Apr 12
Tennyson Joseph, who teaches Political Science at the UWI in Barbados, has outlined a programme for “the Second Independence Revolution”, in an address to the Common Sense Convois of the Lloyd Best Institute of the West Indies held recently.
It is now fifty years since the first English-Speaking Caribbean states attained independence. To many of us, these have been fifty years of marking time, trial and error, false starts, and dashed expectations, with some successes but more disappointments…
Tennyson Joseph has challenged us to re-examine the political system and practice we inherited at ‘Independence’ and to revisit the federal option. I agree, although it remains to be seen whether Arab Spring methods and Occupy tactics will have resonance in the Caribbean. Casual observation suggests that the use of social media is concentrated in a demographic of young urban professionals and hence may have limitations as an instrument of mass mobilisation. And so far there seems to be little appetite to replicate Occupy tactics here–though this may change. I coincide with Tennyson in believing that a cross-Caribbean social/political movement grounded in the population is the best way to salvage the regional project. But isn’t there a contradiction between his call for a ‘Caribbean Integration Party (p. 33) and his position that ‘the political party in its present fom (should) be smashed completely’? (p. 34) . I guess the CIP should be in a different form, but then better to not call it a Party. In revisiting the federal option, my hunch is that a giant leap into federalism is too big a change in institutions and culture, and will raise too many issues of negotiated distribution of power, to be comtemplated at this time–but what may be feasible is measured, incremental quasi-federalism where there are tangible benefits to be had. Climate change adaptation, energy security, food security, intra-regional transport and joint diplomatic and trade representation in emerging economies are some of the obvious areas.
I hope that the dialogue will continue.
Norman
I agree Norman…incremental steps towards federalism, which address the issues you raise and many more. These steps will have to be driven by an approach which has social equity including gender equity at its core, and a political governance process which is much more inclusive than anything we have now, or that the current political structure can deliver.
I enjoyed as always reading Tennyson Joseph. He is an enthusiatic quatum leap thinker. I agree with him that the only state that can help the Caribbean now is a pan-Caribbean state. Whether we are at the stage where such a state is immanent is another story.
While the blackberry is in more than the hands of urban professionals, at least here in Barbados which I know of, the usages to which that is put at present seem not to be as political in the sense in which Tennyson puts it as it could be. For example, although the students I teach all have them, they appear not to treat them as mechanisms for group project activitty. The use seems unidirectional and social. Or maybe this is my lack of knowledge of the capabilities of the technology.
I suggest that we do not perceive Tennyson’s and Norman’s suggestions as either or but begin to follow whatever is feasible. Having just watched a French Guyana film on environmental degradation caused by industrial gold dregging in the hinterlands of the Guyanas, and learning from the local feminists of the problems being posed for women and girls by this same activity, I suggest the time for beginning that new independence journey needs to start in all the ways we can get it to start.
Guidance,
Margaret
Much of what Dr. Joseph has pointed out concerning the (forced) adoption of the parliamentary system of government by ex-colonies in the Caribbean is absolutely salient. However, is it really that the masses don’t have access to make positive change happen? Is it possible that the masses are too apathetic to go out and to fight for what they need as long as they receive some small tokens? Is it that the minority (power brokers) practice such an entrenched form of corruption that it makes any change really just change on the surface? Also, after so much time has elapsed, are we not clearly aware of the negative aspects of organized society as John Locke and Thomas Hobbes saw it? This is at the crux of the problem with the ways in which modern society has been set up to serve the elite, is it not? Is it possible that there is limited room in most governance models for the interests of the masses to be properly represented? I am still uncertain the system of governance is the main culprit though, for me it is the lack of integrity with which the governments/people of the Caribbean (especially TNT) govern the societies that they responsible for. The parliamentary system definitely does not serve the ex-colony well, so let us come up with a system that is tailor-made for the needs of the region, the people and the times in which we live, one with the adequate checks and balances. What are we waiting for? Fifty more years to pass?
But isn”™t there a contradiction between his call for a “˜Caribbean Integration Party (p. 33) and his position that “˜the political party in its present fom (should) be smashed completely”™? (p. 34) .
I haven’t read through it all yet, but yes that would seem to be a contradiction. I don’t read it as his calling for such a party though. He says “In our reflection, we must consider deeply why it is that, a region which has had such a long tradition of grass roots political activism, has never once conceived the necessity of organising in a sustained and deep way, a Caribbean Integration Party..”. So he is reflecting on how odd it is that political activism hasn’t spawned such a party in the past. On this score I think he’s incorrect. In Antigua there was the Antigua Caribbean Liberation Movement of the late Tim Hector which was (is? not sure if it still exists) avowedly integrationist. There were also political parties in Trinidad in the past which embraced the idea of integration in their agenda and their names but this was before the federation. More recently there is (or was) the Pan-Caribbean Congress which is supposed to have members drawn across six states (Antigua, Barbados, Grenada, Trinidad and Saint Vincent).
A better question must be why such Caribbean Integration Parties tend to flounder when they are formed and why they aren’t formed with greater frequency. (Continue reading this comment at A Caribbean Integration Party)
Okay, having read through it, I must say I agree with some of Dr. Joseph’s points, but I notice he seems to have fallen into what I term as a “trap” of believing that the Westminster system is not suited for us and calling for us to find a new model of governance while acknowledging that the politicians themselves have corrupted the system. Now, to be quite frank I’ve never agreed with the idea that the Westminster system is unsuited for us or anybody else. There is nothing special about the British which makes Westminster only suitable for them. In any case, Westminster itself is merely one form of parliamentary democracy which has been successfully adopted by a wide variety of countries across the world (indeed studies seem to show that countries with a form of parliamentary democracy are less likely to fall into dictatorship like the South American countries of the 1970s and in various earlier periods). I’ve always refused to believe that somehow people of African and Indian descent are incapable of using any form of parliamentary democracy properly (in fact India itself successfully uses a form of the Westminster system). Our problem in the region is not a political one, but a social one. We have adopted the form of Westminster democracy, but not its substance. For that we need people of integrity to be MPs and we have had precious little of those kinds of persons. Until we have persons of integrity forming the majority of politicians then we can seek out new models all we want; the only thing that will happen (and I would be quite willing to bet my house on this) is continued failure as the corrupt politicians end up corrupting the new system through their “ideology of greed and bribery” to paraphrase Dr. Joseph. If they find it dangerous to even have principles, ideologies (real ones, not corrupt ones) and policies, under which system will they ever provide good governance? The only model I can think of which would provide good governance without having the nature of the politicians changed first would be direct rule by an external power such as Canada or the United Kingdom (as happened in Turks and Caicos). That won’t work though since it would require the exact opposite of a second independence revolution – it would require a de-independence revolution.
Continuing…
What we need is a social revolution. A revolution in our values at large. We can’t be tolerating corruption and clownish politics while expecting progress. For a lot of the older generations it may well be too late though public awareness campaigns by private NGOs could help to persuade those who are ambivalent to come out on the side of decency. The key though lies with the children. They need to be taught civics (and not just the form, but have it hammered home into their way of thinking). This should be done through schools as well as in public awareness campaigns by NGOs.
This could be where integrationist movements/societies/associations etc can come into the picture – they would have to reach out people and provide educational materials to children concerning good governance as well as demonstrating just how alike we all are across the region (so comparative civics to show that the system in the Bahamas is little different than the system in Jamaica, etc) and perhaps sponsoring the teaching of an expanded civics syllabus in various schools (perhaps the private ones since the public schools might not be able to do that – but if the public schools are allowed to do so by the government then they should be included too), pre-schools, nurseries, clubs, etc. If possible, the sponsoring of student exchanges (to literally show students that we are all one people and one nation scattered over different territories) should be done as well. It would take some amount of time (probably at least 30 years). But in the end a concerted and sustained effort would bring about a transformation to allow us to actually make the systems we have work to our benefit (as corrupt politicians are replaced by politicians with principles and as a new generation grows up aware of the benefits of working together instead of spiting each other). By 2050 (which could be the target date), the region could be the polar opposite of what it is today.