Dear Editor,
A positive and improved view of the future is a key ingredient for the perceptions of a people collaborating to create a great future. A positive view of the future will drive productivity, investment and political collaboration. Excessive expectations increase conflict.
In Sint Maarten in the 1960s and prior there had not been much in the way of great prospects in Sint Maarten. There was little reason for the quality of life to improve and therefore also no high expectations. Then in the 1970s and 1980s the particular circumstances with a growth in air travel, the smart use of opportunities by Claude Wathey and investment interest in the eastern US led to a boom in Sint Maarten. Not having had this boom before, the population adopted the expectation that this economic boom would result in a great standard of living for all in Sint Maarten. The levels of expectation bloomed from a low level to a high one.
And whilst some prospered, the need for workers and the relatively open border meant that the wealth needed to be shared with a much larger population so the expectations, inevitably inflated, were not fully realized. The access to internet and cable TV, like the rest of the world also accelerated this spurt in expectations.
In the last few years, especially since 10-10-10, the country has hit a number of challenges which have made it clear that prosperity and happiness are going to require overcoming some fundamental hurdles and the resolution of some tough structural impediments. Not just instable government but dump fires, indictments for corruption, ineffective civil service, crime and of course hurricanes.
This reduction of the expectations has led to a wide range of responses:
* Calls for increased nationalism. The setbacks have led to some believing that a more “unified” country would solve the problems and return the country to be on track for the expectations developed in the 1970s and 1980s. Nationalistic pride is seen as the solution to raising the ability of the country to produce the unrealized benefits that had been expected. Flagpoles got built and efforts made that were intended to “bring the people together.”
* Identification of “culprits” that can be seen as the cause of the non-realization of expectations. These vary, but include “the Dutch,” the political establishment, the older members of the political establishment, the younger and newer members of the political establishment, investors, employers and (up to 2010) Curaçao.
* Increased interest in radical solutions like Independence on the one side and integration into the Netherlands on the other side. Between these extremes there are a range of ideas that seem largely driven by the desperate hope that the expectations can return.
On top of these declining expectations there comes a disastrous hurricane exceeding in damage all that came before. The vulnerability of a small single-pillar economy, the limitations of a small state as well as the thought that somehow the shameful looting will be punished in some form, are also added to the mix that negatively impacts the positive views of the people of Sint Maarten and their expectations.
“Resilient” and “Strong” are good choices of words to describe what the country would now like to be. But nobody is attracted to the concept of being resilient, it is more a condition that you are forced to be in tough circumstances. These tough circumstances, however, also reduce the level of expectations and thereby allow for more measured decision-making, a more grounded view of immediate prospects and rethinking of some unrealistic expectations that evolved from the boom times and political restructuring and might have been a contributing factor to the many of the challenges like political instability.
This more realistic perception of the future might be the silver lining of Irma.
Robbie Ferron
