THE EDITOR, Madam:

Nowadays buses stop anywhere to pick up, or let off passengers. Motorbikes no longer stop at traffic lights, and taxis, as often as not, either overtake for long distances in the right side, or drive down the ‘left-turn’ or ‘right-turn’ lanes, and then veer across to the front of the ‘straight-ahead’ lane. These, while certainly being unacceptable, and often times very dangerous, might be labelled as the smaller misdemeanours

Rudy Giuliani, before he was perverted by Trump, was associated with a so-called ‘zero-tolerance’ initiative in New York City, in which perpetrators of the seemingly most trivial traffic offences were arrested and investigated. Although there were complaints, and a number of controversial opinions relating to the initiative’s effectiveness, there were also claims that in the arresting and investigation of individuals, the occurrence of larger, more harmful crimes were uncovered.

And it was also claimed that in time crime in New York City reduced significantly.

Given what is mentioned above, the relevant question becomes: Is there a relationship between the smaller misdemeanours and the larger violations? Or does the preponderance of smaller misdemeanours create a mood that ‘legitimises or facilitates’ the larger ones? Or possibly even more likely: Does an excess of larger violations make it a ‘nothing-of-any-consequence’ for the committing of smaller infringements?

Jamaica’s larger transgressions are the widespread corruption, violent crime, and the horrendous homicide rate, which is reaching new levels with ever-increasing mass murders. Significantly less vile, but still harmful to the country’s health, is the widespread procedural inefficiency and bureaucratic bungling/stagnation. And interestingly, an assertion often made is that the main facilitator and promoter of inefficiency is corruption.

Some aspects of our society, regulating, administrating, oversighting over the years seem to be facilitating the big violations, and also, directly or indirectly, cause-and-effect or otherwise, the smaller ones. Successive administrations over time have not been able address the situation, and it is becoming clearer, day by day, that whatever party is in power will not be able to achieve a sustainable solution without working with the one in opposition.

Is it that we cannot do better? One hardly thinks so, for we are a nation overflowing with talent and capability. Or is it that the desire to address our nation’s critical concerns is just not strong enough?

If we really want to, we can find the will and the way to address our main challenges. But do we want to? One necessary condition is really wanting to. A second one is for the two main parties to work together (which should follow from the first).

Maybe, if we can begin to collectively and effectively address the big wrongs, the little wrongs will start to be sorted out.

DAVID ABRIKIAN