Dear Editor,

The standard is that when the people placed their trust in persons to govern their day-to- day affairs it is expected that any action on behalf of the people is done within the bounds of the judicial system. Morality, integrity and transparency must be the guiding forces in every action taken on behalf of the people.

Anytime those in power neglect to abide by the law and resort to illegitimate acts they temporarily neutralize these values within themselves and, therefore, forego the trust of the people. We, the people thought that the firestorm which ensued after Mr. Simmons, Commissioner of Constitutional Affairs, went on to illegally sign an agreement with a constitutional experts that the executive branch would have been more cautious in executing its duty.

On the contrary, last week both the commissioners went on to sign an agreement with NuStar regarding the harbour ordinance. One would have expected that the island secretary, as the last line of defence of what is legally allowed, at least would have done his duty and refuse to affix his signature on that document.

This is a sad state of affairs when egos blind persons that they will venture so far off course to believe that they can make their own rules and regulations as they go along. Although, we all agree that the evaluation of the WolBES is a must, this law states clearly who the person in charge is of signing any agreement on behalf of the Public Entity Statia ( art. 173, sub 1 WolBES).

We also understood that the ‘tall’ commissioner displayed a childish antic by getting hyper emotional when the Secretary General indicated that according to The Hague there was no progress in the process of bettering the administration and financial household, and that the supervision will not be lifted.

Little that this rocking horse knows, is that emotions do not have much influence on these European Dutch. By the way, keep the adage of the writer Alfred A. Montapert in mind, “Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving, but does not make any progress.” We are witnessing a rocking-horse governance in which members are jerking back and forth furiously yet there is no forward movement.

It is expected that you the people will be continuously bombarded with misinformation in the coming days in an effort to convince you how wrong and spiteful The Hague is towards the government of Statia, more specifically you the people. This is done in an effort to divert your attention from the truth, namely, they as government are trampling on the laws that govern us. Listen carefully and separate sense from nonsense so you are able to see through the smoke screen of confusion and rubbish.

It is a pity, but with this last illegal act this coalition gives The Hague the confirmation to establish their next step under the umbrella of supervision. The United People’s Coalition again calls upon government to put its egos asides and be smart by seeking honest dialogue in the interest of our people.

Reginald C. Zaandam

Leader of the United People’s Coalition

Dear Editor,

  Western (Judeo-Christian) civilization is imploding. The crippled vessel is listing heavily; it is sinking. There is nothing we can do about it, so we may as well “sombrer avec élégance,” sink with elegance. Roughly put, that is the message that Michel Onfray has brought us in Décadence, his latest book (subtitled “From Jesus to Ben Laden”). But any such summing-up of the rather complex and alarming arguments in Décadence falls short of the mark.

  There are so many things St. Martiners (French and Dutch) may rather be reading about than the dark prognostication of a philosopher in Europe. But ever since I started following Michel Onfray in his work many years ago, I’ve been captivated by his novel approaches, his prolific pen and his golden tongue; by his abilities as a writer-researcher-debater; fascinated by this man from modest origins who attended the public schools of the Republic, and has forged his way to become a veritable phenomenon: an intellectual spokesman, a one-man-political-force to be reckoned with in France, in Europe and the world.

  Listening to Michel Onfray, watching him debate and defend his positions is like looking at the frigate bird in flight competing for prey with dolphins below and other seabirds above; ill-matched quarrels, amazing uneven contests! He is the envy of all of us teachers, scribblers and stutterers, more envied in France than anywhere else, I presume.

  Onfray rails against “L’État Jacobin: le Jacobinisme,” (the centralized, administrative, bureaucratic role of the French state “where truth resides in Paris only.” He champions regionalism (traditional, regional, and rural cultural values, particularly the culinary specificities of the various regions of his country); I take it this includes French St. Martin. Some 15 years ago he resigned from his job as a high school teacher to work toward establishing “L’université populaire de Caen,” the People’s University of Caen in his native Normandy.

  Like his contemporary, the novelist Michel Houellebecq, Onfray espouses the views of Samuel Huntington that civilizations clash; that they are clashing. He forecasts “le métissage,” race mixing, a multiracial western society: “The white man is an old thing that will soon disappear...” (Interview, Europe 1: 18/01/2017). In keeping with most of the above, he argues that France should exit the European Union, and he is stanchly against Marine Le Pen’s National Front, the national conservative political party. He is an atheist who is respectfully critical of all religions.

  In Décadence, Onfray contends that the imminent signs of decline and sure death are all around us, everywhere. Key among them is nihilism (absence of values, nothing worth dying for). “Westerners, today, rely on paid soldiers who do not wish to die defending dead values they do not believe in [...] He asks: “Who would give up their life for gadgets that are now cult objects of the religion of capital [of capitalism]? One does not die for an iPhone.” Other key signs are “tribalism” [Kind of hostility to diversity and multiplicity.], and a domination of gloom, “une domination des passions tristes,” particularly “ressentiment” [Form of resentment: a kind of scapegoating that involves assigning blame on others for one’s failures, discontent, frustration, jealousy, feelings of inferiority ] (Le Point, 05/01/17).

  To those who reproach the author of being, himself, an agent of gloom, of hopelessness and defeatism, Onfray replies: “I’m like a doctor who has diagnosed a cancer in his patient; you do not accuse a doctor of wanting the death of his patient or of promoting cancer: you should not accuse me of promoting defeatism or of willing decadence” (Europe 1, 17/01/2017). He explains that he studied this decadence “dans la longue durée,” that is by concentrating on long-term conditions and gradual change.

  Indeed, how else could one seriously reflect on the rise and fall of a civilization? And so the sinking is not for tomorrow, or in five, 10 or 20 years; but we are, Onfray insists, experiencing the last phases of decay: “Judeo-Christian civilization is a power that has run out of steam [...] there is nothing that can be done to save a civilization that is dying [...] our boat is sinking, but we need not despair: we must neither laugh nor cry, but understand “Ni rire, ni pleurer, mais comprendre.” And we can also choose to sink with elegance ... (Interviews: Le Point, 5/1/2017; Europe 1, 18/1/2017).

  In Sagesse (Wisdom), one of several other books planned for this year, Michel Onfray will set forth the wisdom that would seemingly help his readers to “sink with elegance,”

Some of us need not be troubled; neither by Onfray’s dismal prognosis nor by that of a number of other contemporary French doomsayers – prophets of decline and decay. Indeed, old-timers like me need not worry at all, our battered ship is too far gone, sinking is much too imminent! Moreover philosophers come and philosophers go and the rains keep marching down Marigot Hill. Besides, all of us readers may elect to ask ourselves: “What shall we gain by being wise? [...] Vanity of vanities, all is vanity.”

Gérard M. Hunt

(Curaçao Chronicle)

Curaçao chose to govern itself as a democracy, but its constitutions and institutions have turned out to be weak and not very popular. Participation in formal and informal institutions is anaemic and not inclusive. Secretive, closed groups seem to manipulate the society to meet their specific needs regardless of any public concerns.

Democracy means power distributed. In a democracy with checks and balances a big chunk of the society is well beyond the control of government; in effect, the government controls very little. Therefore, a crisis in government should not paralyze social and economic activities of the society.

Unfortunately, the year-long crisis in government, that was unleashed when Member of parliament, Marilyn Moses withdrew her support from the PS-PAIS coalition government, has had an extremely adverse effect on the local economy. Foreign investors are unclear as to what to expect. Laws, rules and regulations are up for change in a murky future. A parliament, where 25 per cent of its members have a criminal record, does not imbue much confidence either.

After the most recent crises of last week, politicians’ responses were, once again, elections. The last elections were held in September 2016. The outcome then was fragmentation, which makes it almost impossible to form a solid majority coalition. New elections should produce less fragmentation, but what the rationale behind that thought is, remains muddled. The positive energy of idealistic politicians, eager to serve their community, is once again turned into negative, destructive campaign rhetoric.

So, Curaçao, unable to forge working coalitions is turning into an electocracy – a fake democracy. Richard Haass, president of the nonpartisan Council of Foreign Relations (USA), warned a decade ago that “an electocracy should not be confused with democracy. Immature democracies – those that hold elections but lack many of the checks and balances characteristic of a true democracy – are particularly vulnerable to being hijacked by popular passions. To have elections without such controls means that the election itself is likely to be flawed and that whoever wins will have too much power.”

Exactly that very scenario played out in 2010 and 2013/14. Schotte, a populist and in the meantime a convicted criminal, became the winner and again, is the favourite for the next election outcome. The island has been in disarray since 2010, chaos prevails. Chaos and insecurity do not stimulate the economy and the society in any way or fashion.

The shadow economy, forged by the ongoing success of narco crime, eagerly moves into the large open weak spots of the social, economic and political fabric of the island. By the time a new government takes power they will be firmly settled and established.

Jacob Gelt Dekker

Dear Editor,

The Prime Minister and Ministers of Vromi and Justice are doing great, as you all know our police are always doing their best but those that are responsible to change the laws must wake up and change the laws.

Government must continue focusing on the East side of the island, the light poles at Dawn Beach and Oyster Pond; we all appreciated this great performance of our Government; thanks, keep up the good works and don't forget the side-walks.

Although we are seeing how well Minister Christophe is doing, many people still rather he should remain in Parliament to help get the laws changed and bring in some new laws to move this Island forward.

And l will like to remind Minister Christopher the clients of CKC credit union still waiting for the promises you did during your campaigns how you will help them get back their money from the Central Bank.

It is really discouraging to see so many ministers for finance not doing enough to give the people back their money, it’s very sad when a Government doesn't listen to the voice of its people. It's very sad when a Government doesn't listen to its senior citizens; they were the ones developing this Island when these Politicians were students going school both in St. Maarten and abroad.

Why Government keeps distancing itself from the people cries such as a small claims court is needed, increase the minimum wage, house rent on the island is too high, help the pensioner, legalize gypsies, let them pay a fee every month to help build community centres in every district.

And it is time for St. Maarteners to stop protesting on radio and television and put their two feet on the streets and let Government fulfil their demands; always stand in solidarity with your pensioner at all times, tomorrow you too may be a pensioner.

Think tank, think tank, did you hear about Curaçao Government? Oh yes, I heard of the situation BUT read my lips, for all the former Antilles nations to move forward and to be more successful, all the territories should have a political party.

As the MFK party and UP party both the leaders of MFK party and UP party are the people, Nelson Mandela and with Aruba great things can happen for the people.

Cuthbert Bannis