It is difficult not to believe that countries usually get the governments they deserve and not necessarily the political administrations they need. This probably routinely applies both in instances where democracy prevails and where power is seized either by force or through constitutional sleight of hand.
In countries such as ours that have never satisfactorily met the standards of governance to match the developmental challenges, I have found that there has often tended to be a failure to properly diagnose areas of need and so we repeatedly end up receiving the results folly and poor judgment deserve.
Now, this is no parable to avoid direct reference to the current political competitors whose deficiencies are quite easy to identify. Instead, it is an attempt to fathom the aspirations of an electorate not inconsiderably devoid of a sense of where we ought to be 54 years after political independence.
All of this has come to the fore within recent years, months and weeks in the midst of unfolding developments in countries other than our own, in ways promoted by some people who vote here as virtues to be emulated, instead of atrocious breaches of decent behaviour that ought to be condemned.
So, it was not inconceivable that someone at some stage would have jealously and openly decried the absence of a leader along the lines of the thuggish Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines. I do not have the imagination to make this up. There are people among us so desperately impoverished of a basic understanding of the principles of civilised behaviour that they believe it is quite okay for a government to preside over the killing of over 3,000 people over a period of 12 weeks.
In their minds, these members of the electorate of T&T believe that mass extra-judicial extermination is a necessary evil to stamp out the criminal element. It is a Peter-pay-for-Paul scenario not unlike what another of their heroes, Donald Trump, applies to what he describes as "illegal aliens" and inner city residents (read African-Americans here) living in areas he claims are more dangerous than Iraq and Afghanistan.
I have written elsewhere that this US presidential candidate would in fact stand a very good chance of beating the competition in any electoral contest right here, such is the pervasive belief that the time has come to break with accepted norms of civilised behaviour to solve our numerous problems.
There is also another bunch of crazies, with some overlapping here, who openly supported the bankrupting of Venezuela and the criminal endangerment of poor people through fiscal recklessness and the hubris that comes with the belief that tribal cleavages always prevail. Over here, some claimed an ideological connection and revelled in the fact that, not unlike their hero in the Philippines, fearless fingers were pointed at "the evil empire."
Some of these types are also known to have erected solid defences of the behaviour of people such as Muammar Gaddafi and, take a breath for this one, even North Korea's Kim Jong-un. Believe me, folks, social media have now made it possible to witness people who join the voters' lines in St Joseph and San Fernando and Couva and Buccoo saying these things.
All of this to suggest that our current political environment presents as many worrying features with respect to electors as it does the people who offer themselves up for office. Just as important as the quality of our political candidates is the level of knowledge and awareness of the electorate.
How many people, for example, think it does not matter how much corruption, cronyism and maladministration have occurred but that a political administration has "performed" by providing goods and services considered to be symbolic of a higher level of development? How many believe it is "okay" to engage in wrong-doing "because the others did it too"?
These positions are not a distant hop away from believing that the words and actions of despots and prospective tyrants are admirable and worthy to be praised.
How many believe that the best solution for the problem of homelessness is a high power hose on city streets and not a re-evaluation of social support mechanisms to deal with a high incidence of substance abuse–treatable as a disease and not penalised as a crime–mental illness and extreme financial distress?
At the core of much of this sad state of affairs are fundamental misunderstandings about the value of human rights as a foundation stone of our development as a young country.
On another occasion, I will set out the argument for freedom of expression as one of the more important rights in the building of such a foundation. Note all the names above and go back to their record on free expression. Join the dots. Then ask why I cannot help but believe that the ingredients are already in the kitchen waiting for a fateful brew someday, right here.