Tweet
Jamaica is poorer without him
Published: Friday | February 17, 2012 Comments 0
By Peter Espeut
Men and women who profoundly challenge the way their society operates are never truly honoured by those in power; with the 20/20 vision of hindsight, later generations look back and are often able to more objectively assess the real contribution of social critics. In Jamaica's case, several of these are national heroes today.
In 1831, Deacon Sam Sharpe planned a peaceful strike to protest slavery which morphed into an armed rebellion; he was executed in 1832, but the episode advanced the cause of Emancipation, which came two years later.
Emancipation did not create a just Jamaican society; Governor Eyre and the Jamaican plantocracy of 1865 condemned Deacons Paul Bogle and George William Gordon for their protests against the unjust social structures of the day, and executed them both.
Even as the 20th century advanced, Jamaica was quite a racist society, where things black and African were held in contempt by lighter-skinned elites who still controlled the country.
Marcus Garvey preached black consciousness and advocated for black political and economic power. He was vilified by the authorities of the day. Norman Manley called him "a positive disgrace", and "a loud-voiced person", and famously invited him to "step outside".
All four of these persecuted gentlemen are national heroes today. Hated by the power structure during their lifetimes, they are now honoured as having made serious contributions to the quality of modern Jamaica. But even with all our heroes, Jamaica is still a sick, unjust society.
I have listened to the accolades being poured on Wilmot Harold Nash Perkins (1931-2012) since his death last week, and I wonder why so many politicians and civic leaders did not accord him more honour while he was alive. I suspect it is for the same reason that those in authority did not honour the gentlemen named above: Motty challenged them and the way they operated; he called them corrupt, and accused them of exploiting and impoverishing the people. He asked too many embarrassing questions.
Passion for justice
Motty had a keen sense of injustice, especially injustice perpetrated by the State against its own people. He used his talk show to make sure that many atrocities would not remain nine-day wonders: remember Agana Barrett; remember Michael Gayle; remember Green Bay; remember Orange Lane.
Motty had a remarkable appreciation of the English language, and of subtle distinctions of meaning. His modus operandi was to take the actual words used by politicians, and to use them to expose what the speaker was really thinking.
Who will ever forget his exegesis of "the law is not a shackle" (P.J. Patterson)? Or "those who play by the rules will always get shafted" (Peter Phillips)? Or "Run wid it!" (Omar Davies)?
With Motty around, politicians had to watch what they said in front of a microphone, for he might record it and replay it, and expose the rubbish that sometimes passes for public political rhetoric.
Motty called devaluation of the Jamaican dollar the Government "putting their hands in the pockets of the Jamaican people". He was happy to repeat that the high interest rate policy was "the greatest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich since the abolition of slavery" (Ronnie Thwaites).
Not having a university degree himself, he referred to the UWI as an "intellectual ghetto", a clever suggestion that, despite the great concentration of academic power in one space, they seemed impoverished of ideas to improve Jamaica, and impotent to make a real difference. What Motty was really doing was thumbing his nose at academia. It is hard to believe that a master's degree or a doctorate would have made Motty sharper. Academia has never thought to recognise this most intellectual of men, this man of letters, this most rational man.
In my view, the high world ranking Jamaica enjoys for press freedom is largely because of him. Any nation that would allow a Motty Perkins to say the things he said on air must have a high degree of press freedom indeed!
Motty was not a sycophant; he was not in the talk-show business to do public relations for the party in power. Those in power hated him, but they could not buy him out, and they couldn't shut him up. He was too careful and too smart to be successfully sued for libel.
And as the political parties take turns dispensing high national honours upon their own, thereby demeaning them, they cannot ignore the fact that the one who profoundly challenged them is held in the highest esteem by the people. We are poorer without him.
Peter Espeut is a sociologist and Roman Catholic deacon. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.
Published: Friday | February 17, 2012 Comments 0
By Peter Espeut
Men and women who profoundly challenge the way their society operates are never truly honoured by those in power; with the 20/20 vision of hindsight, later generations look back and are often able to more objectively assess the real contribution of social critics. In Jamaica's case, several of these are national heroes today.
In 1831, Deacon Sam Sharpe planned a peaceful strike to protest slavery which morphed into an armed rebellion; he was executed in 1832, but the episode advanced the cause of Emancipation, which came two years later.
Emancipation did not create a just Jamaican society; Governor Eyre and the Jamaican plantocracy of 1865 condemned Deacons Paul Bogle and George William Gordon for their protests against the unjust social structures of the day, and executed them both.
Even as the 20th century advanced, Jamaica was quite a racist society, where things black and African were held in contempt by lighter-skinned elites who still controlled the country.
Marcus Garvey preached black consciousness and advocated for black political and economic power. He was vilified by the authorities of the day. Norman Manley called him "a positive disgrace", and "a loud-voiced person", and famously invited him to "step outside".
All four of these persecuted gentlemen are national heroes today. Hated by the power structure during their lifetimes, they are now honoured as having made serious contributions to the quality of modern Jamaica. But even with all our heroes, Jamaica is still a sick, unjust society.
I have listened to the accolades being poured on Wilmot Harold Nash Perkins (1931-2012) since his death last week, and I wonder why so many politicians and civic leaders did not accord him more honour while he was alive. I suspect it is for the same reason that those in authority did not honour the gentlemen named above: Motty challenged them and the way they operated; he called them corrupt, and accused them of exploiting and impoverishing the people. He asked too many embarrassing questions.
Passion for justice
Motty had a keen sense of injustice, especially injustice perpetrated by the State against its own people. He used his talk show to make sure that many atrocities would not remain nine-day wonders: remember Agana Barrett; remember Michael Gayle; remember Green Bay; remember Orange Lane.
Motty had a remarkable appreciation of the English language, and of subtle distinctions of meaning. His modus operandi was to take the actual words used by politicians, and to use them to expose what the speaker was really thinking.
Who will ever forget his exegesis of "the law is not a shackle" (P.J. Patterson)? Or "those who play by the rules will always get shafted" (Peter Phillips)? Or "Run wid it!" (Omar Davies)?
With Motty around, politicians had to watch what they said in front of a microphone, for he might record it and replay it, and expose the rubbish that sometimes passes for public political rhetoric.
Motty called devaluation of the Jamaican dollar the Government "putting their hands in the pockets of the Jamaican people". He was happy to repeat that the high interest rate policy was "the greatest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich since the abolition of slavery" (Ronnie Thwaites).
Not having a university degree himself, he referred to the UWI as an "intellectual ghetto", a clever suggestion that, despite the great concentration of academic power in one space, they seemed impoverished of ideas to improve Jamaica, and impotent to make a real difference. What Motty was really doing was thumbing his nose at academia. It is hard to believe that a master's degree or a doctorate would have made Motty sharper. Academia has never thought to recognise this most intellectual of men, this man of letters, this most rational man.
In my view, the high world ranking Jamaica enjoys for press freedom is largely because of him. Any nation that would allow a Motty Perkins to say the things he said on air must have a high degree of press freedom indeed!
Motty was not a sycophant; he was not in the talk-show business to do public relations for the party in power. Those in power hated him, but they could not buy him out, and they couldn't shut him up. He was too careful and too smart to be successfully sued for libel.
And as the political parties take turns dispensing high national honours upon their own, thereby demeaning them, they cannot ignore the fact that the one who profoundly challenged them is held in the highest esteem by the people. We are poorer without him.
Peter Espeut is a sociologist and Roman Catholic deacon. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.
Comment