by Dr. Donald M. McCartney DM
Many, of us in The Bahamas, have allowed ourselves to accept the politics of inevitability. The politics of inevitability subscribes to the notion that history moves in only one direction, that is, toward democracy. The politics of inevitability, at first glance, seem, in and of itself, to be a kind of history.
In my view, and that of Timothy Snyder, author of On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons From The Twentieth Century, the politics of inevitability is like a self-induced coma. Acceptance of the politics is to assume that history is no longer relevant. If what is learned from the past is underpinned by tendencies that are known, there is no need to learn the details.
The acceptance of inevitability has stunted the manner in which we discuss politics in the twentieth and the twenty-first centuries. This approach has suppressed policy debate and spawned political directorate in which one political party defends the existing state of affairs, and the opposing party proposes total contradiction or denial.
Given the state of affairs in governance in The Bahamas, the Bahamian people receive the dirty end of the deal because the results of the debate, in addition to being distorted, is decided before it begins.
The fore-mentioned positions teach us that there is nothing that can be done. Taking this position, as political theorist Leonidas Donskis referred to as "liquid evil."
The introduction of criticism in this milieu creates a slippery slope for all who dare to raise a dissenting voice. To dissent or to be analytically critical presupposes indirect reinforcement of the position taken by the dominant political group or the group cannot or will not change (Snyder, 2017).
The Politics of Eternity
Similar to the politics of inevitability, the politics of eternity is another anti-historical way of considering politics as expressed and practiced in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.
The politics of eternity and the politics of inevitability masquerades and performs as history. While the politics of eternity indicates a concern for the past, it has no concern for facts.
The mood of the politics of eternity longs for the past. Its longing for the past is not rooted in past epochs that were, in themselves, disastrous. Those, who are practitioners of the politics of eternity, present the past as unseen and thus illegible monuments to victimize their adherents into believing in a sense sense of nationalism that legitimizes and thus supports their quest for power.
The practitioners the politics of eternity make the past distant from the present, and they manipulate the past their benefit. There is feeling that the practitioners of the politics of eternity see any mention of the past as an opportunity for them to manipulate the political landscape, conjure up visions of the bogey man and create external enemies of the state or the party in power that do not exist.
The practitioners of the politics of eternity, for the most part, are national populists. In the politics of eternity, the practitioners use mythicized seduction, which prevents followers to think beyond the present and less about the future. In this regard, the practitioners of the politics of eternity make politics a focus on good and evil as opposed to finding solutions to real problems.
While the politics of inevitability is likened to coma, the politics of eternity can be compared to hypnosis. Many practitioners of the politics of eternity causes their followers to act as though they are in a trance, they are subject to act at the behest of the direction of outside forces.
With respect to both the politics of inevitability and the politics of eternity, as Timothy Snyder stated, "The path of least resistance leads directly from inevitability to eternity. If you once believed that everything always turns out well in the end, you can be persuaded that nothing turns out well in the end. If you once did nothing because you thought progress is inevitable, then you can continue to do nothing because you think time moves in repeating cycles. Both of these positions, inevitably and eternity, are antihistorical. The only thing that stands between them is history itself....."
"If young people do not begin to make history, politicians of eternity and inevitability will destroy it."
