Earl M. Bartley, Contributor
HAVE YOU noticed the number of 'award ceremonies' we have been having in recent years with their many honourees (sometimes numbering in the hundreds) for nation-building?
I cannot help asking, with so many people being honoured for nation-building, how did the country end-up in such a frightful mess?
Whatever social and economic retardation the colonialist might have caused, the fact is they left us in a liveable environment. But in 40 years of independence we have converted Jamaica into a cowering and insecure place, mired in economic stagnation, and with 30 per cent of our people living on less than US$2 per day and 17 per cent in extreme poverty subsisting on US$1 per day. Things are so depressing, that in a 2001 poll the majority of Jamaicans thought we were better-off under colonialism. So, how much 'nation-building' could really be occurring?
I do not grudge anybody, and I certainly believe that a person should be honoured in his own country, and in his lifetime, if possible. But it seems that to our long-running fetishism with fashion-shows and beauty contests we have now added the award ceremony and the anniversary celebration. Just think of the awards and award ceremonies that have been multiplying all over the country in recent years. There are the National Awards which occur on Heroes Day; the Prime Minister Awards at Festival time; the Governor-General Awards at Christmas; and the Institute of Jamaica Musgrave Medal award. Then there is the Norman Manley Award for Excellence; and the Michael Manley Award for Community Self-reliance. The University of the West Indies now seems to have four or five separate awards. There are the Honorary doctorates which are awarded at graduation time, the Vice Chancellor Awards, the Pelican Awards and several of the departments and halls of residence have their own awards.
A DIME A DOZEN
In the wider society, every reputable institution has its awards and ceremony. The Private Sector Organisation of Jamaica (PSOJ) and affiliate organisations have their awards and ceremonies and nearly all the professional organisations of doctors, lawyers, accountants, journalists and life underwriters, have their awards and ceremonies. Awards and ceremonies for musicians are a dime a dozen; and some organisations seem to come into being for the sole purpose of issuing awards and having these black tie, long frock, peacock strutting affairs.
Again, I ask, with so many highly esteemed "leaders" (and they are all leaders going by the commendations, no followers here) making "invaluable and outstanding contribution to nation-building" why is Jamaica in such a mess? Either we are guilty of adjectival excess, or the leaders have been working tunnel-vision in their little cocoon, or at cross-purposes. More obviously, many of these individuals, while they may be quite competent in their profession, have not done much in the way of being leaders of society and too many have been missing in action on fundamental matters of national concern. If the latter is the case, the obvious question is why?
Could it be that they did not want to disturb their comfortable professional status and income? If that is the case, these persons are not leaders, they might not even be good citizens, though they be law-abiding. If many of these persons are neither leaders nor good citizens, then what is the purpose of these awards and ceremony with their sartorial excess and brown-nosing?
SELF-MOCKING
Quite frankly, given the hash Jamaicans have made of independence, which is widely acknowledged as due to a failure of leadership from the various organisations and institutions of society, I believe the plethora of these awards are undeserved, almost self-mocking, except we seem not to realise it. In their essence, they seem to be little more than 60-something and septuagenarian versions of the consumerist graduation fad that has overtaken the country from basic school to university. On another level, they often appear like atavistic cravings for the dressing-up and masquerade that the slaves engaged in during the period of plantation slavery.
Whatever their motivation, I believe we should scale back these awards for the next 30 years until we have cleaned up the mess we have made of our society. That is, unless we wish to continue to fool ourselves into dreaming that professional and personal success can be enjoyed in a society suffering from varying degrees of collapse.
LEADERSHIP AND CITIZENSHIP
In pre-colonial African village life and in the small Greek city-states of 2,500 years ago, citizenship and leadership was a fused and active concept. In the Greek system of direct democracy citizens were expected to take turns in "ruling and being ruled." All citizens could participate in public policy discussions and city administrators were rotated year to year. In larger, more highly populated and dispersed societies direct democracy was thought to be too cumbersome as a governance mechanism and representative democracy first evolved in Rome during the 1st century AD. Representative democracy had the effect of separating leadership and citizenship and since then the struggle has been to obtain enough mass participation to ensure the viability, good administration and cohesion of society.
Roman democracy had representatives from the three classes the "one", that is the Emperor, the patricians or landed gentry, and the people or plebeians represented in the Senate; and all Romans had particular rights and obligations as citizens. The chief citizenship duty was to militarily defend Rome, and in both Greece and Rome people were expected to have good character, and to be concerned about the ills of society and have an interest in public affairs.
In Jamaica the full precepts of citizenship as rights, duties, and responsibilities are things that came late to the majority of Jamaicans only over the past 50 years. During the period of slavery the majority had duties and responsibilities to the slave owners, but no rights recognisable in law. Emancipation brought certain basic civil rights to the majority, such as the right to life and liberty in particular the right to sell their labour power for wages. But it was only after the adoption of Universal Adult Suffrage in 1944 that all adult Jamaicans obtained the right to vote, which is the legal right to participate in the Government of their country.
While Jamaicans became aware of their rights after 1944, there was no concomitant programme to educate the people about their duties and responsibilities as citizens. Before 1944 they knew they were obligated to pay taxes and obey the law, but education about the more voluntaristic duties of citizenship such as monitoring the Government and actively participating in public affairs was not systematically inculcated.
Jamaicans for the most part "delegated" their responsibilities and especially their expectations of citizenship onto the new plural institutions the political parties and the trade unions that came into being after 1938. The trade unions were delegated the responsibilities of securing greater wages and fringe benefits; and the political parties with maintaining law and order, generating economic opportunities, and interfacing with the rest of the world. Rather than duties and responsibilities, Jamaicans rested in and were encouraged in the expectation to await the delivery of benefits.
This has been a very costly delegation by the people. The politicians have, for the most part, abused the people's trust and the power and authority reposed in them, and shattered the nation's expectations. So much so, that one of the central preoccupations of Jamaicans today is how to gain control of our governance processes and systems. The hope is that constitutional and institutional reform will enable the people to reassert their sovereignty in society. But unless they are willing to back that up with active citizenship and resolute character, even the best constitution and institutions will again fall prey to misuse and abuse.
CITIZENSHIP CHARACTER
Until they fell into decadence, the Romans were noted for their adherence to the simple verities honesty, hard work and rugged simplicity. The Greeks for their part, were noted for their rationality and high-mindedness. The Americans with their plain-spoken directness remind of the Romans, but differ in their consumerist definition of the good life. All of these people have built great civilisations in which the 'character' of their citizens has played a notable part in keeping their societies orderly and well-administered.
Jamaicans are noted for their resourcefulness and drive, but many of the traits manifested by our national heroes unselfish determination, courage, willingness to take a stand for right, have been missing from the behaviour of Jamaicans for much of the period since Independence. How else do we explain the growth of political violence; garrison communities; and political and bureaucratic corruption. This social decay cannot be entirely blamed on the three or four hundred politicians we have elected since Independence. Too many qualified Jamaicans have decided to vote with their feet (that is, migrate); and among the 25,000 national leaders honoured from all quarters since Independence, many have been anything but leaders.
While I have no doubt that many of the honourees have been nation-builders in the Norman Manley sense of the word, too many have been narrowly focused professionals. Others have been dutiful sycophants, reliable tribalists; muted accommodationists and self-promoting careerists. The fact that none of our reputable dispensers of honours have found it is necessary to recognise the character, and work of a Wilmot Perkins over the past 25 years, nor that of Dr. Carolyn Gomes over the past five years speaks volumes about the characteristics and values that are being elevated for national recognition and emulation.
Nation building requires more than excellence in a professional field. It starts with love of country and requires character, courage and a broader social concern than often manifested among many of our so-called leaders. While we surely need to recognise and honour personal achievement, we probably need to consider controlling the plethora of these awards considering our poor performance in nation-building. Otherwise, I think we run the risk of appearing like the caricature of a Banana Republic, substituting pomp and circumstance for performance, and possibly confusing our young people that form may be more significant than substance.>
Earl M. Bartley is an economist and businessman. You can send your comments to adapapa@cwjamaica.com
