THERE IS A SENSE in which being Machiavellian is the accepted norm for one to be regarded as a true politician. Such comments as “you are too honest or too soft to be a politician” are familiar in an arena where survival of the fittest is the mantra. Here the emphasis is on the fittest since survival is supposed to be a given.
The fittest politician becomes an institution and pays very little attention to the individual, to the extent that it is possible to become unrecognisable after some years of exposure to the political arena. Perhaps this is what is really meant by being Machiavellian, the capacity to lose one’s soul.
The pursuit of fitness brings with it several members of the “institution” who support the fittest with expectations of survival. This survival changes its character depending on whether or the politician is in or out of office. It also depends on whether or not the politician is the fittest.
In a sense you do not have to be the fittest to survive in politics, especially if you have the ability to be parasitic. Like the jungle, there is a role for all, no matter how big, no matter how small. Unlike the jungle, the role is not determined by nature. This speaks to the importance of the soul!
The power of the soul, whose signature is as unique as the fingerprint, comes to light when the body and mind are on trial. Of the three components of man, the soul is extra special in the sense that it is accessible only by man himself and God. It is God’s ultimate connection with who we really are.
It is in this context that there is always hope. But until we recognise that we are ultimately defined by our soul, the burden to elevate our body and mind is futile.
There is no darkness without light; they are both visible without sight! Therefore the thing that differentiates darkness from light is perspective.
So fitness and fittest are driven by perspective born out of societal standards. This does not diminish their importance but underscores their temporary nature. Today you are the fittest, tomorrow you are not!
The transience of it all makes one wonder why man is so eager to gain the whole world but lose his soul in the process. Is it that this man stops being an individual to become an institution? If the answer is yes, then perhaps there is a collision between light and darkness that is a lack of perspective.
The test of the man is to be able to reconcile the situation when given an opportunity to do so. This may be difficult as it requires going back to being an individual and shedding the institution.
Strangely enough, the institution has a character that persists even when its fittest evolves. Furthermore no matter how fit, the parasites are ready to devour at any sign of weakness. In any case, the nature of the parasite is to prey on weakness and pray for it as well.
An institution is incapable of having a soul and so it lacks the ultimate character to appreciate one. It thrives and feeds off its own body; it strives on confusing its own mind. The important thing is to be able to differentiate the individual from the institution, especially when it matters most.
There are times when the separation of the two is necessary to guarantee not only the survival of the soul but the body and mind. Survival of the fittest may be Machiavellian, but Machiavelli himself might have lacked a soul, given his writings.
There are some everlasting truths in politics, you are not certain who your friends are and you are as important as your last contribution to a cause.
In light of the above, is it worth the darkness below?
Please forgive me for being so esoteric!
* Clyde Mascoll is a professional economist and former Government minister in the last Barbados Labour Party administration.
