Ian Boyne Political violence can affect election outcomes. Not only in terms of scaring off voters in particular constituencies but, perhaps more important, in terms of turning potential voters against the party perceived to be behind the violence. Therefore, sinister games are sometimes played to manipulate public opinion.
The political parties trade accusations in the hope of gaining advantage, clearing themselves and muddying the other side. Knowing that politicians are not inexperienced in the dirty tricks department, and that the stakes of this election are high, my advice to you is to adopt a sceptical attitude toward the reports of violence. We are operating with very limited information and are at the mercy of the politicians as well as a police force not unknown to make serious errors.
We should all de-incentivise the use of political violence to sway public opinion by ensuring that we make no decision on who to support, based on reports of political violence. It's too problematic to assess, and even before I heard that bishop from St. Catherine on Nationwide at Five contradict himself plainly, I knew it was risky to come to a judgement as to which party was responsible for which act of violence based on reports, even so-called "eyewitness reports".
Issues-less contest
The problem with this election is that it is turning out to be an issues-less contest and so other matters are taking centre stage. The elections are being reduced to a personality contest. This is not to say that personalities are not important or that leaders don't make a difference. But the development challenges which face Jamaica as a small, import-dependent, debt-ridden economy in a globalised world are too huge to be reduced to just an issue of personality.
Leadership can enhance or exacerbate certain problems, but with the best leadership and most pleasant personality in the world, this country will not achieve sustainable growth unless certain policies are pursued.
Playing cat-and-mouse
But the two parties are playing cat-and-mouse with their manifestos, not givingus adequate time to study and critique them. But why should they, anyway? They know we don't read and are impatient with ideas. So even if the manifestos did come out early, very few would read them, and of those who do, very little independent thinking would be applied to the analysis.
Elections are about winning votes – at all costs. Emotive issues will always trump intellectual ones. Violence as a tool of political strategy can be very effective. Especially in a political culture like ours. I wrote recently that while we have electoral democracy and a Western democratic political system, we have not deeply imbibed democratic values.
Our deep partisanship and tribalism mitigate against that. Our intolerance, impatience with dissent and disrespect for other people's opinions all militate against democratic virtues. Our penchant for political violence is just a symptom of a deeper cultural and systemic problem. We are hostile to a truly pluralistic society. It's not surprising that hoodlums would hurl rocks and other missiles at passing motorcades of political opponents; that political parties have to be deathly concerned about campaigning within a few miles of each other, and that people can't campaign freely anywhere they choose in a given constituency. A society which has truly internalised democratic values would have no such problems.
Culture of victimisation, tribalism and poverty
The roots of our political violence are our bigotry, small-mindedness, a culture of victimisation, tribalism and poverty. I hear people say all the time, in absolute wonderment, that they can't understand how the poor people fighting for politicians are so stupid and idiotic not to know that doesn't make sense.
"Why the politicians dem can hug up and drink together at Parliament and why the Prime Minister can kiss up Derrick Smith and others and yet the PNP and JLP people dem fighting and killing off one another? Dem too damn fool." No, they are not really damn fools. Portia Simpson Miller, Derrick Smith, Bruce Golding and Peter Phillips can always be cordial and jovial when they meet socially because their bread is buttered. If they lose power, they are not going to starve. Their relatives are not going to be on the street begging bread.
They can afford the luxury of cordiality and conviviality because their status ensures that the worst won't overtake them. Sure, they want to have the power and the glory. They want their party to win. But a loss for them would not be as disastrous as it would be for the poor, marginalised, unskilled and socially-unconnected masses.
They are not fighting for any politician when they use violence against political opponents. They are fighting for themselves and their families to protect their food, for they live in a tribalised society in which victory for the other party might mean slow death to them. So they are not stupid and fool-fool when they fight. Dem protecting dem food.
What we need to do is to create a society of equity, justice and respect for human rights so that people of all classes know that no matter which party wins, their rights will not be trampled on and they won't be victimised.
They need to know that their families will not be shafted just because their political party is out of power. Political leaders don't have total control over their followers. So they can sign all kinds of paper proclaiming peace and all sorts of code of conduct. And they can be very sincere, too. But the youth on the corner who knows that his goose is cooked if the opposing party wins has a very deep and personal stake in seeing that that party does not win.
Changes to thepower structures
His candidate can always sign code of conduct. For that candidate has his education, his connections, etc., to take him through after a defeat. The youth has nothing except his political connections. So he must fight for that at all costs. If we really deplore political violence, we must look to bring about fundamental changes to the power structures in Jamaica.
One of my deep regrets about this election is that some of the truly innovative and challenging ideas for constitutional reform that Bruce Golding has put on the table are not being discussed. For these ideas confront in a fundamental way some of the key challenges which face this country in terms of the use of power and its distribution. His own party and marketers are not pushing those ideas, focusing instead on corruption and the ‘PNP mash up Jamaica’ mantra.
I agree that that works emotively far better than the constitutional agenda which might excite middle-class people like me. So they run with that. Elections are about holding the masses, not appealing to the few who want to focus on ‘high-brow intellectual issues’.
But that is why we will always be talking about the symptoms of our political disease: political violence, gang warfare, extortion, and inner-city degeneration. For it takes too much thinking to really concentrate on the underlying structural issues which must be dealt with.
This election is being run like a parochial election. Listen to the boring radio and television interviews with the candidates talking about provincial issues. Each making promises to do with education, health, employment and crime without apparently realising what set of national policies and programmes are required for that. There are no big, overarching issues in this election. It could well be a parish council election, and that is why the media are concentrating so much on individual constituencies.
The Political Project has run out of steam. There is no excitement to it for we are experiencing the death of ideas. Step up the music and the hype. Personality contest coupled with parochial, constituency issues. Throw in another P – prophecy – and really nice up the place. So the elections have been reduced to the contest between the driver and the one who is still on the gully side, judging from the horrendous dancehall hits chosen by the parties to market themselves. (One driver, celebrating the drug trade and the other praising the ‘gangsta on the gully side’ – yet our two leaders proclaim their commitment to values and attitudes!)
The reported criminal threat against the country's newsman par excellence, Cliff Hughes, and his rising star Emily Crooks is not surprising, though abominable, in this tribalised and decadent political culture. We detest opposition. We abhor a multiplicity of views. So we seek to persecute those who don't toe the line. And there is no outcry, for as a people we see things through partisan eyes, not from a sense of shared values. Our democratic foundation is tenuous.
Democratic deficit
Until journalists, other professionals and ordinary Jamaicans can feel free to criticise, blast anyone or any party without fear of recrimination, there is a democratic deficit. We have made progress, mark you. In former times some of the things we journalists write and broadcast would be censored or punished by those in authority.
But we have nothing to be complacent about. A journalist like Cliff Hughes is a national treasure to be protected and honoured, not persecuted. He must be free to attack the People's National Party without any fear whatsoever from any quarters.
Even if Hughes was objectively wrong in what he reported on the constituency polls, he is a journalist of integrity who would not knowingly misrepresent. Say he was set up. Even say he might have been careless. But don't question his integrity when his history of fairness, balance and devotion to the highest journalistic principles is unassailable.
We are too willing to ostracise and punish in this country. Not all of us use the gun, but we do violence daily to democratic principles. ‘Butch’ Stewart now describes as "despicable" what he sees as attempts to use advertising dollar to force compliance, but it was this same ‘Butch’ Stewart who pulled his ads from Perkins on Line when that fearless journalist Wilmot Perkins sharply criticised his management of Air Jamaica.
In Jamaica we don't generally support principles. We support partisanship.
■ Ian Boyne is a veteran journalist who may be reached at ianboyne1@yahoo.com.
