Noble: Disrespectfully disagreeing; why polarisation hurts our democracy

Plural societies, such as ours, are prone to tensions and to pretend that it is a new thing is folly. What is new is the disrespectful disagreement we now witness as we moved from social polarisation (living in different communities) to issue polarisation (where we cannot agree on the essentials of living together).

The recent Express/SBS poll points to ethnicity, a powerful predictor of behaviour, as the polarising force. This is troubling since ethnicity is wrapped up in notions of kinship, which can lead to nepotism, which disrupts democracy.

The different value systems and life experiences of our two major ethnic groups, confined by geography and the constitution, appear to be leading to intense ‘war’ since political power determines the distribution of resources. We have witnessed the unequal distribution of our national resources in the last two decades. One would anticipate that the fight would become even more intense as our economy struggles.

We have a decision to make: do we wish to leave this tendency to war unchecked or should we embrace our imperfect nation’s ‘rainbow’ nature—where every creed and race could find an equal place? Are we comfortable in taking sides, just to ensure ‘our side’ wins instead of confronting crass acts designed to destroy our institutions and the tolerance we have enjoyed? The failure of the NAR and the People’s Partnership experiments demonstrates that there are no shortcuts.

Polarisation affects judgment and emotions, engendering uncivil behaviour over the slightest difference. It causes us not to approach matters of national importance with the serious analyses they deserve, but to behave as though we are supporters of rival sports teams. The operating thesis—the cruder we are towards the ‘opponents’ the more we rouse our unthinking bases—destroys our deliberative democracy. Words matter. We cannot castigate fellow professionals, be contemptuous toward each other and still expect the country to be governable. It does not work so.

The spin doctors, on both sides, have adopted a ‘devil take the hindmost’ approach. They incite like silly schoolboys in the yard, spoiling for every fight. The media are themselves trapped, relying on talking heads from the two major political parties as though they represent public opinion. The Express/SBS poll shows clearly that chatter is not representative of any coherent national position. For example, the poll reports that 44% of our population cannot reach an opinion on the most seminal issue of our country, the judiciary. Why? Because the ‘spin’ is so dizzying, we no longer know who or what to believe.

While the Mixed/Other ethnic group may have sided with the East Indians on several issues, it strongly supported Dr Rowley (50%) and the government (41%). People, seized with the reality that they must live here, and who look for the good of the country, yearn for a saner discourse and are continuously disappointed by the rancour that polarises.

Photo: Trinidad and Tobago citizens march for racial unity on 12 March 1970.
(Courtesy Embau Moheni/NJAC)

The young, shut out from participating, have turned their backs, as per the Express/SBS poll. This may be welcome news for the Machiavellian spin doctors, whose sole interests are to win the next election, but it represents an existential threat for the society. Let us never forget that 1970 was the product of dissatisfied educated youths, who felt that they could not get a fair share in a depressed economy. It is time for us to stop the selfish squabbling and focus on what is needed to create a future.


We must apply facts to our situation in order to raise the level of dialogue. The media and we must focus on solutions instead of bashing each other. Let us give our young people hope for the future.

More from Wired868
Noble: God, Glory and Gold—the relationship between the Church and the Downtrodden

The transatlantic trade in Africans was founded on a misguided interpretation of Christianity. Prince Henry of Portugal, “the Navigator” (1394-1460), Read more

Noble: The iron entered our souls—the unthinkable cost of the slave trade

Iron shackles bound the African enslaved people together as they journeyed across the Atlantic. They were bound tightly. These shackles Read more

Noble: Slavery, Finance and Us—the immoral legacy of the slave trade

“[…] What is this claim that human people have been thrown overboard? This is a case of chattels or goods. Read more

Noble: Truth, HCU and Karen Nunez-Tesheira—the lady doth protest too much

“What is truth?” retorted Pilate at Jesus’ trial (Luke 18:36). The Greek word for truth is aletheia, which literally means Read more

Noble: African slavery and us—how maximum greed transforms poor into mere tools

“Questions of silence always raise questions of memory. Who and what has been forgotten? Which peoples and events are downplayed? Read more

Noble: All ah we tief—money, conflicts and whose interests do elite serve?

“If you don’t have unity, we can’t fight. There are fresh people who call themselves leaders. You can’t be leading, Read more

Check Also

Noble: God, Glory and Gold—the relationship between the Church and the Downtrodden

The transatlantic trade in Africans was founded on a misguided interpretation of Christianity. Prince Henry …

One comment

  1. Provocative in the extreme. I would say that if you have more than two brain cells, you can’t read this and not find food for thought.

    Unfortunately, the more than two brain cells requirement eliminates quite a few.

    And I can’t help but wonder whether you don’t do Wired868 a disservice by omitting ‘conventional’ from this sentence: The media are themselves trapped, relying on talking heads from the two major political parties as though they represent public opinion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.