05 April 2002, 973 words
I do not consider myself to be a successful person. Apart from growing naturally curly hair, I haven't done anything that would define me as a success. My bank balance would make Ish giggle and, though I have managed to make a living - or, more precisely, make a not-starving-to-death - as a professional writer, my opinions and ideas carry less weight in good society than, say, Pastor Cuffie's or Devant Parsuram Maharaj's.
Mind you, I'm not complaining. I admit that my lack of success is entirely my own fault. It is really quite foolish of me to try and be a man of letters without a doctorate, even if I do get it from a Pacific university, or without the support of at least one god. But I always figured it would be unethical to use a Supreme Being, whether Jehovah or Sat Maharaj, in order to establish my intellectual authority.
It was only this week, though,that I realised it is this same foolish bias which accounts for my lack of success in the world and, more particularly, in Trinidad. It's quite ironic that this realisation should have come to me only now, for I have written quite often on the issue of ethics, believing that I understood how ethical principles work.
But I now see that I was only fooling myself, and I offer heartfelt apologies to all those readers I may have misled with my rantings. All I can say in my defence is that I was brainwashed by cultural imperialism, for it was the moral philosophy of mostly dead white male thinkers which I adopted, instead of creating an ethical system based on local culture.
But, thanks to the examples recently set by our society's most successful and respected individuals, brainwashed I am no longer. I am referring, of course, to the newly appointed Independent Senators. Senior Counsel Martin Daly, a former Independent Senator who was not returned to the Upper House, has argued that "It is entirely artificial, although legal, to give the Senate a life of its own in this 18-18 situation." He also asked what work the Independent Senators will be doing to justify their salaries and allowances with Parliament prorogued.
Daly, however, is clearly suffering from a case of sour grapes, if not a case of fermented ones. I mean, look at the calibre of people we have on the Independent benches. (It's true that they won't actually be sitting there in the flesh, but I'm certain that their bottoms will be there in spirit.)
There's economist Mary King, who is also chairman of the Trinidad and Tobago Transparency Institute. "I believe in what the law says," said King, according to a news article in the Trinidad Guardian. Previously, I had thought it a form of corruption, even if it wasn't against the law, for Government Ministers to have portfolios and then accept consultancies where they did little or no work for additional pay. Once upon a time, it would have seemed to me that King was doing pretty much the same thing by accepting a Senator's salary in the present scenario.
But I see now that I'm just plain stupid. This is why, despite her commitment to transparency, I have always found King's newspaper columns to be so impenetrable. My intellect is simply too simple to understand her grasp of the complex realities of economics and ethics.
There's also the argument of attorney Dana Seetahal. Not only is Seetahal a respected newspaper columnist - well, more respected than me, since she gets paid more - but she also lectures at the Hugh Wooding Law School, from which will come many of this country's future politicians and white-collar criminals. Agreeing that it would be morally wrong to accept the salary if she wasn't doing anything to earn it, Seetahal said, "But I do think since I was appointed last week, I've done so many additional things, one of which is speaking at length to various media houses and returning calls."
Now, to the average citizen, this may not seem to be worth $8520 a month. But, remember, lawyers charge by the hour, just like hookers. Besides, the average citizen has no idea how irritating we journalists can be, always wanting to get comments from people and, what is worse, quoting them accurately.
And, had I any remaining vestiges of doubt, the words of Brother Noble Khan would put them to rest, like a dog with an incurable case of mange. Khan is chairman of the Inter-Religious Organisation, which places him in a position of moral authority far exceeding my own. Additionally, he's named "Noble", whereas all my name means is "born handsome" and there are people who ask me "So what happened after birth?"
"We're not responsible for what is taking place politically that has caused Parliament to be prorogued, so I see nothing wrong in accepting the salary," he said. I, with my simplistic ethical reasoning, would have thought that the wrongs of the Lower House wouldn't make a right in the Upper: but Brother Khan has showed me what a mook I am, for which I am eternally grateful.
Finally, there's also Professor Ramesh Deosaran who, like Batman, has devoted his life to fighting crime and would therefore never accept a Senatorial post if it were wrong to do so. There's also Professor Ken Ramchand, a man so strong-minded that he reads the novels of Wilson Harris without the aid of either aspirin or Ex-Lax.
So, with these exemplars before me, I can now re-think my views on right and wrong and whether naturally curly hair is really enough. And who knows? Perhaps, in the fullness of time, I too may become eminent enough to earn $51,000 and change for not going to Parliament for six months.
Copyright ©2002 Kevin Baldeosingh