In 1849, the French critic, journalist and novelist Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr penned the adage “plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose” – “the more things change, the more they stay the same”. Today’s world of instant communication where the modern wonder of digitization technology facilitates many different forms of information – including text, images, audio and video – via the internet to all parts of the globe, may be light years away from Karr’s epoch of almost two centuries ago, but surprisingly, the core content in one of life’s key areas remains unchanged.
This year, around half of the world’s population, roughly two billion eligible voters, can cast ballots in more than 60 countries holding national elections, in what is being described as the largest election year in history. A common recurring theme is the moral convolutions of past leaders and politicians whereby they seem to willingly circumvent important issues of the day to endorse their party’s current candidate regardless of their suitability or eligibility for public office. Hardly a week goes by, either in print media, television or on websites, where we are not confronted by this reprehensible form of behaviour, which is completely lacking a moral compass. These, now senior or formerly statesmen and stateswomen, who, in many instances, are no longer active in their party – whether having been expelled or sidelined by new regimes, or simply retired – will continue to ‘drink the Kool-Aid’ (a harsh reference to the Jonestown tragedy of November, 1978) and regurgitate the political drivel of the day.
Despite having been part and parcel of the political game – it’s a game, first and foremost, winner takes all and rules be damned – and being painfully aware of the cruel fate delivered by the endgame (they are on the bench now, aren’t they?), they cannot resist the pull of the centre stage spotlight. They will say and do anything to return to the fold. Votes are there to be solicited, their procurement is all that matters. Promises? What promises? Everything can be explained. The litany of usual excuses will be trotted out with exacting promptness; the economy, the opposition, world recessions, Caricom tariffs, etc. Accountability has never been (and most likely never will be) part of the modus operandi of both sides of the divide. Oh, for a final grasp of that glorious brass ring!
Why do they allow themselves to stoop to such low moral convolutions? According to former US secretary of state the late Henry Kissinger, “power is the ultimate aphrodisiac”. Apparently, for some, once the taste of its sweet nectar hits the palate, it lingers forever. Perhaps they are wishing for one last whiff, one final kick at the can. An ambassadorship? Chairmanship of, or a seat on a national board? In their grasping through the thick mist of illusion, reaching for the slender straws of connectivity to the seat of power, they are prepared to utter any rhetoric, read any statement and endorse any proposal, so long as it gets them back in the fold. Their eloquence might sway the older folks still divided along tribal or ethnic lines, but thankfully the younger generation are aware of the balderdash. The Machiavellian leaders of today will chuckle at the futile efforts of these old stalwarts behind closed doors, whilst seemingly oblivious to the fact that one day that they will come calling, seeking a similar favour, the crypto currency of politics, and the handcuffs of ‘acquired loyalty’. Oh the lure of power.
These shameless acts of stooping to gain the master’s attention are not restricted to local or regional politics, but are acted out on the international stage in the full glare of the bright lights of live television broadcasts at political gatherings. As these loyalists continue to grovel for whatever they seek, let’s bear in mind Karr’s words “plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose” .
