Michael Abrahams | Political ‘whataboutism’ and binary thinking

Recently, I came across a post on a social media platform where someone expressed the view that our Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) Government is corrupt. Someone else commented on the post asking “what about” the People’s National Party (PNP), that they are corrupt too, before accusing the person who made the post of being a Comrade. This type of response, which is unfortunately not uncommon, displays two flawed modes of thinking: ‘whataboutism’ and binary thinking.

Whataboutism refers to responding to an argument by changing the subject to focus on someone else’s shortcomings or misdeeds. Binary thinking refers to thinking in black and white, seeing things as good or bad, or right or wrong, and being unable to see a middle ground. Both types of thinking are faulty and unhelpful when discussing our politics.

Let us be honest, both of our political parties leave a lot to be desired. Both are guilty of corruption, vote-buying, voter intimidation, engaging the services of thugs to do their dirty work, selling out areas and assets of Jamaica to foreigners, and other atrocities. Both parties have also had leaders who have been blatantly dishonest with the Jamaican people. For example, when Bruce Golding was prime minister, then Leader of the Opposition Portia Simpson Miller criticised him for having a Cabinet that was too big. She jokingly remarked that it was not a Cabinet but a breakfront. She won the next election and, within a week, announced an even bigger Cabinet. Before being elected, our present prime minister, Andrew Holness, announced that in the first 100 days in office, he would institute fixed election dates and term limits for prime ministers. He has been leading the country for eight years and is yet to do so.

ERRONEOUS CONCLUSIONS

Both parties have major deficiencies, but that should not prevent one from voicing concerns about either side. When rational concerns are directed at the opposing party, they should be taken seriously, as it is vital to have a strong Opposition to keep the Government in check. When concerns are voiced about the governing party, we should not be distracted by complaints about the other side.

We must be able to critically evaluate the Government and call them out when they make moves that are not in our best interest. After all, they are the ones responsible for running the country. It is they who make decisions that affect our daily lives. Just because the other party may have similar flaws does not mean we should ignore what is happening with the folks who are ‘running things’. Malfeasance and corruption in our governance must be called out and rejected, regardless of who is in power. Pointing out the other side’s shortcomings is not a useful way to argue these issues.

Similarly, binary thinking regarding our politics is also of little value and distracts from the issues at hand. Seeing things in black and white (or, in this case, green or orange) will often lead to erroneous conclusions. Criticising the JLP does not necessarily make one a Comrade, and criticising the PNP does not make one a Labourite. Yes, some people are stridently partisan and will never accept any criticism of their beloved party, the so-called Labourites and Comrades ‘for life’.

VOICE VIEWS OBJECTIVELY

But some of us are neutral. In fact, the majority of the country has little regard for either party, hence our embarrassingly low voter turnouts in recent years.

Binary thinking has been a persistent source of annoyance for me for several years. People need to understand that not only can a person be critical of a party and be neutral, but they may also be critical of a party because they voted for them and felt let down. This has been my issue during the last two administrations.

I voted for Portia Simpson Miller and the PNP following the Bruce Golding-Dudus-Tivoli débâcle. However, as her term progressed, I became uncomfortable with some of the administration’s actions and expressed my views. Some people hounded me and labelled me a Labourite, oblivious to the fact that their beloved ‘Sista P’ was sitting in the position she was in because of people like me who believed in her and voted accordingly.

Similarly, I thought ‘Brogad’ deserved a second term and voted to keep him in office. Unfortunately, I am deeply disappointed with him and his administration and have voiced my concerns, which have caused some to label me a Comrade. I am neither a Labourite nor a Comrade. In the above-mentioned cases, I expressed my dissatisfaction because what I saw was not what I voted for, and I felt betrayed.

We should be able to voice our views objectively without fear of being labelled or having detractors attempt to distract us from the issues we are concerned about. This is our country–a beautiful country. We must do everything we can to protect it, and this includes speaking out against corruption, injustice, and incompetence, regardless of which side of the aisle it originate.

Michael Abrahams is an obstetrician and gynaecologist, social commentator and human-rights advocate. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and michabe_1999@hotmail.com, or follow him on X , formerly Twitter, @mikeyabrahams.