Edward Seaga, Contributor

This is the first general election in 50 years in which I will not be participating. My involvement began with the Federal Election of 1958 and the general election in 1959, where my efforts were in writing broadcasts and other back-room work. Thereafter, I was involved in all 11 national elections on the front line, including the federal referendum in 1961.

I am not involved on this occasion because, after nearly 50 years of campaigning, far more than anyone else, I have earned the right to take a rest from active politics.

I had responsibility for leading the Jamaica Labour Party in seven general elections. We won two and lost five. This was roughly the same as the People's National Party under Norman Manley. They won two and lost six, including the federal election in 1958 and the referendum in 1961. Local government elections are not included.

Party manifestos

The country is about to face another general election, on August 27. There are complaints that information is lacking on what plans the parties have for improving the state of the country if they win. The expectation is that party manifestos will soon be published full of promises and statements of intentions. The truth is very few people will read them. Jamaica is not a literary society; it is an oral one, passing on information by the spoken word. The spoken word is transmitted in speech and news items through radio and television. But it is the political platform that serves as the best means of communication to the general public.

This presents a problem. Language has to be tailored to the level of understanding of the people. This means using catchphrases, buzzwords and street language. Automatically, this determines what type of subjects can be addressed. It rules out complex arguments on issues, unless the arguments are down to their simplest common denominators.

Few public speakers can handle this type of presentation and still be effective even with the limitations of language. To present the issue of rich and poor which has so many ramifications, I sloganised it in 1961 using a known phrase, "the haves and have-nots". It became a catchphrase with the people. Michael Manley spoke to his reform on the status of children in a simple, direct, much-quoted statement in 1974: "No bastard no deh again."

Party slogans try to encapsulate the single most embracing issue of an election. 'Better Mus' Come' was the message of the PNP in the 1972 general election. As a song, the composer was writing about his own condition, not about the national situation on which Manley was speaking. But the PNP got approval from the composer, Delroy Wilson, to use it and they did so effectively. The JLP used 'Deliverance' as a song and slogan with effectiveness in the 1980 campaign.

Songs are also used to liven campaign meetings based on the lyrics, melodies and rhythms. An unexpected turn occurred in the North East St. Ann by-election in March, 2001. I heard a song being played one night while on the platform. The melody was catchy and, most of all, the rhythm was exciting. I asked Desmond McKenzie about it. He told me it was called 'Chi Chi Man'. The lyrics were not clear to me. I don't usually listen much to lyrics as, with exception of Bob Marley, the words are usually trite.

I told Desmond to use it to liven up the crowd even though I was advised that the tune had already been around as a hit for some time. I only found out more than halfway through the campaign that the lyrics of the song were referring to homosexuals. Worse than that, people were using it to refer to a specific politician.

By that time, it was driven by popular demand and could not be withdrawn. Since then, I have listened more closely to the lyrics of songs. I have even begun to read the messages on greeting cards.

Many persons who are generally from a background where information can be appreciated and understood without mixing it with entertainment, or reducing it to slogans, or catchphrases, condemn this type of electioneering and form of communication. They are undoubtedly ignorant of the power of popular culture.

The most effective means of transmitting any campaign message is through music and slogans. Better yet, when young people are the promoters and respondents. It was western music permeating the Iron Curtain countries and exciting the youth that provided a major part of the dynamic driving force that brought down the Berlin wall without firing one shot, after everything else had been tried.

That same type of campaigning is being applied now on a global scale. A series of giant Live Earth concerts are being staged across the globe: New York, London, Tokyo, Sydney, Kyoto, Hamburg, Johannesburg and Rio de Janeiro carrying a campaign on the environmental issue of global warming. Its success can be measured by the massive crowds in stadiums and parks.

Some of the concerts run for 24 hours, with celebrities and top artistes making appearances or giving valuable support by participating. What is the composition of the crowd? Young people. The message about the dangers of global warming has had little popular traction even though former Vice President of the United States, Al Gore, has been lecturing at frenetic pace across the globe on this topic. The issue is now being driven home to millions by the combination of music and the enthusiasm of young people.

Class snobbery

Of course, it is partly because of class snobbery why those who can handle the written word sneer at th methods used by others who digest information in a different manner. The snobs are correct in preferring issues to be discussed by reading, writing and debating, because these are the most thorough way to ventilate any issue so that decisions can be made on what support to give or withhold.

In countries where the society has a literate tradition, there is a better understanding of the main issues which affect the country. This is a necessity if true democracy, not a fictitious version, is to prevail. If the people are ignorant of issues they can easily be duped into misplacing their support by entertaining and enticing them into 'feel good' situations which have a strong shortterm impact. It has happened in Jamaica on more than one occasion. Perhaps this is a good reason for keeping the electorate ignorant.

The other major factor in voter preference is the element of 'caring'. To the poor, who make up more than 70 per cent of the electorate, this factor is most meaningful to them. 'Caring' is not to be interpreted literally. It is a loose concept which embraces personal care, but goes beyond that to the establishment of a bond of understanding, 'roots' understanding, and a commitment to the welfare of the poor. This is the mantra of the poor.

Likewise, those who have climbed the social ladder and who have an educational background value their own kind and focus their decision making on advancing the educated and on educational upliftment. This is the value that coalesces much of middle-class support in politics.

Each social class group in Jamaica has its own cultural preference as to how they understand and what they understand. These differences make up the cultural mix of our electoral system.

Electoral preferences based on class are perhaps the strongest determinant on how the electorate votes in Jamaica. From the very first general election in 1944, the electorat itself on a class basis: the working class and small farmers mainly followed Alexander Bustamante, while those with education followed Norman Manley. The result was a one-sided victory for Bustamante which convinced Manley that he needed much more support from workers and farmers.

Once this was done, the JLP and PNP shared the low income electorate but the PNP still maintained dominant support from the middle class. The JLP picked up support from the upper income group which, of course, while powerful financially was small in numbers. The other major shift was the penetration of the upper middle class where there was very little previous support for the JLP, by strategising to split that class group in the 1970s. Based on Michael Manley's radical socialist rhetoric and fervent opposition to socialism by the JLP,some 50 per cent of the upper middle class swung to the JLP where that group found more common ground.

The class structure at present, based on a recent Bill Johnson poll, shows the results of the shifting alliances:

A neat breakdown is: