I am moved to write this article because from time to time I have heard the leaders of political parties and sometimes their supporters talk about the greater good. I have also heard the term the “bigger picture” used by members of the United Ptogresseive Party (UPP) but my preference is always for the more philosophical term the “greater good”. Now, what is the concept of the greater good and why is it important in political discourse?

The concept of the greater good is rooted in the philosophical writings of the English philosophers Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill and is associated with the school of philosophy called Utilitarianism. It is a moral and philosophical concept. Basically, the thesis that utilitarianism advances is that “the best action is one that maximizes overall well-being or happiness for the greatest number of people.”

With respect to the definition of politics, it is the establishment of rules and regulations that govern a State. In essence, it is the process through which the State organizes itself, manages and allocates resources with the fundamental objective of improving the well-being of its citizens. In terms of Utilitarianism, this objective should be to provide the greatest good to the greatest number. It is an objective that is very difficult to achieve, but is one that all governments must strive to accomplish. In the words of Otto von Bismarck which, are quite instructive “ politics is the art of the possible, the attainable – the art of the next best.” The role of government, therefore, is to do the best for its citizens.

Having given a definition of politics and the concept of the greater good, I will now try to apply this to the developments within the UPP since its Covention in April, 2024. The objective and raison d’etre of the UPP, like any other Political Party, is to win State power in order to advance the concept of the greater good and improve the well-being of the majority of the people in the State. While I would wish to say improving the well-being of everyone in the State, I know that that would be a rather utopian view.

In the competitive nature of electoral politics, the first objective of any Political Party is to win an election and become government since much cannot be accomplished in Opposition. The winning of an election can also be characterized as a greater good for a party since that is a prerequisite and sine qua non in order to be able to implement its policies and programmes for the ultimate greater good for the well-being of the majority of the people in the State. It is in that narrow context, therefore, that is to say the winning of an election, that I am using the concept of the greater good in this article as opposed to the greater good implicit in philosophy of Utilitarianism. And it is incumbent on a Political Party to put whatever mechanisms, modalities and structures in place to win.

The million dollar question that would arise now is how to determine the greater good in the context of a Political Party to faciliiate its success in a general election. In the case of the UPP, it is argued by its leadership and many supporters that the Convention has answered that question with the democratic election of its leader. However, it should be noted that being democratically elected per se while politically legitimate, might not be strategically advantageous since it does not necessarily translate into the Party’s wider electoral appeal and success.

I posit, therefore, that a Political Party in strategizing to win State power must be bold and pragmatic and look at a multifaceted approach in determining the leader that is best suited to take the Party to political success and not rely solely on emotionalism and on the basis of the result of a democratic leadership election. There are many cases where a Party leader who has been elected in a landslide by his Party, has gone on to suffer a massive electoral defeat in a general election as a result of the lack of national appeal for the leader. An example of the latter was the massive defeat of the Jeremy Corbyn led Labour Party in the United Kingdom in the 2019 general election. A Party should therefore be pragmatic in looking at the greater good. A Party should not be swayed by the views of some in its leadership with rampant personal self-interest who are aligned with a particular person. Such views are invariably antithetical to the greater good of the Party.

I will end by saying that Harold Lovell’s premature resignation of the leadership of the UPP and subsequent retirement from politics after the 2023 general elections was not conducive to the Partys’s greater good and similarly Jamale Pringle’s election as leader of the Party might not have been conducive to the geater good (albeit he was allegedly elected democratically) since polls have shown that Richard Lewis had greater national appeal. While we do not have a Presidential System of election, leadership does matter and even in our Parliamentary System of election the strength of the leader can impact voting. A bold and pragmatic Party with its focus on the immediate greater good i.e., winning the next general elections perhaps would have taken the results of such polls into account and make the necessary leadership change. Such an action would make the saying by Niccolo Machiavelli that “the end justifies the means” rather appropriate. In any case, we will just have to await the outcome of the next general elections to see if the current view of the greater good by the leadership of the Party prevails.

This issue that I have raised will certainly be food for thought and perhaps the focus of academic enquiry for students of the politics of Antigua and Barbuda in the future.