In the political and social dynamics of Aruba, one of the most dangerous yet subtle phenomena threatening the independent development of our community is the deliberate creation of the people’s dependence on their own rulers. When a government structurally places its people in a position of financial and social dependence, it creates an asymmetrical relationship where the citizen loses their power of self-determination.
A government in a state governed by the rule of law exists to guarantee the GENERAL welfare, security, and protection of the fundamental rights of every citizen. The relationship between the government and the people is not based on CHARITY, but on a legal and ethical obligation. It is a government’s obligation to have its departments provide the people with the service they need, rather than the politician leaving their political chair, going out to the streets to play charity, and doing jobs that basically belong to the departments,departments which the government has an obligation to provide with the money and tools to serve the people. But if the government itself fails these
departments?, can the department provide service to the people?
Why then does the politician leave their political management chair to go support private merchants, pouring public money into private companies instead of their own companies, and alongside this, At the same time, they fail to empower their own governmental departments. Is this okay? Do both the government of Aruba and the Netherlands, along with puppet parliamentarians in parliament, approve of rulers stepping down from their chairs, going into the towns to help with kindness, and letting merchants sit in their chairs? Is this how a government should manage? Do we call this good governance of a Country?
Alongside this modus operandi, surprisingly the Netherlands supports this movement: “Aruba is doing a good job” (Aruba is goed bezig). Is Aruba really doing a good job?, or what does the Netherlands actually consider Aruba to be doing a good job at? Is it handing away Aruba’s power for a percentage discount while keeping the people’s eyes blindfolded with kindness disguised as colonization?
When a government focuses on transforming its citizens into passive recipients of assistance rather than autonomous agents with a right to equal opportunity, it causes an imbalance in the democratic structure. Is this currently happening in Aruba?
A people that is financially or materially dependent on their government loses the critical advantage of demanding accountability. Fear of losing governmental “favor” paralyzes public criticism, forcing people to grovel or crawl behind a government for what you, as a citizen, have a right to simply because you pay taxes. Or has the people forgotten, or are they confused?
The fundamental duty of a government is to create a healthy labor market, quality education, and a sustainable economy for everyone in Aruba, not just for a small group and those whom they pick and choose. When assistance is given as if it were a personal gift from the ruler, the structural obligation is falsely changed into an act of generosity. We ask ourselves if this is correct for ourselves ?.