Difficult Conversations – Credit to my Nation

Posted on by
Submitted by Grenville Phillips II

I pledged allegiance to Barbados since the pledge was established in the 1970s. As a child, the pledge was simply words to be recited on command. As an adult, I accepted the responsibilities associated with that solemn pledge.

To uphold Barbados’ honour, I tried to: do what was right, bring light where there was darkness, and provide evidence-based correction where there appeared to be error. To do otherwise would bring Barbados dishonour. To defend Barbados’ honour, I challenged the practise of achieving lucrative ends through dishonest means.

IGNORING THE ENGINEER.

I have also tried to be a credit to Barbados, rather than a dependent burden, by excelling at something. I pursued Structural Engineering. Then I kept adding to my pursuits. One of my engineering roles is to design structures, and then inspect their construction to certify that they are being built as they were designed.

When a building is not being built as it was designed, I would inform the builder and be met with one of two responses. One would be the builder correcting the deficiency. The other would be the builder ignoring me.

BUILDING ON A BAD FOUNDATION.

I have found that builders tend to ignore an Engineer’s instructions, because they think that they have a special relationship with the Engineer’s clients. A builder may have been selected as a reward for political support, and then had the misfortune of having me approve his work. How the builder got the job was not my concern. How he did the job was.

A builder may construct a substandard foundation, and ignore my instruction that it is defective and needs to be corrected. The contractor may proceed to build on the bad foundation, and ignore my notice that I will neither certify for payment the foundation, nor anything built on that foundation.

ALWAYS A RECKONING.

A builder may convince my Client to pay him, and he may finish the project on time. The Minister may have an entertaining opening ceremony, and unveil an attractive plaque. I would always attend if invited, and would normally enjoy the ceremony.

There is always a reckoning. Defective foundations normally lead to the building settling, resulting in cracks in the walls. An audit may be done to apportion blame. I have never attracted any blame in my 30-year career – because I do not approve defective work.

FANTASY REPUBLIC.

I believe that Parliament has built a fantasy republic on a defective and unlawful foundation. I wrote an open letter to all members of Parliament to discuss the glaring deficiencies, but the Prime Minister advised those with such concerns to have them addressed in Barbados’ Courts. So I did.

The question of whether Parliament’s republic is lawful or not is now before the Barbados Court of Appeal. I have been strongly advised, and even threatened, to drop it by those who have pledged allegiance, not to Barbados, but to their political parties. It is too late. I cannot drop it. I have already pledged allegiance to Barbados, and I do not pledge carelessly.

Regardless of how the Appeal Court judges rule, it can only benefit Barbados. We will either move forward with the confidence of knowing that Parliament’s new constitution is lawful, or we will have the opportunity to correct any deficiencies that the Court finds. Either way, Barbados wins.

Grenville Phillips II is a Chartered Structural Engineer. He can be reached at NextParty246@gmail.com

38 thoughts on “Difficult Conversations – Credit to my Nation”


  1. On to Court of Appeal

    Phillips taking republic challenge to next level
    by TRE GREAVES tregreaves@nationnews.com

    THE MAN whose application for an injunction against Government’s move to transition Barbados to a republic was dismissed by a High Court judge is not giving up the fight.
    After his case was thrown out by Justice Barry Carrington last month – a week before the island became a republic – Grenville Phillips II is seeking to have the Court of Appeal overturn the decision that the Constitution (Amendment) Act, 2021 was lawfully enacted.
    Phillips, who ran in the 2018 General Election as leader of Solutions Barbados, told the DAILY NATION yesterday that he filed the appeal on December 1 and served the Attorney General on December 2.
    Phillips, who is again representing himself, said he was not clear when the matter would be heard.
    In a virtual sitting on November 24, Justice Carrington denied Phillips’ claim that a declaration of public consent was not obtained.
    Ruling
    He ruled that the Government complied with the manner and form requirements related to the Constitution (Amendment) (No. 2) 2021, properly facilitated the amendment to change from a constitutional monarchy to a republic, and that there was no legal obligation by the Government to have a referendum to facilitate the change in its governmental structure.
    Phillips also had to pay the state $5 000 in costs.
    However, the structural engineer said he still wanted to hear the Attorney General’s interpretation of Section 49(3) of the Constitution.
    “The Attorney General spent most of the time trying to get the case dismissed, trying to find ways for it to be dismissed on procedural grounds, not arguing the merits of the case, as opposed
    to just giving me the interpretation that I asked for.
    “All I am looking for is an interpretation of Section 49 of the Constitution that makes sense. That is all. None of the parliamentarians would respond or senators would talk about it, so I have to go to the courts. I couldn’t get the judge to consider my part of the argument and now I have to go to the Appeal Court so they can consider my interpretation of Section 49(3), and then they can listen to the AG’s argument’s and come with a decision,” he said.
    Phillips said he still disagreed with the interpretation of the section as it spoke to the various entrenched provisions.
    “What is critical is that I asked for the interpretation and the Attorney General asked for the interpretation because the interpretation is either fatal to either my arguments or the Attorney General[’s arguments].
    “Entrenched provisions are protected from being changed easily and therefore you need a two-thirds majority to change those. Section 49 allows you to change the Constitution of Barbados but it also appears to indicate that you cannot change Barbados and make it a republic. To change oaths, head of state, allegiance to the Queen . . . . What the Attorney General argued was that changing the head of state was not entrenched; that is what they are arguing,” he said.
    He stressed that he was not appealing for himself, but rather for the people of Barbados.

    Source: Nation

    Reply ↓

  2. This is Garth Patterson’s article which appeared in last Sunday Sun reported:

    Constitution not patriated

    By Garth Patterson It has always puzzled me why, in patriating the Barbados Constitution, Parliament did not simply revoke the prerepublic Constitution and re-enact it in one comprehensive document.
    Perhaps out of expedience, or to conserve energy and effort, or because of an unwillingness to completely let go of our colonial past, or just through plain laziness –whatever the reason – it chose, instead, to take the shortcut route, opting to further amend the prerepublic Constitution, and then adopt it, warts and all, as the new Constitution and supreme law of Barbados.
    At least, that is what Parliament intended. It is very questionable whether that is what it, in fact, achieved. It is very possible that this ad hoc, piecemeal approach to not-just-any, runof- the-mill, constitutional reform but to the historic and momentous transition from Barbados being a constitutional monarchy to becoming a parliamentary republic, may inadvertently have resulted in the rollback of the many significant constitutional amendments and reforms that were implemented over the past 55 years.
    Parting gift
    Our Constitution was provided to us by Her Majesty the Queen as her final legislative act for Barbados, and as her parting gift of independence. It was enacted by the Queen by an Order in Council made pursuant to Barbados Independence Act, 1966, an Act of the British Parliament. It appears in the schedule to the Barbados Independence Order, 1966. It has, since then, remained our Constitution and has been amended 18 times by our postindependence Parliament.
    The final pre-republic amendments to the Constitution were effected by the Constitution (Amendment) (No. 2) Act, 2021, which came into effect on November 30, 2021. Those substantial amendments were fundamental, as they were instrumental in providing the new constitutional framework for our republic, by, among other things, removing the Queen as our Head of State and replacing her with our own home-grown President. It was also the means by which Parliament sought to patriate the Constitution. Section 4 of that Act states: (1) The Independence Order is revoked; but the revocation of that Order shall not affect the validity of the Constitution set out in the Schedule to that Order.
    (2) The Constitution referred to in subsection (1) shall be altered in accordance with the provisions of section 49 thereof in the manner and to the extent set out in this Act; and on the appointed day the Constitution as so altered shall become the Constitution and supreme law of Barbados.
    Independence Order
    Now, I know that I’m likely to be accused of nit-picking, but it seems to me that the words above are very important to understanding exactly what the Parliament has done. In enacting the constitutional changes necessary for Barbados to become a republic, Parliament purported to revoke the Independence Order but preserved intact the validity of the Queen’s hand-me-down Constitution.
    The Barbados Independence Act
    expressly gave the Barbados Parliament every right and power to amend or revoke the Constitution that is set out in the Schedule, but it conferred no similar power to amend or revoke the Barbados Independence Order itself.
    (Without that express power, the Barbados Parliament could not, lawfully, revoke an Order in Council that was made by the Queen.) It begs the question, why did Parliament choose to preserve the hand-me-down by reenacting the Constitution set out in the Independence Order, instead of revoking it and enacting our own cris’ bran’-new Constitution?
    The 1998 Forde Commission’s reasoning for its recommendations, made 23 years ago, for patriation of the Constitution is unassailable.
    It said: “ . . . the Constitution should be a product of the Barbados Parliament and completely Barbadian. This would rid our Supreme and Basic Law of any trace of the colonial format, remove any possible judicial or theoretical doubt about the power of the British Parliament to legislate further in relation to the Barbados Constitution and clearly signal that we are in all respects “firm craftsmen of our fate”.
    However, in its professed desire to “patriate” the Constitution (as in, make it from ’bout here), as recommended by the Forde Commission, Parliament regrettably declined to “repatriate” it (as in, send it back to where it come from), as recommended
    by the Cox Commission in 1979.
    More importantly, in the attempt to rehabilitate and repurpose the hand-me-down Constitution, Parliament may have inadvertently omitted the numerous amendments that it had previously enacted over the years. Properly construed, the underlined words in section 4 of the 2021 Amendment Act suggest that the thing that Parliament has re-enacted, which has now “become the Constitution and supreme law of Barbados”, is the Constitution that is “set out” in the Schedule to the Independence Order, as amended by the 2021 Amendment Act.
    The problem is that the Constitution that is set out in the Schedule is not the same Constitution that was in existence as our supreme law up to November 29, 2021.
    Amended numerous times
    That 1966 independence version of the hand-me-down Constitution was amended numerous times over the 55 years since our independence, but those amendments have not been expressly saved or re-enacted. The reforms that those post-independence amendments introduced were both far-reaching and substantial. They included the right of persons residing here for ten years or more to be registered as citizens (so much for my citizenship) and the replacement of the Privy Council by the Caribbean Court of Justice as our final appellate court.
    Are those constitutional amendments still in effect?
    This question will likely provide fodder for us lawyers in the coming years. This confusion was entirely avoidable. Even if I am ultimately wrong in my interpretation of the 2021 Act, why this awkward, backwardthinking, approach to such a major, consequential, constitutional change?
    Parliament could have, and should have, revoked that colonial hand-me-down and enacted a new constitution; one that consolidated and preserved all the best features of the hand-medown (fundamental rights and so on), and the myriad amendments previously enacted by it, while establishing the new constitutional regime for our republic. If Parliament had applied a little more creativity and imagination, we would have a new, single, consolidating, constitutional document – one reflecting the will and ingenuity of our own people – instead of the warmedover, patchwork of colonial legislation that now passes as the Constitution of our new republic.
    I fully appreciate that the Government has announced that it intends, eventually, to wheel and come again with a whole new Constitution, with the process of consultation set to begin in January 2022. But, as we all know, lawmaking is a lengthy process. It only took 55 years to make these fundamental changes to become a republic; and 23 years to implement the Forde Commission’s recommendations for Constitutional patriation.
    Who knows, therefore, when the promised whole new Constitution will ultimately be enacted. Probably not in the lifetimes of those of us who were born before independence.
    In the meantime, in becoming a republic, optics and symbolism are just as important as the necessary constitutional alterations.
    It was optically curious that Prince Charles was invited to participate in our official ceremonies to declare and celebrate our emancipation from our British colonisers, whom he represents. It is equally curious that, as the final, official, most fundamental, legislative act in securing that freedom, Parliament chose to retain the colonial remnants of the hand-me-down Constitution, when it could, just as easily, have revoked it and enacted its own. Where is the national pride that inheres in our newfound republican status, when to find the fountain of our Supreme Law, we must still turn to the pages of the old, colonial, supposedly repealed, Independence Order?
    Patchwork instead of patriation. I guess we are not all that emancipated after all.

    Garth Patterson is a Senior Counsel

    Reply ↓

  3. The contentious Sec 49 clause of the Barbados Constitution:

    1. (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, Parliament may, by an Act of Parliament passed by both Houses, alter this Constitution.
      (2) Subject to the provisions of subsection (3), a Bill for an Act of Parliament under this section that alters any of the following provisions, that is to say
      (a) this section and section 1; (b) Chapter II;
      (c) Chapter III;
      (d) sections 28, 32, 35 to 39, 41, 41A to 41E, 42, 48, 60(2), 61,62,63 and 76 to 79 (other than subsection (7) of section 79);
      (e) Chapter VII (other than section 83);
      v) Chapter VIII;
      <s) Chapter IX;
      (h) any provision of Chapter X in its application to any of the provisions specified in paragraphs (a) to (g>,
      shall not be passed in either House unless at the final voting thereon in the House it is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds of all the members of the House.
      (3) Subsection (2) shall not apply to a Bill in so far as it alters any of the provisions specified in that subsection for the purpose of giving effect to arrangements for the federation or union
      1981-24.
      of Barbados with any other part of the Commonwealth establishment of some other form of constitutional between Barbados and any other part of the wealth.
      or for the association Common-
      (4) A Bill for an Act of Parliament under this section to which subsection (2) does not apply shall not be passed in either House unless at the final voting thereon in the House it is supported by the votes of a majority of all the members of the House.
      (5) In this section
      (a) references to this Constitution or to any particular
      provision thereof include references to any other law in so far as that law alters the Constitution or, as the case may be, that provision; and
      (b) references to altering this Constitution or any particular provision thereof include references-
      (i) to repealing it, with or without re-enactment thereof or the making of different provision in lieu thereof;
      (ii) to modifying it (whether by omitting, amending or overriding any of its provisions or inserting additional provisions in it or otherwise) ; and
      (iii) to suspending its operation for any period or terminating any such suspension.
      (6) No Act of Parliament shall be construed as altering this Constitution unless it is stated in the Act that it is an Act for that purpose.
      (7) Nothing in subsection (2) shall be construed as including any of the provisions of the First Schedule or the Second Schedule among the provisions specified in that subsection.
    Reply ↓

  5. What the Attorney General argued was that changing the head of state was not entrenched; that is what they are arguing,” he said.

    British Law may state that Head of State must be British Crown, but same way Queen Elisa will be succeeded shortly when she kicks the bucket, Barbados preempted it with their own home grown local version.

    Reply ↓

  6. Constitution not patriated

    By Garth Patterson It has always puzzled me why, in patriating the Barbados Constitution, Parliament did not simply revoke the prerepublic Constitution and re-enact it in one comprehensive document.
    Perhaps out of expedience, or to conserve energy and effort, or because of an unwillingness to completely let go of our colonial past, or just through plain laziness –whatever the reason – it chose, instead, to take the shortcut route, opting to further amend the prerepublic Constitution,

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    It would be interesting to find out who is now protected by this lurch to the republic and how.

    We all know big maguffies in the UK and Barbados are involved in corruption!!

    Reply ↓

  8. https://barbadostoday.bb/2021/12/14/bwu-accepts-reason-for-debt-settlement-legislation-but-wants-language-changed/

    GP2 may have more than a bee in hi bonnet. Add Garth Patterson (GP3) article and the payment of debt legislation and I am beginning to wonder what we are evolving into.
    Constitution – questionable
    Payment of salaries – questionable

    It is funny to watch the esoteric debate that often unfolds here, whilst the actions/laws or bread and butter issues with immediate impact on our daily lives seem to go unnoticed.

    Reply ↓

  10. How to Develop the Nation

    As a Structural Engineer Grenville should be viewing Barbados’ change to a Republic as a new Project in the Building of a Nation.
    From an Information Technology computing perspective you can perceive this function as “Show all History” and “Erase all History” on a search engine or a System Reboot back to factory settings on your device or a cleansing of your data folders and clearing up the hard drive as well as software development of a new system using latest programming language to replace the legacy system.

    Some concepts of truth will obviously be too esoteric for some who are not ready for initiation into ascendancy, but one universal truth is the knowledge that past and future are present in the present.

    Kriyayoga to Experience Eternal Light Within

    Reply ↓

  11. TheO

    How did u arrived at the payment of salaries?

    That would only lead to social unrest and political suicide = sandi and the 5% Cut

    Reply ↓

  12. Did You Pledge Allegiance

     

    Daily we recited by heart every word,

    I merely listened and mouthed all I heard.

    Didn’t understand its significance back then,

     

    Years later its meaning came when we became men.

    Once I understood its meaning I could say it no more,

    Upholding my country’s honour requires things I deplore.

     

    Politics determine the path of the country,

    Leaders dictate what should or should not be.

    Enacting Laws that go against moral views,

    Destroying traditions and historical values.

    Good that was generally accepted now seems to be,

    Evil, and evil seems good for many in our country.

     

    As citizens we should pledge to uphold morals,

    Lives of righteous values should be required for individuals.

    Love, charity, caring, and kindness carry commodity value,

    Essential requirements are fast becoming the privilege of the few.

    Goodness exists in abundance amongst us but it has become a weakness,

    It is practiced only by those with stronger values or deeper piousness.

    And I too love our Country, the land I always knew,

    Not the moral decay that exists today, nor what they ask us to do.

    Corruption can overrun a Nation, and homage to a flag may have dubious significance,

    Essentially if honouring your country dishonoured you, why Did You Pledge Allegiance?

    Reply ↓

  13. People should view themselves and all others as people and not as members of a race or nation as all are the same
    You are not Barbadian African etc you are human

    Reply ↓

  14. Speak for theyself….we ARE AFRIKANS…from KUSH, KEMET and TIMBUKTU….

    we have to assert our rights or have that stolen too just like they STOLE OUR IDENTITIES….at least 3,000 YEARS AGO..

    Reply ↓

  16. Africans are the first humans the source of mankind they were the original stock that went around the world and made all other races

    Reply ↓

  17. Yes we are and nothing can change that, not even after 3,000 YEARS…

    a preview of January’s Kush quarterly..

    “It is a recorded fact that Classical Kush was the first global empire and populated the entire planet. The Kushites migrated out from modern Ethiopia, Kenya, Sudan, Eritrea, Somali, Arabia into Egypt/Kemet, India, Central Asia, Southeast Asia, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, and the Americas. Our Kush ancestors in Kemet themselves recorded on the temple walls that their ancestors migrated from the mountains of the moons, i.e., the Ethiopian Highlands and the Rwenzori Mountains in Uganda.

    The family of Kem (Ham) known as Maa, Kin-Anu, and Kush migrated down the White and Blue Nile, established and in homage to father Kem, named their new capital Kemet. Kush was the ambitious pioneer, expansionist, and developer of the three. Hence, Kush’s great name can be seen written in various forms on walls and artifacts globally. Bear in mind that Pangaea (supercontinent) migration occurred before Kush propagated civilization throughout the planet. However, the earliest recorded evidence of deliberate, global empire-building, colonization with the spread of pyramid culture and maat is Kush. Maat and pyramids were to Kush what democracy and skyscrapers are to modern western nations.”

    Copyright ⓒ 2021. All Rights Reserved

    Reply ↓

  20. And for this i have a whole page dedicated to Poetry and Proverbs….there lies the strength in passing on information.

    “Proverbs are a very effective mode of communication, and their correct and persuasive use in speech is always taken as a sign of sound education, maturity, cultural sophistication and wisdom. Among their many uses, we can discern the following:
    To Express Abstract Truths. Proverbs are generally used to communicate truths that may be abstract and difficult to grasp. Such a proverb usually dramatizes and configures the bare truths in the facts of everyday life and world. In the proverb form the truths become so substantial that they stimulate the imagination and challenge the understanding.”
    -N.K. Dzobo, African Symbols as Sources of Knowledge and Truth

    Reply ↓

  21. Grenville needs to step back from his Court Case versus Government as he is onto a hiding for nothing as Courts march in lockstep with Government. He would be better off raising his self indulgent populist conspiracy theories on social media and mainstream media like Barbados Today or writing a book about it. Ironically the Courts and Constitutional Laws are the legacy of the colonial British and are areas that need to be addressed by the new Republic so that Justice is freely available to the poor common man woman and child. The Courts know this and need to protect their livelihood / scams.

    Reply ↓

  25. Grenville should have known better….after experiencing a decade of that hot mess, I could have told him, but he saw for himself, it’s useless wasting any more money on that unless he got a real plan with a real goal with the DRIVE to see it through to the end.

    attempting to keep the colonial system in place is not a goal….that’s trying to maintain a CRUTCH…

    Reply ↓

  26. Told yall everything has REACHED A HEAD…most people will miss it because they are distracted with so much shit and not everything can be put out there, definitely can’t put certain things out there….but they would not apply themselves to go seaching for answers anyway, still listening to lying politicians who are there to mislead them and keep them bonded and in bondage, that’s why those political negros were manufactured to begin with……….unfortunately yall are now stuck in the matrix even worse when it’s complete idiots who know even less, leading a procession of FOOLS….but don’t move, yall looking real good…

    those of us thus BLESSED and CHOSEN can lead the way outta that captivity….for those who no longer want to be seen as Slaves to the colonial system..or pass any of it on to their current and future generations….those are the intelligent ones..they are growing in numbers daily…

    So Pacha put ya firmly in ya place yesterday and ya still not satisfied, still reaching….still too petty to engage with….still nothing worthwhile to contribute consistently….sad..

    chatte irrepressible? now where have i heard that before..

    i got certain days to pull up clowns and other days, i just watch other people do it….those are the days when i actually have something much more constructive to do…like yesterday and today…..but i did enjoy the REAMING ya got.

    Reply ↓

  27. There it is again, “THE CHOSEN”!

    That sort of attitude never ends well!

    Murdaaaaaaaah

    “THE CHOSEN”!

    Wuhlaus! Muh belly!

    Reply ↓

  28. What reaming was that?

    Ain’t yuh suppose to feel when yuh get ream?

    The Royal Wee like he is The Little Pee Pee!

    Murdaaaaaah!

    Reply ↓

  29. I suppose he would say that I am a very big cunt!

    Tomato, tomata
    Potato, potata!

    Different opinions, that’s all! And that should be okay when nothing can be proven.

    Reply ↓

  31. Barbados: Catalyst for regional change

    IN THE LEAD-UP to Barbados’ adoption of republican status, one of the frequently asked questions by the foreign press revolved around the possible implications for the rest of the English-speaking Caribbean.
    The answer: Barbados’ example would very likely serve as a catalyst for the remaining monarchical dependencies.
    First, given Barbados’ standing in the Caribbean imagination as “Little England”, her adoption of republicanism would have lifted a psychological burden on the rest of the region on the basis that “if Barbados can do it, then so can we”.
    Secondly, the ease with which Barbados undertook the step, without a bitter internal political debate, and devoid of a divisive partisan-induced referendum, would have hinted at new approaches for pursuing regional republican ambitions.
    While there may be more complicated constitutional requirements such as referenda and special majorities in some Caribbean states, the Barbados method is still likely to inspire future regional attempts.
    At the very least, it is likely that future attempts will be undertaken on the basis of a unified approach between government and opposition.
    This will mark a sharp departure from the recent experiences of St Vincent and Grenada, whose attempts at constitutional change were derailed by petty partisan divisions. It is also likely that in any future referenda, the buoyancy of the Barbados experience will no doubt influence a more politically sophisticated response.
    Thirdly, the current global context is one which favours a similar path in other Caribbean countries.
    Barbadian republicanism cannot be separated from the Black Lives Matter moment, and the demands by formerly enslaved peoples for reparations, self-respect and human dignity.
    Significantly, too, there was no significant political objection from a globally diminished Britain or from local pro-colonial groups.
    The effect of Barbados’ move to republicanism is already being witnessed regionally. A Facebook post from former Prime Minister of St Lucia, Kenny Anthony, appeared to signal to new Prime Minister Philip J.
    Pierre that St Lucians should rethink the popular myth of Barbados as “conservative” and should move to join Barbados in the Caribbean
    Court of Justice and in republican statehood.
    More directly was a letter written by former prime minister of Jamaica, P.J.
    Patterson, to the prime minister and leader of the opposition detailing a unified path to republicanism.
    Patterson implored the leaders not to allow Jamaica to be the last Caribbean country to break with British colonialism.
    It is clear that in the present moment, Mia Amor Mottley, as Prime Minister of Barbados, is proving to be a catalyst for change. After nearly four decades of a sense of “defeatism” and slavish accommodation to the global order, the Caribbean is entering a moment where, despite persistent challenges, the learned helplessness is being rejected as an option. In this ongoing effort, Barbados is setting a clear path for others to follow.
    Tennyson Joseph is a political scientist at the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus, specialising in regional affairs.
    Email tjoe2008@live.com


    Source: Nation

    Reply ↓

  32. Order being restored
    WHEN YOU STUDY planet Earth you should deduce that it did not just happen. It was created. By whom or what is up for debate. But when you pay attention to the detail there can be no doubt that it was carefully calculated – and with intelligence of the highest order.
    The ocean, the sky, the clouds, the moon, the sun, the stars, the rain, the snow – all amazing.
    The night, the day, the four seasons – fascinating.
    The mountains, the valleys – breathtaking.
    The trees, the fruits, the vegetables, the animals, the fish – all for survival.
    A serious attempt at understanding it all takes us beyond the human intelligence as we know it. This creation, for that is what it is for sure, is inexplicable and therefore breeds speculation.
    In speculating, the one and only factor that should be constant is that there has to be a Creator. Having established that, then the next question is who or what? Supreme Being or nature?
    No matter how it is categorised or labelled, the Creator has the right to make adjustments – to reconstruct. If things are not going according to plan, the Creator has the obligation to change the unintended course of travel. If the Creator recognises disorder, which obviously would not have been in the plan, the Creator will make the necessary adjustments so that order will be restored.
    The minibus culture in Barbados ignored all the laws and their behaviour at times bordered on disorder. Policing seemed not able to control them.
    Our law books carried heavy fines for the disgusting eyesore of littering but that made no impact on our society. Health departments employed health inspectors who were either invisible, crippled or afraid to enforce the law.
    “Lining up” the way that civilised human beings were designed to do was hardly ever practised. In Barbados, I saw barbarian behaviour and not Barbadian behaviour. This uncivilised display was most embarrassing. Even animals did a better job.
    However, apparently the Creator recognised that things were not going according to plan – that we could not control we.
    What was the Creator supposed to do? Allow His/Her/Its plan to be derailed? Allow the work to be destroyed? Allow the people to destroy themselves?
    Naturally, the Creator had to step in and fix things; make adjustments; do reconstruction; restore order. Man had disappointed; man was inadequate; man was too weak; man was not taking care of the Creator’s creation; man failed the Creator.
    The Creator had no other choice but to retake control. Look around and see how everybody is now lining up like decent civilised human beings should. Look around and see how clean most people’s properties are. Notice that there is no garbage on the streets. Notice that the minibus drivers’ behaviour is now near that of human beings.
    Observe how peaceful and quiet it is at night. Observe how you enjoy serenity. Observe how there is a fall-off in “colds and flu” – possibly due to the sanitisation that we should have been doing all along. Observe how caring for each other has returned. Observe how ‘’stay safe” and “I love you” have replaced “ah gone”.
    People are now growing their own food again. Look how many people are now selling fruits and vegetables.
    The difference between want and need is now getting attention.
    Is COVID-19 therefore not powerful? Who is responsible? The Creator or the Chinese?
    COVID-19 is worldwide and all at the same time – without a deadline.
    Who has the power? Who owns the planet?
    Don’t mess with the creation! Don’t mess with the Creator!
    – MAC FINGALL

    Source: Nation

    Reply ↓

  33. Changes in slave plantation societies such as USA and Caribbean has been slow over last 50-60 years as they also have in other Colonial plantation societies such as Africa, India, Sri Lanka, where the same legacy systems were maintained.

    Inequality still prevailed and the underclass were treated as underdogs not under gods.

    The biggest crime to humanity is a belief that white skin has a higher spirituality and superiority to colour, which is obviously not true when you look with your own eyes.

    Reply ↓

Leave a comment, join the discussion.