Position is the art of gunnery, Mr Editor, or words to that effect. A former comrade in arms, politically speaking of course, not literally please, used to remind us of this at critical junctures in caucus discussions on issues of the day. I think we all understood what he meant. Strategy is important in politics. Timing isn’t everything either, but it’s important too.

Two very recent events prompted the remembrance and I will come on to those events shortly. There are a couple of other points I wish to make before I get there. In the meantime you can guess at what two events I have in mind.

Political parties have but two principal aims: one, to win power; two, retain power. No secrets there, I don’t think. Elections must never be overlooked; past results, which, as usual disclaimers go, are no indication of future performance, along with particularly the poll that is looming.

I continue with another military analogy; and interesting is it not how the Westminster system lends to these sorts of analogies? Instructive too, I dare say. This one is taken from Sun Tzu’s oft-quoted The Art of War: “every battle is won before it is fought”.

This applies equally to electoral politics. While three years may seem like an eternity when you are in the Opposition (and it does: I have been there and done that for 13 years), three years can feel like a very short time to accomplish what you need to accomplish when you are Government and two years have already slipped by (this too, I know from experience, the last five years under the UBP).

The trouble is strategy can sometimes dictate, and positioning pre-occupy our politics. But voters can and do discern when this is happening, even when, or especially when, the partisans cannot.

Strategems that work elsewhere don’t always work well in the small community that we are. You know how it goes: people know people who know people. Family and friends, and friends of friends abound in Bermuda. Or as heavyweight champion Joe Louis said about his opponents and the boxing ring: “You can run baby, but you can’t hide.”

So I come on to those two events:

One, crossing the floor: this is nothing new, here and elsewhere, and really should come as no surprise. Sure it may seem that the traffic is one way, but as I recall, the first by a Member of Parliament was PLP to UBP in mid-term. It was the start of what has now become a habit, if not a tradition – and a potentially good one at that. People will get to thinking about how wedded we have to be to party positions and practices. It prompts you wonder too, I hope, about how different the parties really are in ideology when shifts can be so comfortably made and accommodated. Mind you, there is nothing like an election to confirm the position. A right of recall for sitting MPs might also be most illuminating and instructive.

That said, the options around here are limited (and some might also say, limiting) when you still want to make a contribution. As I tell people all the time, there are really only two games in town: OBA or PLP. If you are not comfortable or welcome in one, there is always the other. Face it folks, independents and third parties have not fared well, or at all, in Bermuda since 1968.

While I understand the disappointment and anger of some, please, do yourselves and the rest of us a favour, ease up on the vitriol. I read some of the bloggers and so much of what they have to say is so unnecessary and so unhelpful. A lot of it is downright nasty and occasionally racial if not racist. What is particularly galling is so many of them who have these strong opinions, and and claim to speak the truth, dare to do so anonymously. How brave of them.

It gets even worse when you realise that some are party hacks and partisans masquerading under one or more pseudonyms (some of them paid for the purpose apparently) all trying to compete to influence public opinion, one presumes. It really does cause you to question the efficacy of posting anonymously when the practice is being abused and misused in this way. File this under a topic for another week, another column.

Event number two: the speech and you all know the speech I am talking about. It was literally and figuratively a call to arms (military jargon again: it fits) that was pitched for two audiences: those who wanted to hear what he had to say and those who don’t want to hear what he has to say. No surprises there, really.

It was decidedly and pointedly political. Duh. What it also did is get people wondering about, the real, you know, reason for the speech. Some people were thinking it was cover for his comeback. I am not so sure about that. For others it looked like cover for more crossovers to come. I dunno. Time will tell on both counts, but all of it the usual speculation or, if you prefer (I do), just plain old grit for the mill.

Speaking of which, the ex and I definitely agree on one thing: Bermuda could benefit from a little more grit and selflessness.

* Got an opinion? You can either share it on The Royal Gazette website or dare to write jbarritt@ibl.bm.