I’M sure I’m not alone in finding what is happening in Sark very sad.

Of course it is still a beautiful island with a unique atmosphere and many charming residents. To a casual visitor from beyond these islands it may appear to be the same idyll it always has been. But to those within the Bailiwick with a real and enduring love of Sark – and there are very many of us – the corrosive factionalism of the last few years is hugely upsetting.

Each Channel Island has its own character, not just physically and historically but socially as well. Jersey is a bit flamboyant and flashy and Guernsey rather more restrained and understated. Perhaps both characteristics date back to our respective allegiances during the English Civil War. Alderney occasionally has suppressed tensions between the indigenous minority and the larger incomer community but they always unite against any outside criticism. Meanwhile, Sark always appeared to be one of the more cohesive societies in the archipelago – but not now.

I am certainly not trying to romanticise the Sark of yesteryear. Of course, there were sometimes rows between individuals or families and occasionally more widespread discontent. One of the most dramatic upheavals was when the late Dame of Sark got very grumpy with her fellow islanders and threatened to hand governance of the island over to the Guernsey States. Her power to do that was very questionable, to put it mildly, but it certainly got people’s attention.

I was a boy staying with family friends in Little Sark at the time and I well remember the head of the household telling The Times newspaper that if she went ahead he would ‘blow up La Coupee’. In retrospect I fail to see how that would really have been any practical help to Little Sark but it was a dramatic statement of defiance and underlined the local population’s implacable opposition to outside rule.

Despite those occasional tiffs, most of us from Guernsey (and of course the locals) will remember Sark’s community during the second half of the 20th century as being very much at peace with itself. Quirky maybe, even prickly at times, but very self-reliant, mutually supportive and welcoming. Alas, while much of that surely still exists, those are not the adjectives most people would use to describe Sark today. The early years of the 21st century have had far more to do with conflict, factionalism and division.

I am certainly not going to use this column to join forces with either side in this civil war of words – I am more concerned about those caught in the crossfire. But I should make my position clear.

I welcome the end of feudalism, however benign, and thought it should have come sooner. I welcome the end of primogenitor as a basis for inheritance and thought it should have come sooner. I warmly welcome the coming of full democracy and definitely thought it should have come sooner.

I suppose to that extent I am in bed with the Sark Estate/Brecqhou faction. Where I part company with them is in the hectoring of those with a different vision for Sark to their own. For instance, Sark News’s characterisation of the Seigneur, Michael Beaumont, as some autocratic dictator who rules with an iron fist is risible. The recent advert that implied that the local populace should march in the streets against such dictatorship like some form of ‘Sark Spring’ is absurd.

As a journalist I sat in Chief Pleas and watched a mild-mannered, middle-aged Seigneur argue with passion and frustration that reform was needed and should happen more quickly. I saw his blood pressure rise as he tried to convince not only the feudal tenants, but also the elected deputies, that it was in Sark’s interest to embrace change rather than have it thrust on them. He was a modest agent of modernity, not a cruel crusader for the retention of a centuries-old feudal regime. You got the impression he would rather be gardening and that the only reason he battled on in the role of Seigneur was to avoid letting people down.

Very sadly, Sark today does seem to have two factions, the traditional establishment and the SEM lobby, with a few noble neutrals. Electorally, the former has been far more successful, suggesting it has the greater following. But in the area of commercial dominance the opposite is true and that financial weight has occasionally been used in unfortunate ways. In particular the act of petulance straight after the first democratic elections was regrettable.

Has Sark still got some tweaking to do to remove the last vestiges of its feudal past? Certainly – but credit should be given for coming so far so fast. Is the island ruled by the dark forces of tyranny and repression? Of course not – it now has regular free and fair elections for all of its government.

Is the greater danger a new economic feudalism? Quite possibly. Investment was badly needed and should be very much welcomed but the temptation to use commercial muscle to achieve political ends should be resisted if harmony is ever to be restored.

Most importantly, will Sark soon return to the happy place at ease with itself which many of us remember? I desperately hope that I am wrong but the only honest answer is that it doesn’t seem very likely.