There is nothing intrinsically wrong in making out people we like, admire, idolise, or even deify to be heroes. In fact, a great many people see enough heroic qualities in their parents, teachers, neighbours and friends to call them heroes. Moreover, because there are neither universal standards nor precise sets of characteristics that an individual must exhibit in order to qualify as an international, national or personal hero, everyone is free to compile a list of qualities they feel are sufficient and appropriate to justify the designation of hero.

As I see it, a hero is not about chasing personal ambitions and, is less about egocentricities, but more about achieving for the greater good for humanity, through acts of sincere altruism. Therefore, qualities such as selflessness, bravery, courageousness, skilfulness, determination, spirituality, thoughtfulness, strategic and tactical abililty, perseverance, credibility, loyality, being flexible but steely are but few characteristics I’d look for in an individual I call hero. As exhaustive of this list appears, there are other more important and less important traits that are equally significant to other folks in determining heroes.

It is against that background that one should assess fellow columnist, Garfield Higgins’ piece titled, ‘Chronicles of a Jamaican hero’ that appeared in The Agenda of the Sunday Observer on February 15, 2015. Higgins deserves a medal for using last Sunday’s column to stir up the proverbial ants’ nest — albeit to produce a predictable outcome. The writer, in his own inimitable, but passionate style, laid bare his unflinching devotion and inestimable love for former Prime Minister Edward Seaga and the myriad things he accomplished, whether as prime minister, minister of finance, development and member of parliament for Kingston Western.

By Higgins’ account, and based on the litany of achievements enumerated in the body of his magnum opus, particularly in the area of institutional building, Seaga deserves the honour of national hero. Given that nothing is inherently wrong with any such call, there ought not to be any quarrels with Garfield about his choice. However, because he is recommending Seaga for Jamaica’s highest national honour, his recommendation automatically becomes a national issue, as any such investiture is bound to have national implications. No reasonable Jamaican, not even one with less than an iota of fairness or modicum of decency or sense of history, can deny Edward Seaga’s sterling contribution to the development of Jamaica between 1959 as a member of the Legislative Council and 2005 as Opposition leader. Seaga’s work rests not solely on the institutions he helped create or with the politics he helped to shape, but his life’s work transcends classes and strata and is most evident in the advancement of our cultural identity and brand. However, I have divergent views from Higgins on his suitability for Jamaica’s highest national honour.

By Higgins’ account, and based on the litany of achievements enumerated in the body of his magnum opus, particularly in the area of institutional building, Seaga deserves the honour of national hero. Given that nothing is inherently wrong with any such call, there ought not to be any quarrels with Garfield about his choice. However, because he is recommending Seaga for Jamaica’s highest national honour, his recommendation automatically becomes a national issue, as any such investiture is bound to have national implications. No reasonable Jamaican, not even one with less than an iota of fairness or modicum of decency or sense of history, can deny Edward Seaga’s sterling contribution to the development of Jamaica between 1959 as a member of the Legislative Council and 2005 as Opposition leader. Seaga’s work rests not solely on the institutions he helped create or with the politics he helped to shape, but his life’s work transcends classes and strata and is most evident in the advancement of our cultural identity and brand. However, I have divergent views from Higgins on his suitability for Jamaica’s highest national honour.

Conversely, Chief Tacky should be vested in the Order of National Hero. For those who are dismissive of Tacky’s fight against the brutal and oppressive slave regime, there is nothing mythical about Tacky’s contribution. Accounts of his bravery in the fight against slavery are well-documented. Lest we forget, Tacky, a native African, described as a Coromantee, used his remarkable powers and ability to organise and mobilise the Easter Monday slave uprising in 1760, unmistakably and ostensibly to overthrow and drive out the white slave masters. His army of fighters started in Frontier and Trinity plantations but steadily advanced to Fort Haldane where they took charge of the armoury and stole firearms and gunpowder.

Tacky’s army of men used the firearms and gunpowder they confiscated at the armoury at Fort Haldane to overrun slave plantations located at Heywood Hall, Esher and Ballards Valley in St Mary. Scores of white plantation owners were killed as the uprising took hold, and hundreds of slaves joined the fight for liberation. For, although Tacky did not have to become involved in any uprising, having been born a “free man”, he had the moral conviction that “none is free until all are free”.

Unfortunately, Tacky did not achieve his vision of a free black Jamaican nation. One of his own betrayed him. Tacky was shot and his body decapitated, with his head placed on a pole. Many of his fighters committed suicide in preference to being killed by the British and Maroon militias. Sacrifices such as Tacky’s are enough to impel any nation possessing a scintilla of historical consciousness to confer upon a son or daughter who, having fought as gallantly as Tacky did in pursuit of freedom, the honour of national hero.

Nevertheless, back to Garfield Higgins’ tome of last Sunday. We must learn that, although disagreements and intense dialogue are inevitably parts of the democratic process, we have to bury the past as a means of ridding ourselves of the bitterness and hatred that defined some of our political experiences. Inasmuch as we advocate moving on as part of the reconciliation process (and this may contradict the lead sentence of this paragraph) we cannot deny the importance of words. Words matter, and to the extent that we can measure them and be more meditative about their use, we should, because once they leave our lips we cannot reclaim them.

I mention this because of some of the unkind comments in response to Garfield’s opinion about Edward Seaga’s suitability for national hero. Unfortunately, some of Mr Seaga’s own words remain indelibly fresh in many people’s mind, they have not forgiven him, and he has not apologised to the country for saying some of the things he said. Whether provoked or not, saying threatening things like, “Locking down Jamaica tighter than a sardine can that not even rain can fall…” and “Blood for blood, fire for fire…” will not endear people toward you. More than anything else, and even as I abominate some of the vitriol toward Seaga, some of his utterances are responsible for the perception people have of him as a highly divisive figure, and herein lies the conundrum for Garfield: A national hero must be the symbol of national unity.

In the final analysis, and regardless of what some people may say, we are still, for all intent and purposes, a young democracy. We must celebrate the freedoms and rights that are enshrined. Freedom of expression is one such fundamental right, and the fact that we can share our opinion is awesome. Therefore, as we remain trenchant with our views and passionate about our political orientations, it will not hurt if we also become respectful and tolerant of views that are diametrically opposed to our own. Let us give tolerance and respect a try.

Burnscg@aol.com