Toolbox

‘The ideal Caribbean person’

We should be grateful to BC Pires for drawing attention to what must surely rank as one of the most outstanding examples of bureaucratic verbiage ever inflicted on an unsuspecting Caribbean public.

In his ‘Thank God It’s Friday’ (TGIF) column, in the Trinidad Express on September 12 last (www.trinidadexpress.com/index.pl/article?id=161374732), Mr Pires unleashed his full satirical wit on an opus entitled ‘Creative and Productive Citizens for the Twenty-first Century,’ which purports to outline the characteristics of the ‘Ideal Caribbean Person’ –available on the Caricom website for anyone with a sado-masochistic desire to read it (www.caricom.org/jsp/communications/meetings_statements/citizens_21_century.jsp?menu=communications).

Now the only thing Mr Pires is guilty of – apart from allowing his biting sarcasm to run riot – is not making it clear that this document was prepared some eleven years ago for the attention of the 18th Meeting of Caricom Heads, held in Montego Bay, Jamaica, in July 1997. Thus anyone reading the TGIF article might, somewhat unfairly, get the impression that the target of Mr Pires’s typing finger is a recent or current document.

Be that as it may, the exalted vision of the ‘Ideal Caribbean Person’ contained in the paper continues to find resonance in official pronouncements pertaining to Caricom’s educational, social and cultural goals and development aspirations.

Unfortunately, as a result, the term ‘Ideal Caribbean Person’ has almost become something of a cliché and the fault for this may well lie in the ponderous, pedantic language ridiculed by Mr Pires.

We have previously complained about the opaqueness and obtuseness of the language employed by the drafters of Caricom communiqués, but this particular report – no doubt the product of bureaucrats and consultants – aimed at defining the ‘Ideal Caribbean Person’ in the context of the region’s human resource development strategy, must be worthy of some sort of prize for being as unedifying and stilted a passage of prose that has ever been produced by a region rich in literary and cultural expression.

The famous British satirical magazine, Private Eye, has a section called Pseuds Corner, which delights in exposing the pretentiousness of people, especially politicians and celebrities, as they strive for effect through public pronouncements of meaningless, pseudo-intellectual drivel. Private Eye has no need to lampoon these types, since to repeat verbatim what they have actually said, without comment, is sufficient to expose their pompousness and ridiculousness. Their inane utterances speak for themselves.

Ditto the text of the ‘Ideal Caribbean Person,’ in which can be found the following gems proclaiming that the person should be “imbued with a respect for human life since it is the foundation on which all the other desired values must rest; is emotionally secure with a high level of self confidence and self esteem [what’s the real difference?]… is aware of the importance of living in harmony with the environment… has an informed respect for the cultural heritage… demonstrates multiple literacies, independent and critical thinking, questions the beliefs and practices of past and present and brings this to bear on the innovative application of science and technology to problem solving… values and displays the creative imagination in its various manifestations and nurture [sic] its development in the economic and entrepreneurial spheres in all other areas of life; has developed the capacity to create and take advantage of opportunities to control, improve, maintain and promote physical, mental, social and spiritual well being and to contribute to the health and welfare of the community and country; nourishes in him/herself and in others, the fullest development of each person’s potential without gender stereotyping and embraces differences and similarities between females and males as a source of mutual strength.”

We think you get the idea.
Sorry, but in our own Caribbean ‘pseuds corner,’ the bureaucrats and politicians have got it wrong again.
In simple English, we think that the ideal Caribbean person is someone who loves his or her family and country, life and a good time, not necessarily in that order. The ideal Caribbean person is someone who holds fast to whatever faith she or he believes in. The ideal Caribbean person also believes in education, self-improvement and hard work. She or he believes in being rewarded for honest toil and in giving something back to her or his community. The ideal Caribbean person works hard and plays hard.

The ideal Caribbean person walks among us every day and the ideal Caribbean person is in all of us. We are talking about a force that comes from within. The ideal Caribbean person cannot be created by political diktat and certainly not through limp, nonsensical bureaucratese, no matter how well-meaning. All we ask, across the Caribbean, is that our governments provide us with quality social services and a secure environment to pursue our aspirations to become the ideal person we all dream of being.

Comments

About Comments

We thank all readers who have contributed to this site since its relaunch. This section of the website is intended to provide a forum for reasoned and reasonable debate on the newspaper's content and we hope that readers make full use of it as many have already done.

The comments section is an extension of the newspaper and what it has become well known for over its history: accuracy, balance and fairness.
In recent weeks a large proportion of the comments posted have contained attacks on other users, slander, coarse language and profanity. Comments of these types will be deleted.
Comments which contain gratuitous and incendiary references to race and ethnicity will be struck.
We reserve the right to edit/delete comments for length, any libel and taste. We moderate all comments so be patient while your message waits to be approved.
Curious about the little images next to each commenter's name ? Go here and sign up using the same email address you used to register for Stabroeknews.com then upload your image and confirm it.

18 Responses to “‘The ideal Caribbean person’”

Pantha
on September 26th, 2008 8:40 am

Unfortunately, the ideal Caribbean person is now residing in Toronto, New York, Miami or London and is living and partying hard there; and cannot therefore comment on the verbiage, since he or she is too busy.

[Reply to this]
geeteerebel
In reply to the above comment on September 26th, 2008 10:22 am:
True…..
Or he/she could be living somewhere else in the US, wondering how to make the region better so one day he/she can return.

As fall brings forth the canadian cold, he/she could be thinking.. “my bones aren’t made for this weather.

[Reply to this]
Pantha
In reply to the above comment on September 26th, 2008 1:42 pm:
…or pray for global warming
Josh Ragnauth
on September 26th, 2008 11:24 am

Is it at all possible, despite the time interval, to find out WHO actually wrote the definition. Surely, the official recorsd must still exist in the archives, and the names should therefore become public knowledge.

[Reply to this]
Roger Williams
on September 26th, 2008 5:26 pm

Withour reading BC Pieres’s treatment, I read and re-read this Stabroek News editorial for good reason. The editorial clearly outdistances any of the event-reactive gibberish that usually flows from the pen of some of our Editors, and sets new standards of pettifoggery and witlessness.

it seems to do the stupid thing … validate someone called BC Pires without the neccessary trouble of reflective thinking.

I promise to read BC Pires later and comment appropriately, but am very glad that I skipped to the Caricom-webpage immediately to see what the furore was all about. My sincere conclusion is that this SN editorial is testimony to the cakeshop mentality that has replaced erudition in our society today, and the generous nonsense that has replaced the capacity to abstract, and to articulate a higher ideal.

I gagged when I saw that the SN Editor had replaced a lofty effort at disavowing abortion and war (”… imbued with a respect for human life since it is the foundation on which all the other desired values must rest…”) with the careless and infantile insinuation of “… we think that the ideal Caribbean person is someone who loves his or her family and country, life and a good time, not necessarily in that order…”

This is the thinking of an eighteen-year old, pure and simple … and is trite and shallow.

Who is this “we”, then, …

If that was no shocking enough, the editor refers to the clear language of “… is emotionally secure with a high level of self confidence and self esteem.” with the arrogant, even asinine, comment: “what’s the real difference?”.

If this had come from anywhere other than a respected newspaper, I would have simply ignored it. But this is the Stabroek News, people, the Stabroek News! My only advice is that the editorial staff take the time to acknowledge that there is a subtle yet distinct difference in the meaning of “self-confidence” and “self-esteem”. For the record … realistic confidence in one’s own judgment, ability, power, etc. as against a realistic respect for or favorable impression of oneself .

Now any fool should have checked the dictionary before making that dismissive a statement, but in a seamless moment of arrogance and childishness born out of a rage to discredit CARICOM, the staff writer opted for the easy way out.

Now if the above made me uncomfortable, the next made me see red.
The mangling of the next four ideals of the ideal Caribbean person ( “… sees ethnic, religious and other diversity as a source of potential strength and richness; is aware of the importance of living in harmony with the environment; has a strong appreciation of family and kinship values, community cohesion, and moral issues including responsibility for and accountability to self and community; has an informed respect for the cultural heritage;… “) into the awesome and fathomless drabness of ” … The ideal Caribbean person is someone who holds fast to whatever faith she or he believes in …. We are talking about a force that comes from within… ” is a case study in high-school semantics.

Does “… whatever faith she or he believes in … ” include murder, violence, anarchy, atheism, racism, nepotisn? Because these are relevant concerns where an intense and overt moral sanction or restraint is absent in the belief system.

The hopes of our founding fathers that a post-1977 “ideal Caribbean Person” could bring to bear vision and wisdom as he or she “… demonstrates multiple literacies, independent and critical thinking, questions the beliefs and practices of past and present and brings this to bear on the innovative application of science and technology to problems solving …” are lost on SN’s Editor … and we are all the poorer … as a region … after this latest bit of intellectual mischeif.

This staff writer should cease and desist!

[Reply to this]
Pantha
In reply to the above comment on September 26th, 2008 8:29 pm:
The editorial was supporting Mr.Pires in taking aim at the pretentiousness of language stating the obvious, as if the words were the tablets of God brought down to earth by Moses. I read both Pires’s essay and the Caricom communique, and can only say I’m appalled at the waste of time it represented. And I cannot in all honesty figure why you would not castigate the Caricom personnel - this is Caricom, sir, Caricom ! not a think tank paid to produce a blizzard of self-indulgent “scholarly” papers! - for not assigning their priorities in a manner more fitting to the organizational mandate. I could understand your anger with the SN and Mr. Pires if the language of the communique had been poetic, lyrical, concise, uplifting to the soul and elevating to the spirit…a sort of manifesto for the region, an inspiration to all. But alas, it is not. It is pedestrian, dry, wordy and lacks even a modicum of wit or originality.

Perhaps, sir, you are spending too much time reading bureaucratic press statements, or writing them, to understand the fury of intelligent people subjected to trite and meaningless phrases from an organization that treats us like children to be lectured or condescended to. And if you wish to take umbrage at the editorial, then perhaps less venemous language would make your point better.

As it is, sir, you give the distinct impression of supporting the maintenance of an army of personnel with your taxes, who, instead of doing more to integrate the region, spend your money creating self-serving, officious pronouncements that grandly repeat self-evident truths and justify the writers’ existence, but which, in the end, achieve very little, or nothing at all.

[Reply to this]
Roger Williams
In reply to the above comment on September 27th, 2008 2:50 am:
Now, Pantha, this is getting to be ridiculous. Don’t lose focus …

First, the arguments you raise are … quibbling! A man of your intelligence should focus on the factual detail, not on sophistry.

Secondly, the “army” of personnel you allude to seems necessary to represent , articulate and document the individual hopes and concerns of the very disparate states forming the union. Many of these states still prize their individuality, and the total absence of a visionary leader in the current crop means that it is these selfsame lofty words of the fledgling CARICOM that will help us remember what we set out to do so many years ago!

Thirdly, it follows that CARICOM’s Secretary General a servant, not the master, of the political whims and fancies of its individual leaders. I may be wrong, but until they give him/her effect power, then he or she must concentrate on using every diplomatic skill and persuasion at his/her command to keep the organization on course. The Secretaries-General seem to have done a good job thus far.

Fourthly, it takes no effort to second-guess a 1977 document. Any fool in 2008 can say with hindsight that they “know” the issues a fledgling union was facing at that time. If the words suited the occasion, then it was a fit! To condemn an institution on nothing else than the “words” they used 31 years ago is an exercise in foolhardiness. Knock yourself out!

Fifthly, it seems that the irony of the whole situation is lost on you. BC Pires seems to have used “words” in his denunciation. It would be tragic if after I read his article that I would remember your allusion to “as if the words were the tablets of God brought down to earth by Moses”. Who is BC Pires, and what has he done for Caribbean integration lately? A ” full satirical wit” is no substitute for the diplomatic skill necessary to, say, reconcile Bharat Jagdeo with thirteen counterparts who disagree with him.

Sixthly, it would be foolish to infer that I agree with all that CARICOM does … but a critique must be based on the factual record … nothing else!

Finally, I should think that diplomatic language has to be pedestrian and dry. It should be food for SN’s editor’s sword if you, Pantha, crafted communiques in terms that were “poetic and lyrical”.

Why not give us a sample!

Do you dare?

M. Xiu Quan-Balgobind-Hackett
In reply to the above comment on September 28th, 2008 4:11 pm:
Ah, Mr Williams, YOU GO make him cease and desist!

[Reply to this]
Adam Frankowski
on September 26th, 2008 8:08 pm

Mr Williams doesn’t seem to realise that the SN editorial is slightly “tongue in cheek”.

The “ideal Caribbean person” should have a sense of humour.

[Reply to this]
Roger Williams
In reply to the above comment on September 27th, 2008 1:58 am:
Strange, Adam, I would have thought the SN editorial was more “foot-in-mouth”!

The Ideal Caribbean Person cannot afford to be infected with this dangerous disease!

[Reply to this]
Roger Williams
In reply to the above comment on September 27th, 2008 1:30 pm:
Strange, Adam, I would have thought that the SN editorial was more “foot-in-mouth”.

The “ideal Caribbean person” should not be infected by this dangerous disease!

[Reply to this]
Pantha
on September 28th, 2008 10:48 am

This one is reply to Roger Williams, up above.

However, fair enough. I’ll run through your points and try to answer

1. I didn’t think defending SN and Pires’s freedom to express a toungue in cheek and sarcastic opinion qualifies as either sophistry or qibbling. And I do believe that that document Pires took aim at was a waste of some committee’s time. We must agree to have divergent opinions on this one.

2. The longer I speak to the disapora and read about Caricom, read its pronouncements, the more I believe that integration will never occur precisely because of the prizing of individuality to which you refer. And that means Caricom is, as a whole, becoming nothing more than a talking shop. That communique simply proved the point. That both grieves and irritates me.

3. Following from your (our!) point #2, it seems more logical to assume Caricom has now become an enity unto itself, albeit toothless. It certainly does not appear to be the servant (or a master). Please advise me what are the concrete achievements of Caricom, with respect to, ummm, the recent EPA? As opposed to the nations that fund it, of course. Communiques? Press statements? If they can’t even settle the harassment of Guyanese at other island’s airports, let alone create a passport-free zone or a common currency after thirty five years of existence, then yes, I’d say Caricom seeks to justify its existence in the absence of real progress by drowning us in minutiae and irrelevancy.

4. It’s not a 1977 document, but one from 1997. But I assume this is a typo? In any event, Caricom was formed in 1973, and had that communique been issued then, I would not have quibbled so much. As it is, to issue something so self-evident and pedestrian almost a quarter century after the founding of Caricom does a whole lot less than impress me.

5. The worth of Mr. Pires is not, I’m afraid, so easily quantifiable. His language is that of a commentator, but I’ve read his work for many years, and he is stimulating, thought provoking and acts as a welcome breath of fresh air in getting people to actually think (after being put to sleep by boring bureaucratese press statements and — dare I say it? — Caricom communiques). His use of language alone is reason enough to pay attention in a decline of literary standards, and his points are worth noting. People like him are an annoyance to those in power because of their way of puncturing hypocrisy and deflating pompousness. I think that merits more than just a casual dismissal. And if people from all over the Caribbean read his work (as they do), I would posit he has done quite a bit more for integration than all the posing of the heads of Gvernment whose priorities oft seem more geared to pleasing their constituents in order to get re-elected than furthering any notion of Caribbean unity.

6. Hard to answer, since we seem to be in agreement here. I simply feel that Caricom has not lived up to its promise. Crafting dry statements is not my idea of what they should be doing.

7. I really smiled at the last point, because just a few days ago I posted a comment saying that (with reference to Chavez’s rhetoric and Mr. Coxall’s commentary) diplomatic rhetoric should be reasoned and non-inflammatory. But Mr. Williams, we are not talking about a diplomatic utterance, we are talking about the equivalent of a definition, almost a manifesto, a statement of principle and ambition and idealism. It’s not, in my opinion, the same thing. And so, yes, I do expect better, high-falutin’ language for such a statement. We *want* soaring rhetoric and words to move us, to achieve the unachievable.

Something that starts with, oh, I dunno. Maybe “We the people…”. Something that contains “blood toil, sweat and tears”. Or “I have a dream.”

[Reply to this]
Roger Williams
In reply to the above comment on September 28th, 2008 10:46 pm:
1. I take total exception to your comment that the document Pires took aim at was a waste of some committee’s time. There is an gargantuan degree of irresponsibility and ignorance in that statement, and is best dealt with with some advice high school students can use.. Do a Google search of “Ideal Caribbean Person” and see the people, and institutions, that have considered the statement as effective ammunition for education and curriculum policy. Are you so delusional that you did not, like SN’s Editor or BC Pires, bother to read the other opinion first?

2. The point of CARICOM being nothing more than a ‘talking shop”, I find, is usually reserved for a particular type of social and political miscreant who is very easily recognized in the subtle positions they take. You may think the UN is a “talk-shop” too. Compare their budget with that of CARICOM. Re-invent your self, Patha. Show me with precise examples how your position is validated by comments from someone like PJ Patterson … or do you hold “strong” opinions about him too?

3. It takes a lot of courage to live in Canada and see thirteen heads of state determine to sign an EPA, then ask: what are the “concrete achievements of Caricom wrt the EPA”. This is circular, almost meaningless thinking. The harassment of Guyanese at regional airports is a function of a paradox: thousands being forced from mainland Guyana by an oppressive economic environment, and the islands to which they flee being able to absorb only that much. It would be idiotic (but perhaps you can identify with that virtue) to suggest that these selfsame islands have not accommodated thousands of Guyanese over the years (without any hassle).You fled to Canada, didn’t you? Tell us of the hassle you had to endure to achieve that remarkable feat! Finally, after thirty-five years of your own existence, you still don’t get it, so why should people engaged in something as running whole countries?

4. We could continue this argument ad absurdum, so I will let the response to BC Pires below speak to you as well.

[Reply to this]
Pantha
In reply to the above comment on September 29th, 2008 9:05 am:
I don’t have a problem with your disagreeing with me, sir. You have your opinions and points of view, as I have mine. I do on the other hand take exception in your language, which alas, all too often substitutes poisonous attacks for any kind of clarity of thought, and, sadly, is far too rife in these fora.

I was hoping for less vitriol in your response, but since you seem to want to do nothing but vent your bile in extreme terms at those who have the temerity to disagree with you and who take exception to your virulent prose, I’ll just leave you to indulge your little fantasies. I have no appetite for your mud-slinging and name-calling. When you can respond in more measured terms, you can be assured of my interest once again. You can claim this as a victory for your brand of Hyde Park soap-box oratory.

michael tannassee
In reply to the above comment on October 7th, 2008 9:11 pm:
succinct ! would suffice ,, given a reason to think on PANTHA !………
Roger Williams
on September 28th, 2008 10:57 pm

Response to BC Pires’ “Ideal Caribbean Person”

I have finally had the time to read the “Thank God It’s Friday” piece in the Trinidad Express for September 12. One inescapable conclusion …

There is an awesome, throbbing, horrible emptiness in the mind and work of BC Pires. It is especially evident in his grotesque piece “The Ideal Caribbean Person”

This truly is the desperate banality of a deskbound hack, a nine to fiver who found himself with lots of spare time, no ideas to justify the pay grade, and an easy target in fifteen lines of a CARICOM communiqué. Do a Google search on “Ideal Caribbean Person” to see how far he missed the mark!

I had hoped against hope that the source of inspiration for Stabroek News’ editor, in his ridiculous commentary of the same name on September 26, was something so truly profound and inspiring that we would all be forced to retract, to concede, and to beg the forgiveness of an inspired columnist’s vision. I was disappointed! Contrary to Stabroek News, it is not only our politicians (sic) who generate pronouncements of meaningless, pseudo-intellectual drivel.

What we got from BC Pires was an insipid attempt to hock the unsellable, another attempt to pawn fake goods. We got from BC an attempt to imply that CARICOM’s crafting the idea of an “Ideal Caribbean Person” somehow translated into a failed attempt to fashion a new Magna Carta, Declaration of the Rights of the Child, or some such other product of astonishing advertising poppycock like “Rally Round the West Indies”. Is this for real?

It would be laughable if it were not in black and white … and perhaps is reflective of a deeper, more sinister manifestation of anti-CARICOM rhetoric that seems to be infecting liberal Caribbean media-personalities these days. Look at their photographs closely! At best, it is cheap trickery aimed at personal aggrandizement and assuaging delusion. In essence, however, it attempts to belittle the work of hundreds of the best minds in the region as they struggle to bring order and success, to keep alive a vision of unity that many of the current crop of regional heads of state seem incapable of comprehending.

Who, exactly, is BC Pires, and what has he done for Caribbean integration lately? We recounted (see http://www.scribd.com/doc/6102259/A-DEADLY-STORM-OF-RHETORIC-IN-GUYANA-ABOUT-CARICOM-AND-THE-EPA ) the sad fact that convenient memories now forget that it has been the strong and steady support of a unified CARICOM that has kept Venezuela, Suriname and possibly Brazil off Guyana’s territory. More recently, CARICOM’s support was evident in the UNCLOS and UNITLOS ruling on Guyana’s maritime border with Suriname. What of the CCJ, or CSME in 2015.?

But Pires would have us believe that CARICOM’s worth should be measured in hotel bills. This is the classic manifestation of the cake-shop mentality alluded to for Stabroek News, and the convoluted thinking of an intellectual leprechaun. He hides his diseased outlook with a “nonchalant” reference to the “Good Negro” and “pappyshowing”. We know his kind well … BC’s own citation of “res ipsa loquitur” … the thing speaks for itself. His own words condemn him!

Stabroek News’ editor, incapable of forming an opinion of his own, validates the inanity of BC Pires as “brilliant satirical wit” without bothering himself with the necessary trouble of reflective thinking. I now see where he got his “what’s the real difference?” quip from. This is plagiarist insensitivity and intellectual incompetence at its worst, adequately argued at http://www.scribd.com/doc/6248296/A-Response-to-Stabroek-News-The-Ideal-Caribbean-Person .

So, we conclude for BC as we started for Stabroek News. An elitist segment of the Caribbean population seems to have declared war on CARICOM … for all the wrong reasons.

If we must offer a critique of CARICOM and its institutions, then let’s focus on the factual evidence (there is plenty available), not sophistry … or nonchalant racism!

[Reply to this]
M. Xiu Quan-Balgobind-Hackett
on September 29th, 2008 6:12 pm

Mr Williams lacks a sense of humour. Read Jonathan Swift’s How to roast a pig.

[Reply to this]
BIG D
on October 5th, 2008 5:29 am

Mr Hackett,you make me feel hungry.Allow Williams and Pantha to slug it out.It is good to know that we have people who can think positively.

[Reply to this]