Tweet
Shame and rotten fish
Published: Friday | March 4, 2011 0 Comments
Both our two main political parties are going to come out of the Manatt-Dudus commission of enquiry smelling like rotten fish, and I hope the televising of the proceedings is causing more and more Jamaicans to hold their noses. So often when I hear our corrupt political system discussed, someone pipes up: "They are not the same; one is much worse than the other!" And that is always true; the party in power always has more opportunity and resources to be corrupt, and the label 'more corrupt' switches from side to side as government switches from party to party.
We need to reflect that to vote in Jamaica is to choose the lesser of two evils. Which means that when we vote, we are choosing evil - lesser or greater - which, I guess, is why so many people of conscience have dropped out of the political system. Over the years, I have asked friends of mine who have aligned themselves with one political party or the other, how their consciences can allow them to join an organisation that creates and supports garrisons and dons, and all that goes along with it: political thuggery (usually involving guns), turf wars usually involving violence, swift retribution administered by dons to residents' complaints, rent-free occupation of government housing, free use of public utilities by garrison residents, government contracts to party favourites, and so on. Their answer is always that they didn't have anything to do with garrisons and dons, and didn't know anything about them.
Corresponding arrangements
But surely this is a convenient lapse of consciousness, for these garrisons and their corresponding arrangements are not peripheral to Jamaican politics, but absolutely central; both parties, while in office, have taken steps to create new political garrisons, and to support those already created, and neither party has taken any concrete steps to dismantle any of them, despite the many calls to do so; clearly, they consider garrisons to be of the highest importance. It really is not possible for someone to support a party and to disregard and ignore such a main activity of the party, which can only be described as evil.
The close links bet-ween political parties and criminals is such to have demanded the presence of politicians - even Cabinet ministers - at the funerals of criminals; politicians have been known to publicly thank dons for their assistance in keeping 'the peace'. It should surprise no one if a party in power should suppress evidence obtained by the intelligence arms of the police and military, (including tapes of telephone conversations obtained by wiretaps) that confirmed linkages between politicians and criminals; and to use none of it to lay criminal charges on anyone; this would frustrate the best efforts of decent elements within the police and military to rid the country of gunrunning and drug dealing, and alarm our foreign allies negatively impacted by our peculiar domestic political culture.
State influence
Since it has become the practice for parties in power to use the resources of the state to strengthen the power and standing of these dons, it should not surprise anyone if a party in power should try its utmost to prevent the extradition of one or more of these dons, even to use the resources and influence of the state in the process.
If this has, in fact, happened in Jamaica, things would have come to a sorry pass. The Manatt-Dudus commission of enquiry has been called to find out the truth, and what it is already exposing is the extent both parties are prepared to go to defend their relationship with garrisons and dons, even to denying their existence and their position. Suspicion falls on people in high places to such an extent that it was even necessary to hide the surveillance arrangements from the prime minister and the Cabinet. As I said before, both parties are smelling like rotten fish.
How are we to free ourselves from this rotten political system we have created and perpetuated all on our own? The two main parties have no interest or inclination to liberate us. The private sector is profoundly compromised, as it provides the funds to the parties that support the garrison system. Trying an 'Egypt' or a 'Libya' here in Jamaica would be pointless, as there is no obvious alternative to the two main parties.
The system has to be brought into such local and international shame and disrepute that it cannot continue. Hopefully, this Manatt-Dudus commission of enquiry will make a good start at this.
But how much shame will be enough to cause our politicians and their private-sector supporters to blush? Do they have any capacity for shame?
Peter Espeut is a rural development sociologist.
Published: Friday | March 4, 2011 0 Comments
Both our two main political parties are going to come out of the Manatt-Dudus commission of enquiry smelling like rotten fish, and I hope the televising of the proceedings is causing more and more Jamaicans to hold their noses. So often when I hear our corrupt political system discussed, someone pipes up: "They are not the same; one is much worse than the other!" And that is always true; the party in power always has more opportunity and resources to be corrupt, and the label 'more corrupt' switches from side to side as government switches from party to party.
We need to reflect that to vote in Jamaica is to choose the lesser of two evils. Which means that when we vote, we are choosing evil - lesser or greater - which, I guess, is why so many people of conscience have dropped out of the political system. Over the years, I have asked friends of mine who have aligned themselves with one political party or the other, how their consciences can allow them to join an organisation that creates and supports garrisons and dons, and all that goes along with it: political thuggery (usually involving guns), turf wars usually involving violence, swift retribution administered by dons to residents' complaints, rent-free occupation of government housing, free use of public utilities by garrison residents, government contracts to party favourites, and so on. Their answer is always that they didn't have anything to do with garrisons and dons, and didn't know anything about them.
Corresponding arrangements
But surely this is a convenient lapse of consciousness, for these garrisons and their corresponding arrangements are not peripheral to Jamaican politics, but absolutely central; both parties, while in office, have taken steps to create new political garrisons, and to support those already created, and neither party has taken any concrete steps to dismantle any of them, despite the many calls to do so; clearly, they consider garrisons to be of the highest importance. It really is not possible for someone to support a party and to disregard and ignore such a main activity of the party, which can only be described as evil.
The close links bet-ween political parties and criminals is such to have demanded the presence of politicians - even Cabinet ministers - at the funerals of criminals; politicians have been known to publicly thank dons for their assistance in keeping 'the peace'. It should surprise no one if a party in power should suppress evidence obtained by the intelligence arms of the police and military, (including tapes of telephone conversations obtained by wiretaps) that confirmed linkages between politicians and criminals; and to use none of it to lay criminal charges on anyone; this would frustrate the best efforts of decent elements within the police and military to rid the country of gunrunning and drug dealing, and alarm our foreign allies negatively impacted by our peculiar domestic political culture.
State influence
Since it has become the practice for parties in power to use the resources of the state to strengthen the power and standing of these dons, it should not surprise anyone if a party in power should try its utmost to prevent the extradition of one or more of these dons, even to use the resources and influence of the state in the process.
If this has, in fact, happened in Jamaica, things would have come to a sorry pass. The Manatt-Dudus commission of enquiry has been called to find out the truth, and what it is already exposing is the extent both parties are prepared to go to defend their relationship with garrisons and dons, even to denying their existence and their position. Suspicion falls on people in high places to such an extent that it was even necessary to hide the surveillance arrangements from the prime minister and the Cabinet. As I said before, both parties are smelling like rotten fish.
How are we to free ourselves from this rotten political system we have created and perpetuated all on our own? The two main parties have no interest or inclination to liberate us. The private sector is profoundly compromised, as it provides the funds to the parties that support the garrison system. Trying an 'Egypt' or a 'Libya' here in Jamaica would be pointless, as there is no obvious alternative to the two main parties.
The system has to be brought into such local and international shame and disrepute that it cannot continue. Hopefully, this Manatt-Dudus commission of enquiry will make a good start at this.
But how much shame will be enough to cause our politicians and their private-sector supporters to blush? Do they have any capacity for shame?
Peter Espeut is a rural development sociologist.
Comment