Peter Espeut | Campaigning by littering

Ethology is the scientific study of animal behaviour, specifically focusing on how and why animals behave the way they do. (Do not confuse it with Ethnology, or Etiology). It is a branch of Zoology, and I dabbled in it in my undergraduate years studying the Natural Sciences.

Have you ever noticed dogs walking about their yards urinating – a little here and a little there? Usually the amount of urine produced is a smaller amount than when the dog relieves himself/herself. Why do they do that? This is the sort of behaviour that Ethologists study.

Scientists tell us that dogs mark “their territory” by urinating on certain objects within “their territory”. The dog returns to these spots on occasion to renew this olfactory mark. Olfactory marking often occurs in areas where other dogs have left their urine mark – have left their odour.

Dogs are social animals, and when other animals enter “their territory” this may cause anxiety – they may feel threatened – which will stimulate them to mark “their territory” by leaving their smell. Maybe this will intimidate the other animals, and cause them to leave or stay away. Perfectly understandable animal behaviour! (Interested readers can turn to Google for further information).

TERRITORIAL MARKING

Are you wondering why my mind runs on territorial marking every time we enter the election campaign season? Let us indulge in a little human political ethology. A small minority of Jamaicans are political animals (the majority eschews politics), who insist on marking some area or other they would like others to consider to be “their territory” with green or orange “claat”. Why do they do this? It is all about insecurity. Other political animals have invaded “their territory”, and in their profound sense of insecurity, they wish to intimidate the other side by depositing their “claat” all over the place.

The height of “claat” gamesmanship is to deposit your colour over the stronghold of your opponent, which will cause them heart palpitations, and in a fit of panic they will tear down your “claat” and erect their own “claat”. Now don’t get caught! This kind of “claat” politics could cost you your life!

Even when political animals erect their own colour “claat” in their garrison, it is pure voter intimidation. No community – stronghold or garrison – is ever 100 per cent monochromatic; the “claat” on the lightposts, and the “claat” hanging on the fences are loud reminders to your neighbours how they are expected to vote.

It has been the view of past political ombudsmen – and I agree – that cussing this kind of “claat” along the roadways is a breach of the Political Code of Conduct, and should not be tolerated. But no-one who has ever held that office has been able to stop the cussing of political “claat” all across Jamaica.

DECLINED TO SIGN

Mind you, politicians from one side have declined to sign the Political Code of Conduct, which bans voter intimidation (Articles 2 and 5 in the Declaration of Political Conduct, and Sections 1, 2, 3, and 7 in the Code of Conduct itself; Google it). I wonder if this could be a statement of intent?

But political animals from both sides have colluded to make sure that even if the Political Ombudsman is working with superlative efficiency, he or she will have no teeth to bite the dogs that try to intimidate others by spreading around their political stink. If the political dogs colluded to create a toothless and gagged Integrity Commission, if it turns out that they had created a political ombudsman with real teeth, the sun would rise in the west!

It seems to me that cussing all this “claat” on the public roadway is also illegal, breaching several statutes. First, all the “claat” on the utility poles is trespass upon the works of the Jamaica Public Service Company, or the Jamaica Telephone Company (I know it is now C&W), or whoever owns the poles. I encourage them to take to court all those cussing the “claat” on their property, and prosecute them for trespass, and sue them for damages and cleanup costs.

Second, littering the place with all that “claat” is indecent, and a breach of the Anti-Litter Act. Both our major political parties are notorious law-breakers. Littering and defacing property is is also a breach of Section 6 of the Code of Political Conduct, both parts (a) and (b). I observe that a lot of the “claat” from the 2024 Local Government Elections was not taken down, which tells me that the government has zero-effectiveness against the political “litterati” and “claat”cussers – which includes themselves.

And third, if someone cussed “claat” of any colour by my gate or fence, or on any utility pole on my road, I would consider that someone was trying to intimidate myself and my wife, that our privacy had been invaded, and our human rights had been violated. No politician should be allowed to get away with treating any Jamaican like that!

This kind of political campaigning by political animals stinks to high heaven, and should not be tolerated in a civilized society – in a free and democratic society.

But then, what better do you expect from political animals? Thank God the majority of us Jamaicans are decent human beings who have declared a pox on both their houses!

Peter Espeut is both a natural and a social scientist. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com