. For example, my interpretation of pro-West did not leave a good taste in my mouth. Clearly there should be some clarification of the Western principles a politician believes to be important for Guyana.
Even more importantly, I hope the Guyanese people understand that not all Western traits are good traits and can discern between the good and bad traits when choosing “pro-West” leaders. Obviously, the American people were not able to make this distinction.
Email: StellaSays[at]gmail.com
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Stella Says…Whistle blowers welcomed and protected
by Stella Ramsaroop
(Originally published in Guyana's Kaieteur News on 19 August 2007)
The Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill presented for approval by Raphael Trotman is still hanging in limbo despite numerous calls for the enactment of such legislation from all parts of Guyanese society. However, it seems innovation has found a way around any governments’ stalling shenanigans and will no doubt be to the benefit of all free (and not-so-free) people.
Wikipedia is an online source of information that has made a sound impact on modern culture. Anyone in the world can contribute or edit entries on any subject; thereby creating the healthiest encyclopaedia that has ever existed.
Now these remarkably inventive Wiki people have gone one step further and created a new site specifically designed for those who have valuable information to share about their governments and corporations. The site is called Wikileaks (www.wikileaks.org). Oh baby, is this going to be so much fun.
Here is what Wikileaks has to say about its brilliant idea, “Wikileaks is developing an uncensorable Wikipedia for untraceable mass document leaking and analysis. Our primary interest is in exposing oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, but we also expect to be of assistance to those in the west who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their own governments and corporations.”
It continues, “We aim for maximum political impact. Our interface is identical to Wikipedia and usable by all types of people. We have received over 1.2 million documents so far from dissident communities and anonymous sources.”
The value of such a site is beyond measure to a country like Guyana that has a government that refuses to be forthcoming concerning its actions or to pass legislation to allow for the openness of information to the people. Just imagine the implications of a site like this.
This site provides an avenue for the anonymous, untraceable leaking of documents without censor, which means that anyone who has been sitting on information about their government and just waiting for a chance to let the world know about it without paying a stiff price for being a dissident can come forward now without fear of reprisal.
I can hear the angels in heaven singing, “hallelujah!” Governments worldwide will be held accountable to the people for their actions – like it or not. Wikileaks claims to have received over 1.2 million documents so far. If ever there has been a mechanism for keeping our governments honest, this far surpasses all else.
That is not to say that the proposed FOI bill should not be passed and enacted, as it is only proper for the people of any free country to have full knowledge of their government’s actions. There is no reason the people of Guyana should rely on leaks to attain the information they rightfully deserve from their representatives.
Still, as we have seen, some governments do not wish to be so forthcoming with information. This is where a site like Wikileaks will prove invaluable to the openness of information.
Here is how the makers of Wikileaks see the site, “Wikileaks looks like Wikipedia. Anybody can post to it, anybody can edit it. No technical knowledge is required. Whistleblowers can post documents anonymously and untraceably. Users can publicly discuss documents and analyze their credibility and veracity. Users can discuss the latest material, read and write explanatory articles on leaks along with background material and context. The political relevance of documents and their veracity will be revealed by a cast of thousands.”
The dissemination and analysis of documents posted on Wikileaks about Guyana will be the dream of every journalist from this nation who has been lowered to the position of information peddler for the government. It will also be the nightmare of every corrupt public servant.
I can see it now - the price tags of those mansions owned by government officials will become public knowledge, backroom deals will be brought to light and even information from the bygone days will be revealed. I simply love it when justice wins and corruption is exposed.
Wikileaks encourages those who have been bought or intimidated into silence to let the entire world know the truth. Whistleblowers have stood up for justice even when doing so risked retribution – or at times death. This new site shoves the injustice bully back and protects the whistleblower.
As mentioned on this site, there are many governments who rely on concealing reality from their people and sufficient leaking will bring these administrations down. While there will no doubt be several governments scrambling around to cover their corruption and to enact campaigns about how whistle blowing is unpatriotic, I expect this site will see the dawn of a whole new political world.
Moreover, Wikileaks also supports corporate whistle blowers. The site says, “A corrupt or unethical corporation is a menace to all inside and outside it.”
It seems Wikileaks is still tweaking itself to sustain the vast number of entries it is receiving and will continue to receive. However, the site expects to be up and running fully within the next few months. There is yet to be a link created for Guyana entries. Let’s hope this is remedied quickly.
Slippery politicians, be warned. Your days are numbered.
Email: StellaSays[at]gmail.com
(Originally published in Guyana's Kaieteur News on 19 August 2007)
The Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill presented for approval by Raphael Trotman is still hanging in limbo despite numerous calls for the enactment of such legislation from all parts of Guyanese society. However, it seems innovation has found a way around any governments’ stalling shenanigans and will no doubt be to the benefit of all free (and not-so-free) people.
Wikipedia is an online source of information that has made a sound impact on modern culture. Anyone in the world can contribute or edit entries on any subject; thereby creating the healthiest encyclopaedia that has ever existed.
Now these remarkably inventive Wiki people have gone one step further and created a new site specifically designed for those who have valuable information to share about their governments and corporations. The site is called Wikileaks (www.wikileaks.org). Oh baby, is this going to be so much fun.
Here is what Wikileaks has to say about its brilliant idea, “Wikileaks is developing an uncensorable Wikipedia for untraceable mass document leaking and analysis. Our primary interest is in exposing oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, but we also expect to be of assistance to those in the west who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their own governments and corporations.”
It continues, “We aim for maximum political impact. Our interface is identical to Wikipedia and usable by all types of people. We have received over 1.2 million documents so far from dissident communities and anonymous sources.”
The value of such a site is beyond measure to a country like Guyana that has a government that refuses to be forthcoming concerning its actions or to pass legislation to allow for the openness of information to the people. Just imagine the implications of a site like this.
This site provides an avenue for the anonymous, untraceable leaking of documents without censor, which means that anyone who has been sitting on information about their government and just waiting for a chance to let the world know about it without paying a stiff price for being a dissident can come forward now without fear of reprisal.
I can hear the angels in heaven singing, “hallelujah!” Governments worldwide will be held accountable to the people for their actions – like it or not. Wikileaks claims to have received over 1.2 million documents so far. If ever there has been a mechanism for keeping our governments honest, this far surpasses all else.
That is not to say that the proposed FOI bill should not be passed and enacted, as it is only proper for the people of any free country to have full knowledge of their government’s actions. There is no reason the people of Guyana should rely on leaks to attain the information they rightfully deserve from their representatives.
Still, as we have seen, some governments do not wish to be so forthcoming with information. This is where a site like Wikileaks will prove invaluable to the openness of information.
Here is how the makers of Wikileaks see the site, “Wikileaks looks like Wikipedia. Anybody can post to it, anybody can edit it. No technical knowledge is required. Whistleblowers can post documents anonymously and untraceably. Users can publicly discuss documents and analyze their credibility and veracity. Users can discuss the latest material, read and write explanatory articles on leaks along with background material and context. The political relevance of documents and their veracity will be revealed by a cast of thousands.”
The dissemination and analysis of documents posted on Wikileaks about Guyana will be the dream of every journalist from this nation who has been lowered to the position of information peddler for the government. It will also be the nightmare of every corrupt public servant.
I can see it now - the price tags of those mansions owned by government officials will become public knowledge, backroom deals will be brought to light and even information from the bygone days will be revealed. I simply love it when justice wins and corruption is exposed.
Wikileaks encourages those who have been bought or intimidated into silence to let the entire world know the truth. Whistleblowers have stood up for justice even when doing so risked retribution – or at times death. This new site shoves the injustice bully back and protects the whistleblower.
As mentioned on this site, there are many governments who rely on concealing reality from their people and sufficient leaking will bring these administrations down. While there will no doubt be several governments scrambling around to cover their corruption and to enact campaigns about how whistle blowing is unpatriotic, I expect this site will see the dawn of a whole new political world.
Moreover, Wikileaks also supports corporate whistle blowers. The site says, “A corrupt or unethical corporation is a menace to all inside and outside it.”
It seems Wikileaks is still tweaking itself to sustain the vast number of entries it is receiving and will continue to receive. However, the site expects to be up and running fully within the next few months. There is yet to be a link created for Guyana entries. Let’s hope this is remedied quickly.
Slippery politicians, be warned. Your days are numbered.
Email: StellaSays[at]gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)