Tweet
As in every other society on the planet, this whole matter of socialization is vitally important. It appears, however, at least in my opinion, that the common agents of socialization in Jamdown (family, school, community, church, etc.) have to a great extent failed over the past several decades.
Unfortunately (again, in my opinion), Wignall’s third category seems to be the stereotyped view of the average Jamaican held by other people in the Caribbean and the Americas (“Is the typical Jamaican the boisterous one finding no benefits in basic decency, inviting a hustle, a scuffle and willing to subvert the state by utilising all that the slimy underbelly of the society makes available on a daily basis?”) I sincerely hope I am incorrect in this view.
Decoding the typical Jamaican
WIGNALL'S WORLD
Mark Wignall
Sunday, May 31, 2009
A country's character is defined not by the behaviour of its elites but by the everyday motions of what is called 'the common people'.
The extent to which the behaviour of the common people either debases or lifts the reputation of the country will in turn define the quality not just of the country's day-to-day affairs but more importantly its future.
To the population at large, all of a country's affairs, including its social and economic motions, are choreographed by the political directorate. It is, however, important to recognise that where significant distance exists between winning elections and delivering quality governance, where this increases over time, at some stage the country loses its direction and it is the culture that survives the best in such chaos which will tend to define the 'typical' person of that country.
Any class or mode of behaviour which evolves in this broken system will be the one which recognises the utility value of bad manners and the uncivil approach; pushing to the front of the line; paying or accepting a bribe; seeking violent, kangaroo justice; and having no strong nationalistic feeling or the urge to be a good neighbour to a fellow Jamaican.
Is the typical Jamaican the one who recognises the treasured ideal of father and mother in harmony, responsible parenthood, quality work ethic and education of children, acceptable civic responsibilities and respect for the environment?
Is the typical Jamaican an uptown social maven loudly chasing lavish creature comforts and proclaiming highest integrity while covertly subverting the state at all levels through powerful contacts?
Is the typical Jamaican the boisterous one finding no benefits in basic decency, inviting a hustle, a scuffle and willing to subvert the state by utilising all that the slimy underbelly of the society makes available on a daily basis?
Is the typical Jamaican the person with a mid-level education always aiming for more and trying to contribute in his or her small way?
Or is the typical Jamaican an idea still without shape and ably assisted by a belief in the most conveniently available vogue?
Much of what makes us Jamaicans comes at us, in our childhood, our teens, young adulthood, from different directions and through differing modalities. Fairly sound parenting will define the time, amount and method of exposure. Whether it is simply good manners, the expression of our culture or the very delicate subject of sex education.
As example, I believe sex education ought to fall under a broader palette known as parenting. If one is a good parent, one will know and appreciate the timing and the graduated content of sexual matters.
In this country, which has a high incidence of unreported rapes, the typical Jamaican, still undefined, is a dunce in these matters. Still too many of our young men believe that the typical Jamaican man must get him tings. If it can't be had by consent, it must be taken.
The typical Jamaican man loves the Church, hardly goes there, believes in God, rice-and-peas and chicken, plays dominoes, will have a drink, maybe a smoke and he loves his children and women.
The typical Jamaica woman is smarter than he is, loves the Church, will go there for religious or other solace, cooks for her man, increasingly would prefer not to, is seeking credit for her mobile phone, is always heading to the hair stylist, loves her children, cares for them, loves her man, cares for him and is outgrowing him fast.
We all speak too loudly in discussions, do not read, tend to prefer money to education and knowledge, have family in the US or UK, and we will sell our soul for a US visa. And as much as we share common traits, much of which binds us - the disparities in 'typical' - separates us.
We survive more but care less
It is accepted by the man and woman at street level that Jamaica can't come back, meaning our country is beyond redemption. Increasingly, heinous murders, and even the fire which broke out two Fridays ago at the Armadale Juvenile Correctional Centre and claimed the life of five young girls, occupy no more than a moment's discussion. After that, we mentally wire our brains to make space for the next set of murders and another tragedy.
In the interim, we care only about the man in the mirror and our hustling for the next day.
The care factor of a nation is based on how it treats its young, its elderly and those physically and mentally impaired. I cannot say to what extent the policemen who fired tear gas canisters inside the correctional centre were typical Jamaicans or whether the girls, the survivors who were said to be displaying the extreme in rowdy behaviour, were so too. Indeed, in trying to weave our way through the tragedy, the puzzle, we are left with one main consideration.
As a nation we cannot continue or survive on the trajectory we have seemingly chosen. This is the same nation which had rats gnawing at the feet of the indigent and the infirm when fire struck in May 1980 and claimed the lives of 153 nameless, faceless women at the Eventide Home. We dumped the charcoal that was left of them in a mass grave at Heroes Park as if to somehow declare, 'We have placed them beside heroes'. Now let us get on with the business of killing PNP and JLP.
This is the same nation whose police killed seven young men (who may or may not have been angels) at Braeton in March 2001. We were told that it was a shoot-out between the police and gunmen, yet in hindsight we are forced to ask, after the police had identified the house, had corralled the men so that none could escape, why was tear gas not used (through the thin aluminium louvers), like it was at the Armadale Correctional Centre? Indeed, is there a single instance in which Jamaican policemen have ever used tear gas in situations like the Braeton killings? If the answer is no, it raises another question.
Police shootings and human rights activists can coexist
Only a certified fool would choose not to believe that at times the police concoct shoot-outs or that there are vicious, irredeemable gunmen who will, cornered or no, fire at policemen.
The problem is, increasingly, the profile of the young gunman is beginning to match up with what is seen in many inner-city communities as the typical notional culture among the young. Even if a youngster has no intention of ever firing a gun, the gunman is still seen by him as part hero, part hopeless, lost soul foraging for what is deemed, fi him own. The question is, do Jamaican policemen set out to kill more than apprehend?
If Jamaica had more pockets of normality or viability than the wide swaths of dysfunctional thinking and behaviour at all levels, the human rights activists and the champion of police killings would coexist. A normal society begins by accepting the right of each and every citizen. We have not reached there yet.
A normal society recognises the power of the state to do good and its potential to use that same power to turn in on its own. In other words, no matter how vicious our gunmen may become, humaneness forces us to ascribe rights to that monster, just in case he turns out to be an angel.
Our new minister of national security, Dwight Nelson, a typical Jamaican, in the sense that his roots are working class, and it was through education that he rose, has been in the news lately. Addressing Police Federation delegates last Wednesday, he has seemingly given the police carte blanche to continue in the same vein as before. He has told them that they can rest assured that he will make available to them the best lawyers to defend them whenever conflicts arise in shoot-outs.
Sounding like the typical politician who must pander to his audience, Mr Nelson must have been aware of the travesty of justice that was perpetrated in the Janice Allen case and the very recent ruling. Did he have to suck up to the policemen in such a way and in the process, slap in the face the efforts of Janice Allen's mother, Millicent Forbes, to seek justice, now totally denied to her.?
Mr Nelson could have told them 'my ministry will go overboard to protect and support you when you are on duty, doing your work and facing up to young killers with guns. But to you who want to shoot first, shoot second, then lie and call it shoot-out, I will act with the same strength to expel you from the force'.
The hard fact is that murderers are difficult to pin down in Jamaica. There is about a 70 per cent chance that a murderer will not be caught or convicted. Then, even if convicted, although the penalty for wanton murder is hanging, in reality, hanging is off the books because lawyers use the system to foul it up so that the convicted remains on death row for more than five years. Based on the Privy Council ruling on Pratt and Morgan, life imprisonment trips in after the five-year period.
The police know this, so if one gun is found in a young man's belt and he is in a party of four, the police will kill all four.
Minister Nelson's ministry has no money to pay the policemen, but in recent times it seems that the Police Federation has read him the riot act behind closed doors. It's either that or the minister is simply following the beat of a nation still not sated in its blood lust.
He says Minister Montague must explain more
A reader comments on the recent 75-member Jamaican delegation to the Fifth Commonwealth Local Government Conference and State Minister Bobby Montague's explanation of the size and the visit. Many of the criticisms I received centred on the possibility that any gains that could have been had by way of face-to-face conference contacts and involvement in workshops could have been sourced through other means in this high-tech world.
One writer, a manager in accounting, tore to shreds my column last Thursday, 'Was the Bahamas trip worth it?' Said he: 'I will agree that from a cost/benefit analysis the J$10M cost of the trip seems justifiable, however this debate is much more than cost/benefit and cannot be debated only from that standpoint; what of prudence, could what was achieved have been done with a smaller delegation?
'The minister seems to justify the Microsoft Tracking Software gift as one of the benefits for this massive delegation, but how many Jamaican delegates participated or was necessary to participate in that workshop, granted there was such a workshop to begin with; let's not discount the bar operator's remarks because she made a valid point. Would the Microsoft Tracking Software gift to Jamaica happen without participation in the conference? If so, it must be discounted in the cost/benefit equation.
'One of the best areas of defence in the minister's explanation of the large number of those who attended was the modular structure of the Local Government Conference. According to him, "If the conference was designed to accommodate a lesser number of people attending, it probably would have lasted for well in excess of a week. Many of the workshops (seven per day) were held at different venues at the same time".
'Mark, the comparison you cited of the Jamaica contingent to that of the other nations are very telling, the question then becomes why such great disparity?
'Did the other nations not have a need to participate in all workshops offered, and if so why not? If others did participate in all sessions, how was this achieved with a smaller delegation, are they smarter than our folks?
'Mark, did you ask the minister if there was a need for Jamaica's participation in all sessions, or did Jamaica (maybe unlike the other nations) fail to do the necessary research to determine what workshops were important to its particular needs and plan accordingly?
'There were a total of 28 workshops; did Nigeria and South Africa with 43 and 38 delegates respectively possibly send a single delegate, or none at all to some workshops considered less important, but multiple delegates to workshops deemed critical and offering greater benefits to their respective country's needs? Let's hope the minister will publish a list of benefits gained for all 28 workshops.
'To a question asked by a radio journalist, the minister said: "The conference began at eight in the mornings and ended eight at nights. If some people wanted to have a good time and spend a little of the per diem, that was the wrong conference to go to. There was just no time for anything other than work."
'Utter rubbish! Isn't it part of the Jamaican norm to leave home for a good time after midnight or more likely at 2:00 am, and return home at daybreak then leave for work, church, school, etc?
'Was it worth it to send a 75-member delegation to the Fifth Commonwealth Local Government Conference, in the process spending $10 million? I believe it was.
'Mark, you seem to only look at this from a cost/benefit analysis, and that, my friend, is flawed. By any measure, a delegation of 75 for a four-day conference is irresponsible spending, considering the economic climate, Jamaica's massive debt problem, and wretched financial position.'
observemark@gmail.com
Unfortunately (again, in my opinion), Wignall’s third category seems to be the stereotyped view of the average Jamaican held by other people in the Caribbean and the Americas (“Is the typical Jamaican the boisterous one finding no benefits in basic decency, inviting a hustle, a scuffle and willing to subvert the state by utilising all that the slimy underbelly of the society makes available on a daily basis?”) I sincerely hope I am incorrect in this view.
Decoding the typical Jamaican
WIGNALL'S WORLD
Mark Wignall
Sunday, May 31, 2009
A country's character is defined not by the behaviour of its elites but by the everyday motions of what is called 'the common people'.
The extent to which the behaviour of the common people either debases or lifts the reputation of the country will in turn define the quality not just of the country's day-to-day affairs but more importantly its future.
To the population at large, all of a country's affairs, including its social and economic motions, are choreographed by the political directorate. It is, however, important to recognise that where significant distance exists between winning elections and delivering quality governance, where this increases over time, at some stage the country loses its direction and it is the culture that survives the best in such chaos which will tend to define the 'typical' person of that country.
Any class or mode of behaviour which evolves in this broken system will be the one which recognises the utility value of bad manners and the uncivil approach; pushing to the front of the line; paying or accepting a bribe; seeking violent, kangaroo justice; and having no strong nationalistic feeling or the urge to be a good neighbour to a fellow Jamaican.
Is the typical Jamaican the one who recognises the treasured ideal of father and mother in harmony, responsible parenthood, quality work ethic and education of children, acceptable civic responsibilities and respect for the environment?
Is the typical Jamaican an uptown social maven loudly chasing lavish creature comforts and proclaiming highest integrity while covertly subverting the state at all levels through powerful contacts?
Is the typical Jamaican the boisterous one finding no benefits in basic decency, inviting a hustle, a scuffle and willing to subvert the state by utilising all that the slimy underbelly of the society makes available on a daily basis?
Is the typical Jamaican the person with a mid-level education always aiming for more and trying to contribute in his or her small way?
Or is the typical Jamaican an idea still without shape and ably assisted by a belief in the most conveniently available vogue?
Much of what makes us Jamaicans comes at us, in our childhood, our teens, young adulthood, from different directions and through differing modalities. Fairly sound parenting will define the time, amount and method of exposure. Whether it is simply good manners, the expression of our culture or the very delicate subject of sex education.
As example, I believe sex education ought to fall under a broader palette known as parenting. If one is a good parent, one will know and appreciate the timing and the graduated content of sexual matters.
In this country, which has a high incidence of unreported rapes, the typical Jamaican, still undefined, is a dunce in these matters. Still too many of our young men believe that the typical Jamaican man must get him tings. If it can't be had by consent, it must be taken.
The typical Jamaican man loves the Church, hardly goes there, believes in God, rice-and-peas and chicken, plays dominoes, will have a drink, maybe a smoke and he loves his children and women.
The typical Jamaica woman is smarter than he is, loves the Church, will go there for religious or other solace, cooks for her man, increasingly would prefer not to, is seeking credit for her mobile phone, is always heading to the hair stylist, loves her children, cares for them, loves her man, cares for him and is outgrowing him fast.
We all speak too loudly in discussions, do not read, tend to prefer money to education and knowledge, have family in the US or UK, and we will sell our soul for a US visa. And as much as we share common traits, much of which binds us - the disparities in 'typical' - separates us.
We survive more but care less
It is accepted by the man and woman at street level that Jamaica can't come back, meaning our country is beyond redemption. Increasingly, heinous murders, and even the fire which broke out two Fridays ago at the Armadale Juvenile Correctional Centre and claimed the life of five young girls, occupy no more than a moment's discussion. After that, we mentally wire our brains to make space for the next set of murders and another tragedy.
In the interim, we care only about the man in the mirror and our hustling for the next day.
The care factor of a nation is based on how it treats its young, its elderly and those physically and mentally impaired. I cannot say to what extent the policemen who fired tear gas canisters inside the correctional centre were typical Jamaicans or whether the girls, the survivors who were said to be displaying the extreme in rowdy behaviour, were so too. Indeed, in trying to weave our way through the tragedy, the puzzle, we are left with one main consideration.
As a nation we cannot continue or survive on the trajectory we have seemingly chosen. This is the same nation which had rats gnawing at the feet of the indigent and the infirm when fire struck in May 1980 and claimed the lives of 153 nameless, faceless women at the Eventide Home. We dumped the charcoal that was left of them in a mass grave at Heroes Park as if to somehow declare, 'We have placed them beside heroes'. Now let us get on with the business of killing PNP and JLP.
This is the same nation whose police killed seven young men (who may or may not have been angels) at Braeton in March 2001. We were told that it was a shoot-out between the police and gunmen, yet in hindsight we are forced to ask, after the police had identified the house, had corralled the men so that none could escape, why was tear gas not used (through the thin aluminium louvers), like it was at the Armadale Correctional Centre? Indeed, is there a single instance in which Jamaican policemen have ever used tear gas in situations like the Braeton killings? If the answer is no, it raises another question.
Police shootings and human rights activists can coexist
Only a certified fool would choose not to believe that at times the police concoct shoot-outs or that there are vicious, irredeemable gunmen who will, cornered or no, fire at policemen.
The problem is, increasingly, the profile of the young gunman is beginning to match up with what is seen in many inner-city communities as the typical notional culture among the young. Even if a youngster has no intention of ever firing a gun, the gunman is still seen by him as part hero, part hopeless, lost soul foraging for what is deemed, fi him own. The question is, do Jamaican policemen set out to kill more than apprehend?
If Jamaica had more pockets of normality or viability than the wide swaths of dysfunctional thinking and behaviour at all levels, the human rights activists and the champion of police killings would coexist. A normal society begins by accepting the right of each and every citizen. We have not reached there yet.
A normal society recognises the power of the state to do good and its potential to use that same power to turn in on its own. In other words, no matter how vicious our gunmen may become, humaneness forces us to ascribe rights to that monster, just in case he turns out to be an angel.
Our new minister of national security, Dwight Nelson, a typical Jamaican, in the sense that his roots are working class, and it was through education that he rose, has been in the news lately. Addressing Police Federation delegates last Wednesday, he has seemingly given the police carte blanche to continue in the same vein as before. He has told them that they can rest assured that he will make available to them the best lawyers to defend them whenever conflicts arise in shoot-outs.
Sounding like the typical politician who must pander to his audience, Mr Nelson must have been aware of the travesty of justice that was perpetrated in the Janice Allen case and the very recent ruling. Did he have to suck up to the policemen in such a way and in the process, slap in the face the efforts of Janice Allen's mother, Millicent Forbes, to seek justice, now totally denied to her.?
Mr Nelson could have told them 'my ministry will go overboard to protect and support you when you are on duty, doing your work and facing up to young killers with guns. But to you who want to shoot first, shoot second, then lie and call it shoot-out, I will act with the same strength to expel you from the force'.
The hard fact is that murderers are difficult to pin down in Jamaica. There is about a 70 per cent chance that a murderer will not be caught or convicted. Then, even if convicted, although the penalty for wanton murder is hanging, in reality, hanging is off the books because lawyers use the system to foul it up so that the convicted remains on death row for more than five years. Based on the Privy Council ruling on Pratt and Morgan, life imprisonment trips in after the five-year period.
The police know this, so if one gun is found in a young man's belt and he is in a party of four, the police will kill all four.
Minister Nelson's ministry has no money to pay the policemen, but in recent times it seems that the Police Federation has read him the riot act behind closed doors. It's either that or the minister is simply following the beat of a nation still not sated in its blood lust.
He says Minister Montague must explain more
A reader comments on the recent 75-member Jamaican delegation to the Fifth Commonwealth Local Government Conference and State Minister Bobby Montague's explanation of the size and the visit. Many of the criticisms I received centred on the possibility that any gains that could have been had by way of face-to-face conference contacts and involvement in workshops could have been sourced through other means in this high-tech world.
One writer, a manager in accounting, tore to shreds my column last Thursday, 'Was the Bahamas trip worth it?' Said he: 'I will agree that from a cost/benefit analysis the J$10M cost of the trip seems justifiable, however this debate is much more than cost/benefit and cannot be debated only from that standpoint; what of prudence, could what was achieved have been done with a smaller delegation?
'The minister seems to justify the Microsoft Tracking Software gift as one of the benefits for this massive delegation, but how many Jamaican delegates participated or was necessary to participate in that workshop, granted there was such a workshop to begin with; let's not discount the bar operator's remarks because she made a valid point. Would the Microsoft Tracking Software gift to Jamaica happen without participation in the conference? If so, it must be discounted in the cost/benefit equation.
'One of the best areas of defence in the minister's explanation of the large number of those who attended was the modular structure of the Local Government Conference. According to him, "If the conference was designed to accommodate a lesser number of people attending, it probably would have lasted for well in excess of a week. Many of the workshops (seven per day) were held at different venues at the same time".
'Mark, the comparison you cited of the Jamaica contingent to that of the other nations are very telling, the question then becomes why such great disparity?
'Did the other nations not have a need to participate in all workshops offered, and if so why not? If others did participate in all sessions, how was this achieved with a smaller delegation, are they smarter than our folks?
'Mark, did you ask the minister if there was a need for Jamaica's participation in all sessions, or did Jamaica (maybe unlike the other nations) fail to do the necessary research to determine what workshops were important to its particular needs and plan accordingly?
'There were a total of 28 workshops; did Nigeria and South Africa with 43 and 38 delegates respectively possibly send a single delegate, or none at all to some workshops considered less important, but multiple delegates to workshops deemed critical and offering greater benefits to their respective country's needs? Let's hope the minister will publish a list of benefits gained for all 28 workshops.
'To a question asked by a radio journalist, the minister said: "The conference began at eight in the mornings and ended eight at nights. If some people wanted to have a good time and spend a little of the per diem, that was the wrong conference to go to. There was just no time for anything other than work."
'Utter rubbish! Isn't it part of the Jamaican norm to leave home for a good time after midnight or more likely at 2:00 am, and return home at daybreak then leave for work, church, school, etc?
'Was it worth it to send a 75-member delegation to the Fifth Commonwealth Local Government Conference, in the process spending $10 million? I believe it was.
'Mark, you seem to only look at this from a cost/benefit analysis, and that, my friend, is flawed. By any measure, a delegation of 75 for a four-day conference is irresponsible spending, considering the economic climate, Jamaica's massive debt problem, and wretched financial position.'
observemark@gmail.com