THE YOUNG AND THE ARROGANT

RONALD Harford and Reginald Dumas are two of the most distinguished citizens of this generation.

In contrast, Stuart Young is, at best, a wet-behind-the-ears politician, rescued from a life of obscurity by Dr. Keith Rowley, in whose service he previously did backroom legal work.

At worst, Young often espouses rudeness and crudity much like the politician who hoisted him onto the national stage and handed him an overweight portfolio.

Young’s ministerial posts – in energy and as a sidekick of the Prime Minister – have quickly turned him into a jet-setter, undertaking vital negotiations and rubbing shoulders with major operatives.

On top of that, Rowley hand-carried Young into the exalted post of Chairman of the People’s National Movement, one of the region’s most enduring political institutions.

That meteoric rise could have affected the coolness and nerve of the most seasoned and assured politician.

The fact that it has happened to a political neophyte with no national profile has made him smug and pretentious, with an exaggerated self-opinion.

Young’s aloofness and egotism are further stimulated by Rowley’s authoritarian manner and his often coarse temperament.

Against that noxious backdrop, the just-come politician thinks nothing of crudely criticising any public figure whose remarks he does not favour.   

Young recently chose to “wash his mouth,” to cite an Express editorial, on Ronald Harford, a highly-regarded retired banker with an illustrious career in the sector.

Sometime before, the minister damned Dumas in a similar caustic tone, leading the respected former public officer to retort that he was serving Trinidad and Tobago “before Mr. Young’s birth.”

In keeping with his renowned resolute manner, Dumas vowed that he would not allow himself to be silenced by Young.

Others have endured similar corrosive attacks.

Indeed, foul-mouthed verbal assaults are a popular manner of rebuttal from several other Cabinet ministers, with the short-tempered Colm Imbert being a past master.

Imbert sees ill intent and hostility in all critical economic analyses 

They are all given elbow room by Rowley, whom Professor Selwyn Cudjoe recently described as having “moral blindness, public vulgarity, intellectual narrowness and aggressive narcissism.”

The Prime Minister is guilty of “verbal violence,” Cudjoe said.

Even as social and economic problems envelop the country, Rowley and his snobbish sidekicks are becoming even more disdainful of negative public comments.

Rowley has a laundry list of distasteful remarks, including publicly telling Cudjoe to “just haul…”

Such crassness would have been untenable even if T&T was enjoying the best of times because regular expressions of public anger are unbecoming.

But the country is burdened with security and bread-and-butter crises and deserves a competent team of leaders with patience, understanding, and tolerance.

Abhorrent language toward critics is only adding to the tense atmosphere of lawlessness.

It’s too late to remind Rowley that successful leaders are effective but not abusive, tough but not acrimonious.

But his minion Young should know that his bitter outbursts would get him into repeated senseless clashes with respectable nationals who won’t tolerate such unbridled arrogance.

A word to the wise!