In his recent Op-ed article in the Source, "Outrage painfully absent in face of decay", Frank Schneiger articulated his assessment of a substantial segment of Virgin Islands society — an assessment with which I can associate.
He stated in his article that "it is unfortunate that the territory does not have a true elite that could step forward and say enough is enough."
No doubt there are those among us who would be offended by this assessment and the related statement, "… Virgin Islands life is dominated by a parasitic political class that is as indifferent to the future of the territory as the leeches who run corrupt dictatorships throughout the world." What an indictment! But how far off track is he?
Largely, I share the brutal truth of what Schneiger has expressed in writing, although I might have said it differently. The business of the territory is influenced substantially, although indirectly, by those among us who are least prepared academically or by native ability to assume and discharge the leadership necessary to chart a rewarding course for Virgin Islanders, however we choose to define that term.
In my own one-on-one interactions with peers, I often lament the "dumbing down" of our combined intellect and ability that is evidenced across our society. Even though the territory is blessed with its disproportionate share of individuals who have succeeded academically at world-renowned colleges, universities and institutes of higher education and in our midst there are many scholars in a variety of fields related to the ingredients of good government and improved life standards, there is little evidence that this vast array of human resources is functioning at present in the daily life of the territory.
The unfortunate consequence of this truth is that few, if any, of the individuals who occupy positions of leadership in the territory ever maximize or come close to maximizing their potential in their positions. Everyone loses in this scenario because all energies and efforts that are exerted result only in maintaining and repeating, ad nauseum, the status quo. In my own public utterances while seeking public office over an extended number of years, I have said repeatedly that "the status quo offends me."
Just reflect on some of the issues before the territory that, if they were in human form, would be crying out for relief and attention to improve their condition. I can think of election and political reform, education governance, status, the need for a local constitution and even how to disband the Narcotics Strike Force and place its employees in other agencies of the Virgin Islands government as examples of long outstanding and unresolved issues. Not one of these issues, inanimate in form, can be resolved without deliberate action by our community and its human leaders. As long as we fail to resolve them, they will remain with us.
When used, the term "elitism" triggers a series of very negative reactions. But shouldn't the "dumbing down" of the intellectual capacity of our people and the negative image that it portrays also engender serious negative responses — and especially so due to the deleterious effect that this process has on stunting our development and preventing our academically accomplished from striking the mark in their job performance?
Notwithstanding their academic accomplishments and skill development, many of our sons and daughters who have occupied leadership positions have been unable to soar in recognition for outstanding stewardship. Instead, many, if not most, are maligned. Is it possible that we are putting good people to work in bad systems that need restructuring if we are to get the results that we want? By failing to restructure our systems, are we not condemning these sons and daughters to failure? I believe that the answer to both questions is in the affirmative and that we should guard against setting up our own folks for failure.
It is an age-old observation of mine that many of our better-prepared human resources are functioning on the periphery and are not actively engaged in efforts to bring about broad-based community change. We must devise ways to attract the interest of these people and encourage their involvement in serious community-building activities. We need to break through the low-hanging ceiling of low expectations imposed indirectly by a powerful, but poorly informed and disengaged electorate.
As we embark on developing ways to involve our knowledgeable workers in activities that will lift us upward and forward, perhaps we should also consider ways of utilizing our carnivals and festivals as launching platforms for greater participation by ordinary people in broad-based community efforts beyond carnival and festival. Catering only to the mass vote and suppressing the potential of those who occupy leadership positions is a disservice to Virgin Islanders and the territory as a whole.
Because I believe that I understand the dimensions of our plight, I was excited when the current governor, as a candidate, announced that he was interested in a single term of office only. I saw this declaration on his part as a contribution to the kind of political reform that could aid in removing the negatives that we observe frequently in our executive branch of government.
A single four-, five- or six-year term will allow an incumbent governor to develop and leave behind a legacy that is worthy of remembering, free from the internal conflicts that we have experienced between governors and their lieutenant governors, both aspirants for the same office at the end of the first term. This is just one of the systemic issues that require attention if we are to seek and realize meaningful change.

Editor's note:St. Thomas resident Gaylord A. Sprauve is a retired V.I. government administrator.
We welcome and encourage readers to keep the dialogue going by responding to Source commentary. Letters should be e-mailed with name and place of residence to [email protected].