To be or not to be not a question

BRIAN STONE

“TO BE or not to be” is a phrase that expresses the existential question of whether it is better to live or to die, and the struggle to find meaning in life, as expressed by the character Hamlet in Shakespeare’s play Hamlet.

The phrase “to be or not to be” poses a fundamental question about the nature of existence and the choices we make in life. In the context of making moral, wise and conscientious decisions about electing a government to govern, the phrase can be interpreted as a call to reflect on the values and principles that guide us as citizens. It asks us to consider the impact of our choices on the greater good and to act with integrity, courage and wisdom.

To be a citizen of good conscience means to be mindful of our responsibilities to society and to make informed decisions based on our values and beliefs. Ultimately, the phrase reminds us that the choice “to be or not to be” is ours to make, and that we must approach this decision with thoughtful consideration and a commitment to upholding the principles of democracy, justice, freedom and equality.

“A good citizen is one who knows his rights and demands them, knows his responsibilities and fulfils them, and is ever conscious of the difference between the two” – John F Kennedy.

Democracy matters

“Democracy is not just about the right to vote, but also about the ability to live a decent life. It is about the distribution of power and wealth, and the ability of ordinary people to participate in the decisions that affect their lives” – Cornel West, Democracy Matters: Winning the Fight Against Imperialism, 2004.

West argues that democracy and social justice are interconnected.

Social justice refers to the idea of ensuring that all individuals and groups in society have equal access to rights, opportunities and resources, regardless of their race, gender, socioeconomic status, or other personal characteristics. It involves promoting fairness, equality and inclusivity in all aspects of society, including education, healthcare, employment and criminal justice.

Thus, in evaluating both the ruling party and the opposition based on their record of promoting and delivering social justice, “to be or not to be” for social justice is the question.

“Democracy is not just the right to vote, it is the right to live in dignity” – Naomi Klein.

The future of a free TT

“Democracy is not simply about the right to vote. It is about the right to be heard, the right to speak freely, the right to worship as one chooses, the right to education and opportunity, and the right to be free from the arbitrary exercise of power” – Fareed Zakaria, The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad, 2003.

In his book, Zakaria argues that democracy is not just about elections, but also about the rule of law, protection of individual rights, and limits on the power of government.

Accordingly, “to be or not to be” for the rule of law, protection of individual rights, and limits on the power of government is the question every conscientious national must examine before marking his/her electoral ballot.

“The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all” – John F Kennedy.

Autocracy or democracy: that is the question

In his book, Autocracy: Rules for Survival, Masha Gessen’s central argument is that autocrats rely on undermining truth, creating confusion, and exploiting people’s fears and biases. Gessen writes: “Autocracy thrives on deception, ambiguity and uncertainty. It demands the erosion of truth and the spread of fear.” One can reason with validity that the writer’s argument describes the contentious political landscape that plagues TT today.

Gessen also highlights the importance of building and maintaining strong institutions, such as a free press and an independent judiciary, that can act as a check on the power of autocrats. He writes: “Institutions are the bedrock of democracy. They are the only thing standing between us and autocracy.”

Gessen advises, “We must resist the urge to normalise the abnormal, to rationalise the irrational, and to accept the unacceptable.” “To be or not to be” normalising the abnormal, rationalising the irrational, and accepting the unacceptable is the question. Ultimately, the “to be or not to be” autocracy or democracy question will be answered by the results of the 2025 national election.

“Democracy is when the people keep a government in check. Totalitarianism is when the government keeps the people in check” – Benjamin Franklin.

“To be or not to be” is not a question. It is an instructive inquiry into who and what we are (our morals, principles, values and beliefs). It is intended to ignite a personal introspective analysis and evaluation of our humanity, citizenship, civic duty, progress and wisdom in making the right choices about our country, society, future, and the politics that govern our lives.

Inevitably, “You are free to make whatever choice you want, but you are not free from the consequences of that choice” – anonymous.

Elections have consequences!