Party Politics a la Pacific

THE principle of all transplantation is that the introduced item, in order to thrive, must adapt to the new environment. In many cases, the transplant in time loses all resemblance to the original but the name.

This is the case with the church. It has had to accommodate characteristics of the local cultures a streak of cargoism in PNG and the Solomons, a bit of hysteria in Fiji, all feasting and politics in Tonga, priestcraft and churchianity in Samoa, and many other things got mixed in together with the moral hotchpotch that Christianity represents in the Pacific. Therefore we pride ourselves over Pacific theology, Pacific Way (really a formula for getting the weak states to accept the will of the strong ones and called “consensus”), and many other Pacific thingamibobs. But all these are transplants with the übiquitous coconut cream dressing

and served lukewarm, that is, in a nauseating condition.

Party politics is one of these imports. It is incredible to see how much this foreign institution is remodelled to suit local conditions, more strictly, local interests. This is not peculiar to the Pacific, of course. One finds the same sort of thing everywhere in the world. What is unique to the Pacific islands is that they use and recast this institution without an inkling of what it is, especially the fact that it does embody values which are absent from island societies e.g. liberalism, democracy, the work ethic, republicanism, criticism and so on.

Pacific societies have moralities whose values include sharing (a strategy for survival in resource-poor environments), loyalty (of the weak to the strong), humility (reinforced by the oppressive side of Christian ethics), etc. But none ever had any of the values of liberal humanism. They have always been the target of violent persecution and bullying.

As a result, party programmes in the Islands have for their content part of this oppressive and slave morality. That is, so far as liberal and humanist sentiments are concerned their party politics is simply vacuous.

Although PNG has had parties for some time, though perhaps not as long as Fiji, it is only now with Rabi Namaliu that we see a leader in that country who tries to infuse PNG politics with a sense of humanist tradition. But the dead weight of her rural myriads with their innocent but uninformed perception is just too unwieldy and disproportionately huge compared to the miniscule progressive section of society. The sociopolitical effect of this force will continue to plague PNG for as long as the wide gap between a Namaliu’s or a Lohia’s comprehension of how things work in today’s world and that of a Highland village headman. The gap must be destroyed.

And PNG must wean itself from being a buffer for Australia vis-a-vis Indonesia. Especially now that the Timor business looks risky. Where does PNG stand? With Australia or Portugal i.e. with kith and kin or principle? Moreover, PNG must sometimes look to Europe, though looking to Europe is an art

The Islands

that has to be acquired. But the country is now all wrapped up in party wars where the no confidence vote is the favourite weapon. And Bougainville, a problem that Australia had a big hand in creating, will for some time yet be the standing symbol of PNG unhealed social ills.

The situation in Fiji illustrates how far this can go. Here you have a confrontation between business interests, ethnic elements who are downtrodden but may be potentially blackguards all, and a traditional privileged class whose sole aim in this life and the next is to perfect social parasitism. The sum of their politics is the clash between those specific interests.

Rabuka, for instance, seeing a bleak future in his career if his party does not come home in the “next” election, wags an index finger to drive home the point: he and his party have no respectable platform. No liberty, no human rights, no tolerance, no opposition, just plain sadism alias

traditional privilege.

In fact the control he may not be aware of it marks and is the symbol of the turning point in Fiji politics: the end of the traditional form and the beginning of the new. I dare prophesy, however, no general election for Fiji this year. I was right last time and am dead sure I again will be this time.

Tonga is a laughing predicament not only because she has never had parties, but powerful churches which have the same social effect, but also in the way people reveal their ignorance and intolerance regarding party politics. Many people especially chiefs, their relatives and freeloaders and most people with power, do not want party politics.

Arguments offered say that party politics is a ‘foreign thing’, a convenient phrase, that it would double public expenditure (public expenditure has been doubling at shorter and shorter periods and mostly for villainous reasons), that the present system is a lesser evil than what we do not know, that such a change would wreck the peace and stability we now enjoy.

The pro-democracy movement led by young representatives of the people, is accelerating and is shaping up well to be Tonga’s first political party, though it wouldn’t be in the books for quite some time yet. But Tonga seems to be poised to have parties in the next five or so years.

It will be another nail into the coffin of Tonga’s feudal system as loyalties shift and reshuffle under the new consciousness for change.

The leadership of the two most powerful churches, Wesleyan and Catholic, are solidly behind the pro-democracy movement which is going to stage in November this year a conference on aspects of the constitution that may need revision. Such a colloquium is just the cement required to materialise such things as political parties. But the organisers will certainly experience a lot of intimidation and harassment from quarters that stand to lose if basic law is ever so little altered. □

Futa

Helu