Raw Politics...Jamaica Style!

Critiquing Human Rights in Jamaica: Who Gets to Speak and What is Its Actual Value?

2009-05-20T18:05:00.001-05:00

Traditionally, the discussion of human rights in Jamaica has been conducted in what may be considered 'the privileged voice'. This speaks to the privileged positions occupied, in many ways, by those Jamaicans who set themselves up as 'the authority'. This extends even in the case of Jamaicans who live outside of the country. The privileged voice, therefore, gets to set the tone of the discussion, if not the discussion itself and arrogate unto itself the wherewithal to determine who has access to the conversation and who does not - a kind of gate-keeping practise like we have never seen before!

In that regard, if you are not considered part of the inner-circle of the 'privileged voice(s)' then your position is largely seen as hostile, if not counter productive in terms of how this conversation on (human) rights is constructed and performed here. A case in point is a recent exchange between myself and some members of human rights groups in Jamaica, on Face Book. Without expounding on those details, several attempts were made in different ways to ridicule, if not censure the fact that I openly acknowledged, as I have also done previously, that I am not a member of any known and or named human rights group in Jamaica.

Obviously, my lack of direct involvement in the human rights community in Jamaica does not preclude me from commenting, substantively, on this very important issue which affects us all, however. Indeed, the impression that only, if not mostly, those with a known track record on human rights issues in Jamaica are either able to comment fulsomely on its implications in this country or for that matter offer solutions is plainly wrong. Thus, it relegates those percieved to be on the 'outside' to a defensive posture in this very important discussion, wherein they are constructed as either threatening and or counter productive to the goals of the movement.

This position is, of course, largely inaccurate and definitely insiderist. Its sole aim is to politicise poverty to the extent that it is set up as in explicitly dichotomous relationship with the state vis-a-vis human rights (organisations). Here, 'Government' is perceived as almost always complicit in strangling the personal and other freedoms of a particular kind of 'poor people' and as result, is directly implicated in the high rates of murder exhibited each year in Jamaica, especially those committed by the Jamaican Constabulary Force (JCF). Thus, perceived the JCF is, by and large, construed as the enemy of 'poor people'.

Consequently, those sent to save us all from this unfortunate cocktail of oppression, murder and despair are a select group of people with credentials which largely mark them as 'uptown', if not 'upper middle class' Jamaicans. Indeed, there is nothing, necessarily wrong with this reality in and of itself. This is in the sense in which the police are often implicated in some especially heinous crimes which the news media does not hesitate to bombard us with each evening. Thus, it is important that a dedicated group of volunteers and non-Governmental Organisations, with both the resources and time, are devoted to addressing this cause.

Still, the references/ registers in which human rights are encoded in Jamaica nonetheless warrant questioning. This is epecially in terms of how human rights groups in Jamaica impact the development of a functioning and functionable civil society; that is, one which empowers regular, ordinary citizens with the aim of including them in the process of goverance at various levels. It may, therefore, be argued that through their own actions; however noble, the near universal focus on seeing Government as the enemy and, rarely, ever including the voices of (poor) people directly impacted by the causes they champion, human rights groups inadvertently sideline and or stifle the development of a functioning civil society in Jamaica.

Human rights continues to be a devalued conversation/ topic of interests in Jamaica, in part, because it is largely seen as only advocating the views of otherwise intolerable values and attitudes, such as claiming rights for known murderers and other anarchists in the state, including homosexuals. This is not to say that I agree with this position, however. On the contrary, it is argue that, in Jamaica any unofficial poll of the so-called 'man in the streets' would confirm that this is not only the common perception there is also a great deal of concern and anxiety over how to treat with these matters, especially where people seem to have less and less faith in the 'Government' to provide meaningful answers to their plights, currently.

In that regard, claims made by some members of the referenced Face Book conversation that, a Don Anderson poll found that 43% of Jamaicans do not care about whether someone was murdered, presumably, in cold blood are to be rigourously questioned. This is because it implies that, Jamaicans do not care about (each other) which also, presumably, explains the reasons why murders occur with such impunity in the society and, perhaps also why human rights groups face such a hard time winning support for their cause. Hence, there is no end in sight for the meoteric murder rate, in terms of the needless loss of seemingly expendable, black lives, especially those in Downtown, Kingston.

Significantly, these figures do not define how 'care' is operationalised, as well as the implications which follow from such a conclusion. Indeed, they do not even make a connection between why people would not be concerned about as obviously as distressing a matter such as crime and violence here, whether that presumably sanctioned by the state or for that matter random or even calculated acts of violence conducted by person outside of that group. Consequently, there is need for greater awareness building, in terms of working with institutions like the media, church groups, community based organisations and others to celebrate successful human rights cases as a way of raising the profile of the disussion.

Further, any suggestion that we are somehow unable to initiate a 'culture of peace' with the now, obviously, unacceptable 'culture of violence' which suppousedly characterises all of Jamaican society through negotiation and partnership is flawed. Certainly, no one is suggesting that this be the only approach, nor that we meet and engage in discussions with known criminals. However, there is much value in the way of real engagement between traditionally warring factions, especially in cases where there are areas of common interests.

A more gentle approach which does not seek to demonise all with whom it does not agree must also be considered. This requires real commitment and not half hearted attempts which go no further than merely expressing alarm over vioent incidents. After all, so long as they do not touch us then all is well. It is important to note therefore that, human rights are rights not just limited to violent murders 'Downtown', but also involves the systemic and entrenched economic and class systems which orchestrate the untimely destruction of innocent Jamaican lives and also life chances.

With respect, therefore, making a great noise about crime in Jamaica and engaging in long, impassioned discussions about just how 'unacceptable' it all is, as representative of our frustrations with the current state of affairs does not truly help. If there are no reasons to be hopeful then we are all in trouble. What is then, is the track record of our successes in this area? How many human rights issues have been successfully resolved in its history in Jamaica?

And, why have we not, in addition to campaigning for the rights of others, show how these strategies have worked in the past? At what point do we recongise that, while we discuss the proverbial Rome, in this case Jamaica, burns? What then would it profit the so-called 'regular', 'ordinary' Jamaican to sit back and callously enjoy the savage murder of other innocent Jamaicans? The traditional view of 'poor people' as 'victims' and police officers as 'bullies' and the state as supportive of/ enabling this narrative, in which police excesses are excused under the rubric of some spurious 'investigation', continues the trajectory in which the skills necessary for coping with the problems in the society are ignored.

As a result, the question of the successful examples is a valid one because, whether we are still caught in the trap of the colonial militia set up to immobilise poor, disenfranchised black people, historically, we still need to have hope! How do we get 'buy-in' and build consensus through actual empowerment? Where are the solutions from the people who are also directly affected by these harsh realities? And, why is it that, to suggest that there is need for this kind of broad based partnership, at the levels at which civil society plays a greater role, if even facilitated by the state, are not usually seen as legitimate options? Could it be that we do not want solutions? Or, is that, we have also given up hope? Lost sight of our commitment to service? Service, after all, encompasses even the difficult and trying times and the perseverance that comes with the hope of success.

Who wants to fight if there is no end is sight? Who wishes to make time for causes that have no heroes; no faces to celebrate in order to galvanise further support, if even at grassroots levels? What of the views of the mothers, sisters, brothers, fathers and communities in pain? Where are the job training and esteem empowerment workshops that will equip disadvantaged and at risk people with new skills to tackle the problems in their communities?

Unless there are actual solutions then this is a pointless exercise. Unless we are actually doing more than demonising Government, though they are very much deserving of that, then we are doing extremely very little. Unless we are widening out our frames of reference to see human rights as the rights of all Jamaicans, even those with other issues beyond a murdered son, or daughter then we have not yet started this especially important discussion.

Human rights include more than just a fight against homophobia; though it must have this as an important pillar of its make up. Human rights must also get to the root of the problems which give rise to these issues in the first place - the colonial patriarchal misogynistic attitudes enshrined by the state and practised as class politics in Jamaica. If we are not also engaging in this discussion and finding solutions to those problems too, then we are all dead in the water - no pun intended.

There must be more than just talk; there has also got to be action; and real action to boot!

Media Politics in the ‘West’: CNN and President Obama

2009-05-12T09:52:00.001-05:00

I have found myself completely engrossed in a discussion I was drawn into, recently, on Face Book about the politics of media bias in America vis-à-vis the US Government and its recent labour report statistics. This is not unlike a conversation I have also, routinely, heard mentioned on the BBC, in particular on its World Have Your Say programme, on which I have also been a guest on-air a few times.

The main thesis of that argument centres on what is claimed to be the mainstream (‘liberal’) media's support of Government, in particular, the Obama administration, in the specific context of America. CNN comes up for greatest mentioning in this regard, though the same may also be said of the BBC, etc. Here, ‘liberal’ refers to the sense in which such media are, presumably, renowned for pandering to the views of the largely, white, in this case American, educated, set of mostly undeclared elites. As such, the ‘liberal media’ are largely perceived as pro-Government and, in particular, pro-Obama partly because Obama is regarded, especially by his critics, as (more) 'acceptable' to ' liberal', whites.

Read as upper-class, educated and especially metropolitan in its outlook, CNN, BBC and others, suppousedly, fall over themselves to represent President Obama and his administration, to a lesser extent, in progressive terms, presumably ignoring the grim realities of the 'real' America and the wider world. But is this characterization accurtate? And, how do such claims about the responses of the media towards President Obama aid or limit his ability to govern/ function? Are their attitudes, necessarily, different from the coverage of former President Bush?

To appropriately answer any of these questions, I feel it is incumbent on me to state that I am neither American, nor necessarily vested in seeking a complete resolution of this discussion; that is, beyond opening up for consideration some initial observations about, in particular, CNN’s coverage of President Obama which though largely favourable in my view, nonetheless challenges some of these assumptions. To begin with, agreeing with these assertions would, by necessity, mean that President Obama’s key messages of ‘hope’ and ‘change’, however questionable for some, are at best a fluke and at worst a complete lie. It would also suggest that the President’s platform has not had a positive impact, even outside of America.

Of course, it is important to note that, President Obama is still less than four months into his Presidency, as well as that he has achieved a number of the plans he had said he would implement upon taking office. He seems to have laid the foundation for doing what he said he would do, specifically his proposal to go after tax cheats, as a way to boost income for the economy, by passing laws to ensure that American businesses that hide money in tax havens like the Cayman Islands would be found out.

Further, lifting the ban on stem cell research, closing Guantanamo as well as opening up relations with Cuba and parts of the ‘Arab world’, also mark the US President as committed to achieving the platform on which he campaigned. While, the jury is certainly still out on the economy, despite signs of life on Wall Street, there are clearly reasons to understand what might well be considered (favourable) ‘media support’ of President Obama, currently. After all, the seeming speed with which he is going literally takes your breath away.

Still, it does not change the fact that the media seem explicitly biased in their treatment of the current President than say President Bush, or do they? Is there merit to the claim that this new President is getting a bligh – an easy pass, as it were, on the way to achieving his mandate, without rigourous opposition by the American media? Indeed, even if we accept President Obama's media savvy helps to explain what appears to be a complicity on the part of the range of the 'liberal' (mostly American) media to represent Government in a positive light in order to achieve some other unspoken interests, whether for like of Obama or because of monetary interests, these claims do not tell the whole story.

Indeed, remarks like these are to be rigourously interrogated. This is, especially where the notable bastions of 'liberalism' CNN were amongst the first to start questioning whether the new President was 'doing too much'; that is, not focusing completely on the economy. They were also amongst the first to counterpoint those questions with the, presumably, ‘never-before-seen’ images of white Americans living off food stamps. The obvious reading being that the American economy was in such a state of shambles that even the sacrosanct images of 'whiteness' were, themselves, under threat.

Admittedly, I found the narrative surrounding these stories very disconcerting, every time I watched the reports, if not altogether disingenuous. I was never under the impression that there was a real commitment to explaining, in clear and unequivocal language, that the conditions of living on food stamps, insofar as they allow one that privilege, is common to the realities of many white Americans. More to the point, the fact that the narrative sets up tensions between the then depth of the ‘Global Financial Crisis’ and America's own efforts to dig itself out of the quagmire, with these suppousedly depressing images of wholesale economic malaise and presumed despair, heavily undercut the claims that the new President was getting a 'free pass'.

In fact, I recalled in one story on the same CNN, about pirates in Somalia taking an American captain hostage being reported, directly ahead of questions about President Obama's ability to 'keep America safe'. Beyond the obvious ‘fact’ that, the media are ‘only’ answering the questions which the ‘public’ wishes to have responses to, there was no mistaking the clear parallels, however questionable, between the activities of Somali pirates and American security issues in this context. This, especially as President Obama also has direct roots in Africa.

The subtly of the parallels, however, were made all the more apparent thanks to the BBC which reminded, recently, in one of its features that piracy in Somalia is an especially sore point in modern American history. The near defeat of its army in 1993, chronicled in the movie Black Hawk Down profoundly underlined the point. While, obviously, important to Americans in terms of their security, the pirate incident, however innocuous, also raised questions about whether the President could (really) keep America safe, specifically regarding threats immediately outside its borders.

The obvious connection, therefore, between an African-American President and Africans (Somalis) who were creating havoc for Americans, presumably in the interests of economic activities, was unmistakable - at least in my view. Then, there was also the matter of whether President Obama was not, himself, weak when it came to military capacity as the Commander in Chief. In that regard, there is a clear and evident need to reconsider the claims that he has been given an easy time by the likes of CNN and other such media.

After all, I have not yet heard or seen where CNN has afforded, in the same way, the Obama administration an opportunity to respond substantively to the charge by former Republican Presidential candidates Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani that the President did not make (enough of) a fuss over North Korea’s rocket launch, recently. According to them, this was evidence of his weakness on security issues. Indeed, just today former Vice President Dick Cheney’s remarks about America being less safe with President Obama in office continue this discussion, all the time without a visible and meaningful reply from the administration in terms of defending the President’s credibility.

It seems reasonable in my view, then, that the question of media bias has less to do with a pro-Obama favouritism and somehow seems to relate more to the changing attitudes towards blackness in American popular culture, specifically at the levels at which media such as CNN and others operate; and how that affects their vision of the Government. Notably, I conceded in a Face Book response that, all media are biased. The question, then, seems to be less about the biases of media, per se, and more with how such biases affect how the ‘facts’ are covered as well as, whether there were any ‘facts’ to begin with.

Media bias is a function of media practise, generally. Facts and figures help to extend those biases; though, they are not necessarily in and of themselves biased in the same way that one's agenda is or can be. To critique media bias without a simultaneous admission of this kind, therefore, makes such a criticism almost redundant; that is, where it does not present alternate facts and figures to dispute the claims made by those reported as 'official' in the (mainstream/ liberal) media.

Indeed, one colleague in rebutting these assertions reminded that, ‘facts’ (and figures) are not autonomous pieces of information which' fall from the sky'. In her characteristically acerbic critique, my colleague/ friend highlighted the very point I was attempting to make that, unless there are new ‘facts’ that have been marshaled to challenge the claims in the original discussion about the labour statistics put out by the Government (read President Obama) last week and reported by the 'liberal media', then there is hardly a credible premise on which to say the Government is lying.

As a matter of fact, subsequent to my interventions the original commentator reported that his intentions were not to say the Government or the media were lying. Rather, it was to suggest that numbers are being revised upwards to achieve a more favourable view of the American economy. This then translates to increased consumer confidence; more sales and, ultimately, more ad revenue for the media. A fairly simple and straightforward equation.

However, missing from the explanation is the means by which we achieve the awareness that the numbers have been tampered with. Which is not to say that they have not been. On the contrary, the commentator's admission underlines my earlier claim - arguments about media bias, or half truths reported as 'facts' must be dissected in appropriate context, especially where they lead to flawed conclusions. In that regard, the charges of media bias, whether in America or elsewhere do not help much in forwarding a meaningful understanding of how the media work, for whom and why.

Indeed, such an analysis says nothing of whether the stories reported are accurate, production values are adhered to, or even whether professionalism is deployed in the coverage of said stories, or follow-ups done on whichever issue. To which end, there is need to look again at what is being said by such remarks and how they may be used to serve multiple agendas, some of which are often hostile towards certain groups and communities, in this case the Obama Administration.

It is worth recalling too that, perspectives are learned and, obviously, shift to suit the contours of the realities in which we live. Nowhere is this more the case than in the media where the establishment, which controls them usually get to influence what is produced. The ultra Conservative views of Fox News, which is owned by the Conservative Rupert Murdoch, make this point only too well. Hence, ’facts’ are marshaled to support various positions despite that the ‘facts’, themselves, may not necessarily be flawed in terms of verification and testing.

And, that is also not to suggest that, ‘facts’ cannot be made up, or reports altogether doctored to achieve a more favourable image of an organization, in this case the American Government. After all, the example of the disgraced New York Times journalist who was found to have lied in some of his reports in the mid-90’s make the point all to obvious.

Consequently, and as noted above, the complexities in the coverage of America’s first African-American President and the ambivalence expressed in the attitudes of some Americans towards both him and his policies, specifically African-Americans like those with whom I interacted on Face Book are also tied up in these power relations between the state and the media. Thus, the ‘liberal media’s presumed anxieties towards black leadership may well be said to be echoed in the complicated responses of their audiences towards the Government.

Further, it may be argued that this attitude towards how to cover the first African-American President also gives cues to the audiences which they, in turn, read into subliminally and thus, find it hard to make important distinctions between in the attitudes expressed towards Government. This is not to suggest, however, that all of President Obama’s decisions have been appropriate or even good/ effective. Far from it! The failed candidate selections for some of his Cabinet positions would be one such example. Rather, it is to say that, wrapped up in the claims of bias towards President Obama in how he is covered by the ‘liberal media’ are also many unresolved concerns about race relations and the state, in America.

The BBC recently reported that, notwithstanding that Americans work in ‘diverse’ environments, many still live in segregated communities. The refusal in that regard to engage with each other is telling, in terms of what it says about how much work remains to be done about these very troubling issues in America, especially considering that they also set the tone for many in other parts of the world.

Consequently, questions of media bias, whether regarding CNN, the BBC, or any other media in the ‘West’ seen as ‘liberal’ must also examine the history of such media and how they have evolved in/ alongside the societies they presume to serve. How different are they from the rest of the society in which they operate and is such a difference, if noticed, sufficient to suggest that the treatment of all political figures are the same (read favourable)?

If yes, then we have not begun to have this very important discussion as of yet. And, if no, we are still hemmed in by conventional thinking which makes us also, largely, unable to have this conversation in a meaningful way. I would venture, accordingly, that the answer is somewhere in the middle; though, exactly where remains a matter for further discussion.

Jamaica's Mandatory Wage Freeze and the Global Recession: Was this the Best Government Could Offer?

2009-05-03T15:40:00.001-05:00

Below is a post I made on my Face Book page which has generated alot of buzz in that forum. I thought that it would be useful to publish it here, as well in an effort to get the views of an alternate audience. It’s sole intent is to widen the extent of the dialogue about Jamaica’s economic outlook, arising from changes in the world economy which has been on a consistent trend downwards for some time now.

How will Jamaica deal with the fallouts from the ‘Global Financial Crisis/ Meltdown’? These initial views hope to start that conversation, at the very least add another position for consideration.

Jamaica, like several other countries across the world, is feeling the dire effects of the contraction of the world economy and the collapse of the international credit industry, otherwise referred to as the ‘Banking Crisis’. Clearly, global in its scope and destructive in its reach, there is no denying that everyone across the world has come in for some sort of recessionary impact, as a result.

In its own efforts to respond to the crisis, the Jamaican Government has recommended a mandatory wage freeze for the Jamaican Public Sector, after the Prime Minister announced that he was also undertaking to give himself and, presumably, his other ministers of government, a fifteen percent cut in their wages. It is worth noting that, the Prime Minister's salary comes up to well over half a million Jamaican dollars per month which, therefore, means that a fifteen percent salary cut does not go quite as far as those who have had to endure the erosion of the value of their wages over time, due to inflation, as well as the forced wage freeze.

In further justifying his position, one which was not discussed with either the Service or the unions who represent them, the Prime Minister claimed that to give the now due seven percent increase in wages, under the most recent Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed in 2008, that he would have to let go in excess of twenty thousand members of the Service. Government is the biggest employer in Jamaica, with just under ninety thousand employees at various levels in the system. The planned letting go of nearly a fifth of the Service population became the benchmark against which the Prime Minister made his decision.

While, not decrying the PM's right to make hard choices, nor necessarily diminishing the basis on which he must do so, especially those concerning Jamaica's economic future, there is need nonetheless to interrogate the current tone of Jamaica's political leadership. Notwithstanding what many have routinely claimed is 'too large' a Public Sector, it behooves us to also ask whether this is the likely, or even best solution?

Indeed, the questioning of the decision made by the PM, which also directly impacts me, has more to do with the style of governance as well as the spirit than with the decision, itself. Hardly a useful distinction, it nonetheless points to the fact that, if we can employ better decision-making processes then it is more likely that, we can arrive at better outcomes, presumably in the interests of all.

Election Promises

Before coming to power in 2007, the then Leader of the Opposition Bruce Golding and his Party made various promises; among them, an assurance that the economy would grow by as much as seven percent, not unlike that of Singapore and other countries on the fast track to development. Other claims made included the very emotive charge that, while we may not all get rich we certainly did not have to be as poor as were, under the previous administration, in particular under then Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller.

We could not, in effect, afford to take a chance with Mrs. Simpson Miller, the virago, who cares little, if anything for the members of her own constituency. That is, given its then extreme state of disarray. With the upsurge of emotions evoked by that experience, that we must now concede to a mandatory wage freeze is especially curious, if not altogether very distressing.

In addition to a tax on books, salt and other sundry items, the vast majority of which were previously not taxed and which also form a regular part of peoples' daily existence here, does the make point of an apparently unconcerned and uncaring administration. What of the claims about empowerment? Is there any truth to any of them, especially in a context where there is no discussion and no seeming regard for the fact that people are obviously not coping well with the fallouts from the contracting world economy?

Economic Recession

At the risk also of dwelling too much on the bad, it was also this same administration who, when the rest of the Developed World were assembling their various economic crisis response teams claimed that Jamaica is fine and would not be seriously affected (presumably, if at all!). That attitude we now know was also wrong, as much as the apparent lack of regard for the electorate, insofar as refusing to address the nation directly to update us on the status of the economic plans in the current crisis.

To say that we are starved of information, however, would not altogether reflect an accurate position. This is especially in a context where there are enough alternate information sources coming from various points which paint just how serious a crisis we are in, globally. Still, the refusal to engage with Jamaicans on a direct, face-to-face manner is telling insofar as it not only gives the impression that 'nutten naw gwaan', it also reinforces this deep-seated pessimism. Needless to remind that, that and a recession are a deadly concoction when combined together.

Lack of Proper Planning/ Gas Tax

The lack of a visible or even meaningful plan, with of course the exception of the budget whose reading over a week ago seemed to have coincided with flashbacks from a couple years before when the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), the Party currently in power effectively capitalised on the widespread disenchantment of Jamaicans at the time, at the news of a gas tax. Several days of rioting and media campaigns against the then Government - the People’s National Party (PNP), now members of Opposition, forced what appeared to be an about face. The tax was eventually rolled back.

Ironically, gas is now being taxed and despite concerns or even voiced opposition to this move, there does not appear to be the space for that kind of concession by the new administration. This after assuring rather glibly, as noted above, early on in the Recession last year, that Jamaica would not likely be adversely impacted by the crisis.

There was, as expected, a torrent of criticisms with which the Minister of Finance and the Public Service Audley Shaw's remarks were addressed. However, that storm soon passed. And we were back to 'business as usual'. After all, the popular position in some media here is that, there could at least be tolerance, on some level, given how badly the economy was felt to be mismanaged by the previous administration.

Alternate Strategy: Mass Lay-offs?

I am no economic whiz and I can clearly see the value of having a job. However, if mass firings and layoffs are the appropriate course of action, as is suggested by one of the comments on my mood status (on Face Book, shortly after posting), then it seems to me that there is a real need for more brain power to be added to the Government's economic advisory team than is currently available. It is hardly a viable option, which is not to say it could not happen. Still, it does not justify non-communication and or the evident lack of regard so clearly and contemptuously demonstrated by the apparent lack of any type of coherent or even meaningful plan to drive the economy and limit our dependency on Government to provide employment for the majority of Jamaicans.

Taxation of Basic and Educational Supplies

The seeming lack of concern for a trained and or educated work force, across the length and breadth of the country is also exemplified in the move to tax certain books and other basic supplies, as per the new budget tabled by Mr. Shaw. We can be certain that, by these actions this administration sees little or no value in even attempting to communicate confidence in their abilities and their preparedness to do the job at hand - that is, governing in difficult times. This is especially sad, considering just how much we stand to loose in an increasingly worsening world economy.

The drying up of assistance programmes and funds, as well as competitive loans, will mean further erosion in the value of life here. Those at the base of the structure will obviously feel the effects most readily, but you can rest assured that others will too and none of this augurs well for the crime and violence that we continue to grapple with daily, with little or no success. What too of work to rule and industrial action? How will people respond to freeze on their income with no, apparent, end in sight?

These are interesting and timely questions which require urgent responses.

Britain to ‘Retake’ Control of the Turks and Caicos Islands: Constitutional Right or Modern Recolonialisation?

2009-03-25T10:59:00.011-05:00

"Good. Its time that it was realised that some territories are not able to be entirely self governing due to their size location or history. A consultative legislature with limited powers is all that can be hoped for until circumstances change."
Ash, Perth, Australia
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article5919534.ece?token=null&offset=12&page=2)

The constitution of the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) is to be suspended by the British Government today (March 25, 2009), arising out of what it has characterized as, investigations into political corruption in the Caribbean islands, which are still under British colonial rule. The suspension will cede all executive powers in the colony into the hands of the Governor General; who, according to Dr. Michael Misick, TCI Premier, ‘is not [even] a citizen of the country’.

According to the Times of London (online edition, March 17, 2009), in a report by the British Foreign Office authored by Sir Robin Auld, British Parliamentarian, the House of Assembly, Cabinet and ministers of Government will be terminated. Their powers will be transferred to the Governor.

Accused of selling ‘Crown’ lands, apparently without Britain’s awareness or sufficient remuneration in terms of sales taxes, income, etc., Dr. Misick and several of his colleagues (politicians) will be investigated and, possibly, tried for criminal charges by Britain.

This news holds special significance for us in the Caribbean, particularly given our history as former colonies. There is more to the issue than just the mere question of colonial entrapment and domination, though, or even the specific context of the TCI where the politicians are under suspicion. The news is also important in re-contextualising arguments about debt relief and economic enslavement, especially during the current world economic downturn.

While there may well be grounds for British involvement in the affairs of the its colony, the suspension of the TCI constitution, undoubtedly also, evokes old questions about the contempt for non-white, non-British residents of Empire. The remarks above clearly highlight the intractable lack of regard of certain groups of people by colonists, as well as the abiding notion that leadership is largely the preserve of the British Parliament and none other. This is not unlike the arguments used to maintain control of former colonies like Jamaica, who though now politically ‘independent’ retain a Governor General as the representative of the Queen in their constitutions and the state.

Indeed, I made this point, recently, to a friend upon hearing this distressing news. I first enquired whether she had also heard it, herself, as well as to also discuss some of its implications for us here, specifically regarding Dr. Misick’s claim that the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) should ‘intercede’ on the TCI’s behalf to Britain. Alarmed at the defeatist and, seemingly groveling manner in which the embattled Premier responded to Britain by asking the, admittedly, less than potent CARICOM bloc to beg for mercy on the TCI’s behalf, I indicated to her just how objectionable his response was.

‘Global War on Terror’/ Democracy:

Before I was able to speak clearly on the matter, however, I was railroaded by a seeming impatience with reasoning, instead. I was treated to an unusual, if not curious face-off with my friend. My position was ridiculed as ‘rhetoric’ and the equivalent of ‘going around the mulberry path’ – code I was to discover for: ‘I (she) do not wish to talk about this, other than to hear herself speak!’ Still, I persevered and indicated that I was dismayed by the meanings of the impending take over, especially during the ‘Global Age of Terror’.

Ostensibly aimed at growing democracy in disparate parts of the world, I pointed out that Britain’s colonial interests in the TCI (Caribbean) sat visibly at odds with this noble thrust. After all, the Region was neither immediately politically important to the terrorism project – perhaps with the exception of Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, nor was it necessarily a strategic platform from which to operate British economic interests – at least not on the face of it.

My friend countered with the implication that, the Caribbean was, indeed, a hotspot. Earlier, she had heard news of Russia and Venezuela forming a partnership in the latter country. She argued that the two events, together, were significant, presumably in terms of spelling doom for the Region.

Whereas I concurred that the events were newsworthy, however, I disagreed that Venezuela’s and Russia’s relationship, though troubling in some respects, was unusual. Largely, aimed at enriching the two oil producing nations, who were also at odds with the United States, currently, their partnership in the US’ backyard could hardly be viewed as surprising in this regard. Unlike Britain, who claimed to be more interested in spreading democracy and liberating ‘oppressed nations’ from demagogues like Sadam Hussein, the Taliban and others, the Russians and Hugo Chavez were more obvious about their intentions; however nefarious.

I ventured also that a more direct challenge against the contradictions of British declared interests in democracy might prove more meaningful than an impotent plea for ‘mercy’ by Dr. Misick. My friend disagreed and completely cut me off, accordingly. She stated that, Britain was (well) within its right to do as it saw fit. There was, effectively, no need for discussion. Ironically, I had initially made this same point, which I later revised upon more careful consideration.

The actions of the TCI Premier in terms of asking the leaders of CARICOM ‘intercede’ to Britain on their behalf were especially disappointing, if not surprising. It did not reflect an effective use of his platform as a head of state, albeit a colony. Dr. Misick appeared to lack a seriousness of purpose and or pride, particularly given the drastic nature of Britain’s intent. Consequently, the ‘Crown’s impending actions in the TCI are comparable to Queen Elizabeth the Second’s dismissal of the petition brought against her and the British government, in 1994 by members of Jamaica’s Rastafarian community for reparations.

The Queen justified her refusal to acknowledge the claims on the premise that, at the time of its existence, African Slavery was not a crime. While, that may well have been the case according to British law, it is nonetheless debatable whether a similar argument can be made in terms of the outrageous breach of human rights African Slavery so clearly represents, regardless of whichever time in history.

Whether or not an award is made in terms of damages, itself a disputed matter, given the potential challenges regarding allocating any benefits derived from a reparations package in the present, this too is a statement of the collectively disempowered states of black societies, globally. It is important that injustices such as these are actively challenged and that vigilance is maintained in terms of questioning the very premise of such ‘rights’, whether under colonial domination and or other forms of oppression. Ideological resistance is a critical part of this effort.

Solutions:

Rather than make a direct award to each descendant of African slaves in the ‘New World’, including Jamaica, there is a clear case for debt relief for poor countries like ours. This is especially in the midst of a continuingly precipitous fall in the world economy. Poorer/ smaller countries are more likely to feel the dire effects of this fallout. Indeed, in our last budget, seventy cents in every dollar in Jamaica was allocated towards debt servicing while inflation further eroded the value of the remaining thirty cents.

The case for reparations is not a foolish or even misguided, ‘rhetorical’ attempt at noise-making, as a result, especially when considered in this context. The take-over of the TCI by Britain has similar resonances. Dr. Misick is almost obligated, in my view, to exercise a greater sense of pride and forthrightness in terms of his response to Britain’s suspension of parts of the TCI’s constitution.

Rolling over and playing dead, or at the very least making flaccid remarks regarding what is clearly a grave and damaging act is hardly appropriate. A similar set of actions contributed to current untenable states of persistent poverty in the Region and others like it (Beckford, 1972). Hence, the rest of the Caribbean must view Britain’s action with very deep suspicion. After all, as a self declared democratic loving nation, it behooves us to ask: when do these values apply?

PS: I feel it imperative to point out as well that, early last year (2008), I recieved an email from a friend who is also Catholic, in which a priest from a church in the US talked about a Divine visitation from the Blessed Mother (Mary, Jesus' Mother).

Among others, the email highlighted some of the injustices in the world, in terms of the economic systems which privilege the rich and actively disempower the poor and proceeded to explain that a fallout, as dramatic as the economic downturn, was on its way.

The Blessed Mother said that, it would begin in the US in the heart of the financial district and pull other great economies under - think Iceland who, as a Developed Nation, had to go to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for lonas to help sustain its economy, late last year. She said that, the crisis would spread right across the world to teach man to be each other's brother and that, it could not be prevented, only delayed. And, even that could only be achieved through deeper committment to the Word of God!

I was amazed to see how the economic crisis unfolded last year, accordingly, with the predicted deepening at about the time that the email said (October-November) and which also started with the mortgage foreclosures, as it also said. Absolutely uncanny!

The question is: do we believe that this recession is an opportunity for us to stop and refocus, even if we are not Catholics, or religious, or whether we believe in (a) God? There can be no doubt that the greed of the Western Capitalists have precipitated this crisis, which no one seems to know when it will end.

Recently, a friend on Facebook pointed out to me also, after viewing a very distressing video about poverty in Africa, that academics from the Caribbean/ 'Developing World' like Walter Rodney, George Beckford and others have been talking about these issues for some time. It behooves us to pay attention and to know our history.

The economic enslavement of smaller, poorer countries to the will of those who live in the more affluent parts of the world is an inescapable reality. Any efforts to resubjugate us, in whichever form, must therefore, be streneously resisted; not so much because we expect a physical victory but because it is the right thing to do!

Dancehall Must Rehabilitate Its Public Image!

2009-02-10T09:36:00.010-05:00

Below is a letter I wrote in response to the discussion around the banning of certain Dancehall songs in Jamaica. I sent it to the local media, here, a few days ago. However, I have not seen it in print yet.

I also forwarded the blog link to other local commentators. Perhaps they might comment on some of what is said here. Hopefully, I will be acknowledged.

Your comments are always welcomed!

Thanks!

Dear Editor:

I write to acknowledge my endorsement of the efforts of the Broadcast Commission to review and address the untenable state of affairs regarding the wholesale promotion of values and attitudes contrary to the upliftment of the nation. Its decision to discontinue further airplay of the popular Dancehall tune 'Rampin' Shop', though belated, is a timely reminder that the uncontrolled state of permissiveness encouraged in many areas of the Jamaican media require very careful monitoring.

This is not the same as suggesting that there is no place for Dancehall or that the heavy hand of moral arbitration is beyond being questioned. Far from it. It is to foreground instead, the singular importance of popular culture in shaping our collective national outlook in Jamaica, currently. Dancehall plays a crucial role in this regard. It is more than just a genre of popular music. Dancehall is also a very developed culture and includes issues related to economics and power, some of which often run counter to the goals of the state.

Indeed, there is no expectation that, Dancehall should fall neatly in line with the requirements of ‘establishment’ and sacrifice, in the process, its artistic integrity in the effort to school and parent Jamaicans. On the contrary, it is to highlight that whether wittingly, or not Dancehall has contributed much to the process of values formation in Jamaica and has become, as a result, a critical institution of socialisation.

This coupled with the increased weakening of some of the traditional systems, previously, responsible for socialising the state has resulted in the creation of a vacuum. New and different forces have risen up to fill these gaps. Dancehall is one such force. Alongside an acknowledged dissonance about what constitutes appropriate values in Jamaica, therefore, it is not hard to see how Dancehall may be regarded as more than just casual ‘adult entertainment’. For better or worse, it may be regarded as holding a preeminent position of socialisation within the society.

Dancehall must seriously consider rehabilitating its public image, as a result; not just in the interests of practicality given its increased powers of importance in the society, but also as a means of demonstrating its inherent versatility/ creativity. The latter, as we are aware, goes beyond a focus on only themes of sex and violence. Excuses regarding a chronic lack of education on the part of many of its producers and artistes are an insult to the diversity of intelligence and depth of talent within the industry/ culture. These must yield to the more urgent demands of true national development, cultural pride and meaningful progress.

The banning of 'Rampin Shop' as well as all other songs with words considered more generally offensive must be viewed in context, then, in terms of its attempt to guard against a moral opprobrium, especially in the interests of posterity. It is more than a mere question of 'freedom of expression' or even censorship, though these are also crucial considerations.

We are far more than just thugs for hire and sex crazed party-goers. I am confident, as a result, that it is well within our capacity to clean up Dancehall and as well as all other forms of entertainment which often fall outside of the boundaries of acceptability. Self regulation, education and civic responsibility must not be sacrificed, therefore, in the efforts to win popularity, wealth and power.

We can do much better! I am sure of it!

I am, etc.

Rawpoliticsjamaicastyle

‘Yes We Did!’ Barack Obama’s Historic Inauguration

2009-01-20T17:37:00.009-05:00

‘Yes we did!’ The three simple words etched in blue, announced their presence by the static orange light of an unanswered MSN Messenger icon. They were the poignant reminder from a friend and colleague of just how historic the occasion of President Barack Hussein Obama’s Inauguration as President of the United States of America and ‘Leader of the Free World’ was. Embodied in those three words were the power of conviction and the hope of a generation. Not only were we witnessing history in the inauguration of the first African-American to the highest office of US President, we were also watching the US undergo real and palpable change, if even at the level of the emotional.

I cried, unashamedly. The tears flowed silently and then more audibly, especially just before the arrival of then President-Elect Obama to the podium. The cameras caught his tall figure, serious face and pursed lips, as he walked slowly and purposefully the length of the corridor before opening the door for his date with destiny.

I was reminded of the title of President Nelson Mandela’s autobiography: ‘Long Walk to Freedom’, chronicling his life from political activist and convict, jailed for twenty seven years for his unbroken opposition to the objectionable sins of apartheid, to become President of South Africa, then a newly minted democratic nation in 1994. Mandela took with him the hopes of generations of Africans who had drunk long and deep from the bitter cup of racial hatred, abiding oppression and segregation.

In that moment, Barack Obama and President Mandela became one. Across the boundaries of geography and even time, albeit short, their dreams seemed united; twinned in the universal demand for human rights and dignity. In it, I saw the visions of the slaves and the promise and power of their rebellions; their insistent cries of admission not just to the community of nations but also the dignity of the human family. Dr. King’s dreams were being realized and my insistent prayers had not gone unanswered.

Barack Obama would, in a few short moments, take the Oath of Office and with that become the President of the United States of America. However, before that there was the interminable walk of deep reflection and the adoration and pride of the sea of supporters just beyond those doors. Barrack Hussein Obama was scripting history with every purposeful step. His countenance showed confidence and understanding; his measured strides an indication of the challenges which awaited him, not just in America but outside of it.

The economic crisis and the foreclosures would test this great man, as would the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the POWs at Guantanamo Bay. There was Russia, Israel and the Middle East. Iran. India and Pakistan and closer to home, even Cuba. But, still he walked. And I cried some more. The tears came quicker now, almost uncontrollably in their anguished, if not victorious release from pent up anxieties. This was the cry of realization that, as my friend on Messenger had pointed out; we had come ‘from slavery to the Presidency!’

History was unfolding and even while, my silent tears did not mean much in the actual writing of this chapter, told to us through the ‘immediacy’ and global reach of the CNN and BBC news media, I had witnessed it all the same. Moved by its power and the audacity of the kind of hope that had propelled President Obama to such an important moment, I was awestruck and overwhelmed all at once. Words seemed so inadequate in giving vent to my emotions that all I could do was cry, like a small child, humbled by history’s power to self correct. I watched in complete amazement, praying all the time, fervent in my hope for this great man on whose shoulders rested so many of the world’s ills.

This must have been how the Israelites felt when the waters of the Red Sea parted and they were allowed safe passage between it, from Pharaoh’s marauding bands of Egyptians threatening to return them to a life of domination and control from which they had only recently escaped. The parallels were unmistakable. Barack Obama was the modern day Moses, in many respects, parting a different kind of sea – a new frontier of threatening economic ruin and polarizing wars fought on the premise of religious and political ideology, control of the world’s energy and, though often unspoken, nationality, race, heritage and borders.

For better or worse, the world had changed and the ‘Israelites’ of the modern age though scattered across disparate lands, different time zones and places, were now joined together by one common cause. It was much larger than ourselves; much larger than any of us could individually conceive – the gift of Hope! Barack Obama was our leader and the tides of Red Sea’s looming despair were parting with every step he made down that corridor.

With seriousness etched on his face, Barack Obama was preparing to not only take the Oath, he was preparing to lead the world and we, his throng of supporters removed by heritage, culture, nationality, language, time and even technology were all caught up in the power of the emotion. And, so I cried.

Pausing momentarily to gather myself and focus, I decided that more than anything else, my return to this blog would be marked by the momentous inauguration of President Barack Obama to the US Presidency. It symbolized a kind of achievement which allowed me to think that, notwithstanding my own personal concerns, all things were possible and that, because of that possibility we/ I could make it.

The potency of his acceptance speech and the focus on the Civil Rights Movement and the American War for Independence, as well as the Global War on Terror only served to reinforce that pride – that deep and unmistakable joy. Hope renewed and sagging spirits refreshed, the powerful words had instilled in all of us the charge, not only to Americans, to proclaim the victory in all parts of the lands in which we lived. All were joined together. The cause was universal. We were all were soldiers in the great hope of transformation.

How would it all pan out? We were not sure…yet! But one thing was certain, in this moment we were all one…And we most, certainly, could!

After all, out of many, we are one! Yes we can! Yes we did!

Picture shows the smartly dressed President and First Lady Obama at the US Presidential Inauguration Celebrations, on January 20, 2009. President Obama took the Oath of Office and became America's forty-fourth President, the first African-American to do so. (Image courtesy of the Associated Press)

Of Hurricane Stories, ‘Wars’ in the Blogosphere and Technological ‘Know-How’

2008-08-31T09:11:00.009-05:00

My most recent entry here has done more than I had anticipated it would, despite my apparent initial squeamishness about referencing/ critiquing the work of a fellow blogger. Without calling that person by name, as I still have not managed to learn how to do a link to her page and was duly warned off by her on this point, I was completely taken aback by the vicious trashing both of my post as well as my knowledge of the blog technology. You could imagine my surprise that I was invited to tea even in the eye of an impending storm and my initial resistance as I wanted to go home and prepare for Gustav.

Still, I graciously accepted the gesture, as I had been calling weeks before and had even mentioned on the blog that I had visited said blogger’s office, and still did not seem able to manage to secure a meeting. Hence, we drove in a queue, myself, the hostess and another guest, who I had incidentally offered to buy two loaves of bread for at the supermarket. She was preparing for Gustav but had to head off to work.

Ensconced in her arty living room, I was invited to choose between a selection of Caribbean Dreams teas and an ‘original’ black tea which I had previously indicated to her that I liked. In fact, we had had it several times before. So, I went with the familiar, as I have never especially enjoyed Caribbean Dreams, though my fellow guest noted that she bought it as a way of ‘supporting local manufacturers!’

Still, I could understand the sentiment even while I did not share the enthusiasm. We chatted politely for a while on a range of topics, ranging from among them the acquisition of FLOW cable, which both ladies seemed up in arms against. My hostess seemed keen on considering utilizing the services of one of its competitors. The suggestion came as a result of the other guest who I accompanied to our hostess’ home.

After tea, we spoke some more about politics, specifically the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in the United States (US) and the impending Presidential Elections in the Peoples’ National Party (PNP) here at home. I offered my views on the latter, indicating that there was a way in which I felt very conflicted about the leadership challenge, in part, because my love for Mrs. Simpson-Miller had less to do with the woman herself and more what she represented. This, notwithstanding that I was not completely satisfied that she did a very good job as PNP Party Leader in the last elections.

I suggested, as I have done several times in the past, that had Mrs. Simpson-Miller utilized the ‘team approach’ so evidently now in practise by her second campaign to be President of the PNP and had surrounded herself with talented young people there would be no need for this race now. Indeed, had she/ they included this particular demographic in a serious way in the last elections Mrs. Simpson Miller would be the Prime Minister and not the Leader of the Opposition at this time. But, I digress! After all, I had said to my hostess that I would not comment further (on this blog) on these matters, as I was somewhat conflicted on this issue, as noted earlier.

To return then to the earlier mentioned ‘tea meeting’, where I waited a short while after the other guest left before also leaving myself. The offer was made in one of the commentaries further to my last post that I might be able to get a ‘lesson’ regarding matters of how to post links and this kind of stuff in my blog. Still, I waited and nothing happened. So, I finally left and complimented the colour of the dress worn by my hostess as I had done earlier when I saw her in work clothes. There could be no denying the attractiveness of the bright colours of both outfits.

That being said, I was shocked to return home to read, in one of her earlier comments that day, that I had no understanding of attribution as well as the idea of ‘folk', elements of which I had used in my last post. I proceeded, therefore, to pen a response which would, hopefully, represent my understandings of these matters as well as point out the flaws of those charges. Needless to say, I was summarily dismissed and my thanks communicated in relation to her comments about one of my photos was later dismissed also, as further evidence of 'lack of understanding of the importance of attribution’.

I was duly informed that, the comments made had nothing to do with me and more with the photographer. Still, I persevered by highlighting that her comment in relation to my not posting the name of the photographer was incorrect. I hadearlier informed in one of my comments that the pictures were taken from the International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF) website: www.iaaf.org. This leads me to why I have recalled this unpleasant matter here.

Firstly, it is and was never my intent to cause injury and or insult to the learned scholarship of the blogger, whose views I consulted previously as well as in my last post, in part, in my look at the question of a review of the Olympics in Beijing. Indeed, it was never my intent to ‘joust’ on anyone’s behalf and to use her as a target for such unlikely practise.

A reading of the blog as well as the follow up comments might well have indicated that there was, possibly, a misreading or misunderstanding of my post and its motives as well as an adamant refusal to acknowledge the largely complimentary tone used to reference her work. Consequently, I find it interesting that these two charges were made against me in relation to my last post:
- I lack an understanding of the importance of ‘attribution’; and,
- That, that lack of understanding also is translated into a lack of understanding of the idea of ‘folk’.

Taken together, in the context of my last post, these issues are not only misleading but downright insulting. Not only do they seek to unseat the validity of my claims made in relation to telling the ‘full truth’ about the Olympic story but that, in doing so seek to cause further injury by suggesting that my post is merely (?) a repackaging of the views of others, notable among them a former teacher of mine. How absolutely outrageous, indeed!

This is both incorrect and conceptually disingenuous. Notwithstanding, as my erstwhile colleague has maintained, that she referenced said former teacher in her work, she goes further to make another remark about an ‘unreflexive use of the folk’ (in my post). To which extent, she claims there is no ‘valence’ for the arguments which I made as a result. After all, she began her attack from the premise that my remarks in relation to the tradition(s) of resistance and greatness which preceded Beijing 2008 were an academic romanticisation which constructs a, largely, ‘passive’ view of Jamaica’s recent Olympic exploits in China.

She goes even further to argue that, any associations with the history of Jamaica, founded in the type of black nationalism created out of a counter discursive grassroots ethos (?) was also to be questioned. After all, to the extent that these may be read as, what she claims is my ‘unreflexive use of [the term] folk’ marks my reading as, mostly, a claim. There were no heroes before Usain Bolt, in other words, and, certainly, whether there were, in fact, any such historical figures by which the trajectory of his genius is intersected these/ they are, fundamentally, figments of my own imagination.

I am guilty, in effect, of the elitism and latter day acknowledgement which I derided in the post. This I said sought to create Bolt and other select members of the Jamaican Olympic Team as products of a harmoniously nationalist society, albeit curiously. The ‘piece de resistance’? Any efforts to reject her claims must be viewed as ‘a torrent of words which can hardly be ploughed through, let alone understood.’ Read in this way, then, they are the mad rant of ill formed views with no actual ‘valence’ or connections to reality. Specious remarks if ever there were any!

Finally, in the most evident pandering to a populist, presumably, ‘true’ Jamaican identity/ lingua franca I was advised to: ‘tek whe [mi] self!’, as the bothersome bore I had obviously (?) now become, echoed in the annoyance presumably compressed in the Jamaican ‘Cho’ which preceded her ultimate (?) rebuke! Talk about a tirade!

Now, beyond the fact that I never proposed to see Usain Bolt as ‘folksy’, insofar as any point made in the post below, this reading of my entry is wrong on several levels. Firstly, it seeks to create a link between theorists of the ‘folk’ and what is claimed as ‘the unreflexive way’ that I, apparently, used it in the last blog and the implications of that for my look at the Jamaican Olympic team.

By discrediting ‘folk’ theorists as well as their seemingly besetting sin of ‘unreflexivity’, my post as well as the ‘claims’ made about the heroes therein are relegated to the terrain of ideal romantic yammerings not to be taken seriously and, certainly, without merit. Worse yet, my blog is the completely ‘delusional’ efforts at ‘jousting’; read in this case as ‘shadow boxing’ with straw people, as they say in academic circles. I have, effectively, created an argument of my own doing and am arguing it in relation to people/ critics who I have also constructed with the sole purpose of tearing them down with gleeful abandon.

A rereading of my post might suggest the viciousness of these claims, notwithstanding the absence of an apparent link to her page, as well as the baselessness of the charges made by my critic. Indeed, rereading my post might yet reveal that I took issue with the question of Jamaican media representations and their role in the construction of the Olympic narrative, in the larger context of what I find is a clear class bias in terms of how we ‘see’ in this society. This bias, I argued and continue to argue, further embeds the imbalanced traditions of power relationships in Jamaica caused, in part, by a type of racism founded in British Colonialism and before it African Slavery.

In consequence of which, I took issue with the question of a ‘politics from below’ (my own emphasis!) not so much because this was not the case, but that the acknowledgment is rather curious given the long history of greatness of people of African descent, specifically those from the social classes from which most of the Olympians come, in this and other societies with similar histories. To limit the contributions of so-called ‘ordinary Jamaicans’, then, as only worthy of praise at the Olympics is tantamount to a continuation of these same racist attitudes, if not to further oppress those who do not have similar opportunities to ‘excel’ in these same ways.

Do not get me wrong, I am impressed by and proud of the Jamaican Olympic team, like everyone else should be, I imagine. However, what I am doubtful of, is whether these praises by themselves achieve much in the way of forwarding an appropriate understanding of the history of struggle, resistance and achievement so poignantly encoded in Jennifer Bolt’s acknowledgement of ‘coarse cuisine’, or more appropriately, ‘peasant food’ in her son’s success at the Games. So that, whether we wish to see the ‘Gully Creeping’ exploits of the post ‘90s Rocking’ Usain Bolt as ‘folksy’ is hardly of consequence. Indeed, this was never my point at all.

Rather, it was my intention to say that, in the same way that Usain Bolt is descended from particular types of traditions, as does Shelly-Ann Fraser and Melaine Walker and others, and that there is a whole history, as yet unacknowledged, of which these talented, young Jamaicans are fundamentally part. To see this as only (?) indicative of a dichotomous tension between ‘uptown’ and ‘downtown’ is, largely, reductionist and misses certain key points about the complexities inherent in these enduring binaries.

To begin with, issues of class in Jamaica are founded, in many ways, through a performance of ideas about race and racial privilege even inasmuch as they are also about power. Race relations form the crux of the award of class privilege in Jamaica, whereby people of African descent, specifically those who seem to ‘act black’ are placed at the base of the society’s social and political hierarchies.

A brief look at what passes for ‘culture’ (read with the capital C) in Jamaica might yet prove this point; that is, in a context where many of the theorists about Jamaican art, culture and music, among others, are not members of the so-called ‘masses’. Note, I am not suggesting that they should be. Rather, that it is very curious how segregated those spheres are from each other in terms of the cultural composition of both groups. If could digress momentarily to make a related point.

Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to visit the Liguannea Art and Photography Fair which featured a number of top local artists in their efforts to advertise their wares for all to see and, possibly, consume. What struck me as very curious was the high percentage of black figures which were featured either in photographs and or, artworks, like sketches, sculptures, et cetera. More interestingly, most of the well-heeled patrons seemed nothing at all like the subjects covered in the works featured. (But then, that could just be me!)

A friend asked one of the white, Jamaican photographers whether the subjects in the photographs were paid and what is the extent of their relationship to the subject matter? At which point, the photographer explained that, subjects are given a one time payment and sign a release for the use of the photographs. That the photos are used numerous times over as well as the fact that many of the subjects were minors and, therefore, below the age of consent seemed like a non-issue. Note, I say that even in the context of whether or not parents were fully aware of the implications of signing said release forms for the use of their children’s images in these ways.

Of greater concern, though, is the notion that, largely, white and privileged elites get to determine what is an appropriate subject matter for artistic consumption insofar as its relatedness to the question of black (under-aged) bodies, objectified into the world of art for the passive (?) consumption of those who look on. Failing to see the privation and challenges evident in the studies, the glorification of blackness in this regard as an appropriate (?) subject of non-black fascination serves the explicit purposes of glamourising pain and lack of opportunities, if not exploitation.

That none of those featured as subjects were even present at the fair to consume the works is also telling. By all appearances, there is no apparent connection (compassion?) with the politics of ‘art’ with the ‘life’ of those caught up in the photographers’ objectifying lenses. This makes a very profound point in relation to the concept of ‘visuality’ which I am implicitly interrogating here; that is, in relation to my earlier point about how the Jamaican media ‘see’.

One cannot escape the inherent power imbalances of Jamaica or any other society, unfortunate enough to have experienced the horrors of slavery. However, it must be considered especially strange (?) that the actors in the relationships established, in this instance, between media, their audience(s) and specific subject matters seem so segregated.

Whether people interact with each other beyond the realms of what is broadcast, published and or even aired is not really the point. Rather, the sense of entitlement that allows certain people to feel that they (alone) should be privileged (enough) to be commentators about specific subjects is more my immediate concern. As a result of which, how much of media are aimed at educating and informing their audiences in context? How much of the Jamaican media’s thesis of praise come out what it feels are ‘appropriate’ (?) contexts for praise and not others?

Why is it that, there seemed so much discomfort, recently, with the focus on some of the athletes in the Olympic coverage and to what extent does the audience have the right and or the power to question these ideas in their own locales? This was the aim of my last post. To bring into sharp relief the contradictions inherent in the hero-worship discourse of the Olympics in the larger context of a refusal to acknowledge the complexities of the histories which preceded, even propelled these athletes to greatness. The media are front and centre in this discussion.

Why is it then, that to discuss these issues make us so uncomfortable to the point where my post is trashed and I am basically ‘read’ the riot act for seeking to make Usain Bolt, specifically, but all the other athletes in the Jamaican team ‘folksy’? And, why is it that the notion of an uncritical, unreflexivity is so unceremoniously attributed to my questioning of these very premises?

The claims made against my last entry are not only unfounded and excessive in their attack/ rebuke but also create a smoke screen in terms of seeking to divert attention away from the more substantive point of the blog, which was intended to argue that Jamaican history was, in fact, the victor in Beijing 2008. And that, the achievements of the athletes, though important, come out and, therefore, embody a larger politics in regards to how we feel about ourselves as a people/ nation. I call this the ‘nationalist question’ – a poll for which I placed at the top of the last post. That there have been no answers so far might, itself, be very telling.

However, I choose to see this conversation for what it is – perhaps a little over the heads of those not as invested or as concerned. I did say, after all, that the post was decidedly academic and has implications for my own work in the area. Consequently, I am completely mindful of how such views may be perceived as well as that they may also be represented by others elsewhere, often without acknowledgement, in their limited, if not dishonest understanding of my post.

I end, therefore, by stating that this is neither a rant nor a ‘tracing match’, as per regular Jamaican parlance; that is, even while it is seeks to clarify the apparent misconceptions arising from my last post as well as makes additional point s in this entry. Further, it makes no claim about legitimacy beyond the fact that these are some initial views, though considered, on the subject of nationalism in the context of Jamaican popular culture in the wider context of sports. And that, where these claims acknowledge the scholarship of others, is intended to tease out my own views on the matter. In that regard, thanks for your indulgence!

…Until next time, be good!

PS: Still coming up the curve on the technological ‘know-how’ of blogs. When I have it all (?) figured out, I shall be certain to advertise same in a post at some future date!

PPS: Still figuring out how to do links to other pages!

PPPS: Reviewing all blogs to ensure that where possible all photos, etc. are acknowledged.

...Thanks for your patience!

Jamaica’s Olympics Exploits Reviewed: A National Pride ‘from Below’?

2008-08-26T22:45:00.016-05:00

So the Olympics are over, but I did promise 'more later'. Hopefully, this amounts to that even as Hurricane Gustav literally threatens to rain on my parade. Thanks for the overwhelming support of the last entry...

There is a line from Kamau Braithwaite’s poem Negus which reminds me of the exploits of Jamaica’s athletes who, recently, wowed the world with their outstanding achievements in Beijing ‘08. It reads: ‘…we who have known nothing…/ Good earth, God’s earth…’ It chronicles, inter alia, the painful histories of peoples of African descent who, now resident in the ‘New World’ have, in the words of Jamaica’s first National Hero Marcus Mosiah Garvey, ‘accomplished what [they] will[ed]’, despite the seemingly insurmountable odds which they, collectively, faced.

Kamau, who originally hails from the tiny Caribbean island of Barbados, was born Lawson Edward Braithwaite. He lived in Jamaica as well as other parts of the Caribbean and wrote his Ph.D. dissertation on issues related to one of his adopted countries – our beloved ‘JamRock’. Entitled: ‘The Development of Creole Society in Jamaica 1770-1820’, Braithwaite’s tremendous scholarship and value as both poet and Caribbean philosopher are phenomenal. They impact various areas of life in these isles washed by the Caribbean Sea and are instrumental to my reading of the Olympic discourse emanating from Beijing.

There is, however, another agenda here. This blog provides as space in which to work out some ideas in relation to the larger theme of a (trans-) national Jamaican identity which have become as a crucial part of the ‘Beijing experience’, as well as is present in some of the attendant analyses following since, even if not stated explicitly. In my previous post, for instance, I suggested same without necessarily saying so. I wish to do just that today, as well as add a critical rider – these views are, largely, preliminary and reflect, in many ways, my own considerations of the subject. They converge around similar issues in my ongoing academic work as well as my long term interests in the area. Like others before it, this entry is part of an emerging set of ideas about the ‘national’ across a range of disciplines in the popular domain, sports being one of them.

Braithwaite’s work, like those of other scholars including Nettleford and Carolyn Cooper, has helped us scratch the surface and, quite possibly, illuminate the first half (?) of the trajectory of the processes of decolonization and its twin sister nationalism in the Caribbean They have provided an appropriate (?) context through which we may be able to analyse Jamaica’s outstanding achievements and athletic prowess recently demonstrated in Beijing. These cumulative acts of national pride, focus and determination on the part of the Jamaican athletes, then, visually remind that, questions about (trans-) nationalism are not just an intellectual preoccupation which, in the words of Nicholas Laughlin, has become en vogue in recent times in Caribbean cultural and literary studies.

While, it is not my intent to comment fulsomely on the implications of that statement here, what I wish to do; however, is to add the second ‘chapter’ in my focus on Jamaica’s Olympic exploits by way of this entry. Such was promise made earlier on which I am now delivering in fulfillment of that ‘bond’. Indulge me, momentarily, to acknowledge what is, without question, a decidedly academic look at the Olympics, specifically regarding how representations of nationalism which have come out of that experience might be considered.

Indeed, following on my earlier post last week, Annie Paul mentioned in her most recent blog that, these Olympics embody a sort of ‘Patwa power’ in terms of Jamaica’s achievements in Beijing. According to her, the achievements of the young and very talented Jamaican team at the Games of the 29th Olympiad lead by ‘lightning Bolt’ are indicative, in many respects, of a ‘politics from below’ (my emphasis!). Jamaicans of otherwise little renown, as per the society’s class matrix that is, have excelled beyond measure. Showing, in the process, how the traditions of orality out of which most of them have originated are, fundamentally, valued and valuable, despite a traditional Jamaican class politics which would otherwise negate such achievements, locally.

While, I do not wish to address the implications of orality here, it is hard to disagree let alone find fault with Paul’s well reasoned analysis. Still, its substantive value, though important, does not immediately interests me; that is, insofar as she argues in favour an importance which we have always known but which has only now been acknowledged by some within the privileged Jamaican literati. Note, I am not suggesting that Paul is either guilty of this belated recognition nor that she is a member of such an elitist grouping.

Rather, I am contending, as does the famous Jamaican poet, scholar, actor and activist Miss Lou does, in her poem ‘Jamaica Oman’ that, Jamaican people have always embodied the celebratory convictions of character and the audacity of hope (a-la Barrack Obama), to dream big dreams like those witnessed in Beijing. Many were out conquering the world beyond Jamaica’s shores long before 2008. Among others, their quiet struggles have contributed, in part, to one of the more recent ‘wonders of the modern world’ – the Panama Canal during the first decade of the twentieth century.

The mass exodus to places like Englan’, as noted in the previous post below, decades later (1950s) and after that the United States (US) are other notable examples. Other ‘First World’ nations have received many benefits from Jamaica even at the said Olympic Games. Canadian and British Olympic champions Donovan Bailey and Linford Christie, respectively, are the product of outward Jamaican migration to the so-called ‘First World’, as are our scholars, scientists and performance artists, numbered among them even Miss Lou herself. That latter day acknowledgement has now been awarded does not diminish these unquestionable facts of our collective histories.

Miss Lou’s words mirror a similar admiration, notwithstanding that she classifies it under the gendered rubric of the traditionally perceived cunning of Jamaican womanhood:

Jamaica oman cunny, sah! (Jamaican women are cunning, eh!)
Is how dem jinal so? (How is it that they are so smart?)
Look how long dem liberated (Look how long they have been liberated)
An di man dem never know! (And the men did not know!)

By reading ‘oman’ (woman) in this case for Jamaican people I expand Miss Lou’s original meaning to also represent the imbalanced power relations established between the social and political classes in Jamaica. The Jamaican woman metaphorically becomes the larger and largely, disenfranchised (black) peoples of the society’s under-classes, specifically those who have been feminised and ‘othered’ in the alienating master narratives of patriarchal, anti-colonial, dominance outfitted with all the racialised heritage of Colonial Enlightenment nationalism. Consequently, identity politics in the Jamaican ‘nation-state’ operates with a fair amount of disdain towards the social and political pariahs not ‘naturally’ included in the arrogant definitions of statehood offered through slogans such as ‘Out of Many, One People’, as well as and to a lesser extent, the ubiquitous National Anthem.

Though welcomed, the collective nationalization of the Olympic team is curious and warrants critique in this wider context. Largely, invoked through the technology of media such actions represent, in the main, a chasm in the traditions of hegemony practised by the state. Black people in Jamaica, specifically those of working class, inner-city and the rural ‘peasant’ class origins do not (really) belong. They are not, necessarily, included in the definitions of official authority as sanctioned by the preponderance of ‘brown’ and non-black folk in the several areas of Jamaican politics. ‘Browness’, such as it is, becomes the metaphoric representation of a specific state of being which constructs the ‘nation’ as anything other than what it truly is – an African descended majority whose culture and customs differ significantly from the politics of officialdom. Paul is right, therefore, in making the connections between the Olympians ‘from below’ and Dancehall and Reggae musics even if there are (minor) distinctions between these.

Still, Paul does not go nearly as far in establishing the links between Jamaican folk culture and urban blight, which are, in part, responsible for the production of what she calls ‘pocket rocket[s]’ like Shelly-Ann Fraser and others. Acknowledgement must be duly given to the pioneering scholarship of theorists like Cooper, whose insistent refusal to bow in the face of constant criticisms and pressure have been vindicated, in many ways, by the ‘gold rush’ occasioned by the ‘Olympic fever’ which overtook us this past week. That Cooper and a (limited) number of others have argued in favour of a sort of ascendant (black) trans-nationalism which surpasses the fixed geographical boundaries of the ‘nation’ and which are rooted in Jamaican folk traditions; she has also cleared the way for Paul’s analysis.

Consequently, space has to be created in this conversation to acknowledge the extent to which the ‘folk’ as a counter discourse of grassroots Jamaican nationalism has been, fundamentally, disregarded and disrespected in the ongoing struggles for what Nettleford, in his use of M.G. Smith’s plural society model, calls ‘the battle for space’. The team of Jamaican athletes in Beijing not only displayed the power of the ‘the politics from below’ but also made two other similarly important statements. Jamaica continues to be a very racist society which refuses to acknowledge this blight on the nation’s history, by appearing to ‘apologise’ for the obvious material poverty of many of the athletes who represented us in Beijing, China.

That we focused mostly on the champions rather than the entire team further cements the point. Thus, it may be rightly argued that the only reason Fraser and Walker, especially, are heralded to prominence is because they are gold medalists. ‘Sensitive’ viewers can, therefore, tolerate to some extent the sights and sounds of real life struggles, if even momentarily, and proceed to preface their responses either with an apology/ embarrassment for themselves (the viewers, that is!) – the so-called ‘laughter of madness’ in theater which disguises the audiences’ dis-ease with certain aspects of the unfolding performance.

Alternatively, there is the feeling that the athletes may be ‘embarrassed’, almost as a way of explaining away (?) the privation and lack so starkly told in the contradictory discourse of championship occasioned by the focus of the Olympics in Beijing. Getting to the world stage and dominating it is part and parcel of having to compete, fight and struggle regularly in one’s daily existence. It might well be argued then, that it this particular (?) kind of viewer who is shamed rather than the athletes, who incidentally, have not (yet) seen the reports themselves as they have not yet landed in Jamaica since their departure for Beijing.

Presumably, already more accustomed (?) to the familiarity of their constantly challenging contexts all that is left for most of the Jamaica’s athletes featured is win gold medals, set records and create upsets on the world stage. The Jamaicans’ exploits in Beijing could hardly be considered a surprise, in this context, as the grim realities under which many have lived and continue to live are a necessary part of their success story turned inside out, at least from my vantage point. It is completely disingenuous for our local media to project, as a result, an image of the athletes that does not meaningfully correspond with a respectful awareness of this consciousness.

In fact, the media, themselves, contribute to this unhealthy state of affairs by refusing to help forward an appropriate understanding of the material culture of lack and privation which are instrumental to creating our (world) stars. Often no connection is made with the struggles of other Jamaicans in previous decades. As Channer notes in the Wall Street Journal, many have had to flee the harsh conditions of a contradictory ‘paradise’ which accords status and privilege only (?) insofar as one is felt to appropriately embody the high (emphasis added!) nationalist and elitist virtues/ ideals embedded in slogans like ‘Out of Many, One People’! The extent to which most of these athletes are, rightly, the children and products of the Jamaican under-classes foreground, then, the long history of struggle and the traditions of greatness from which they have descended.

Resistance is genetically encoded in our DNA. Not surprisingly, plots to overthrow slavery marked by such famous revolts like the ‘Christmas Rebellion’ of 1865 in the eastern parish of St. Thomas resulted in the execution of National Heroes, Sam Sharpe, a Baptist minister and the mulatoe politician George William Gordon a day after each other. Examples like these occupy a crucial space in shaping modern Jamaican history and are a key part of our tremendous athletic and other abilities. Any effort to suggest otherwise is to miss the singular importance of a collective national (?) resistance, deeply rooted in Jamaica’s conflicted history of race (class and gender) relations. This is indelibly marked by and onto our bodies, including those of our athletes.

That the Beijing performances so wowed the world, specifically during the period between August 15 and 24, potently testifies to our transcendent abilities to rise above material circumstances to the pinnacles of greatness. This is not a fluke, nor is it happenstance. No, there is real talent here – a talent that is, fundamentally, part of who we are. It makes us a strong, confident people who know how to win, laugh, cry and expect the best even when all else suggests otherwise; when to do the opposite of the ordinary and how to adamantly refuse to do nothing at all because the deck seems stacked against us.

Our courage in the face of great adversity and the burning desire that knows that regardless of outcomes we gave it our best is crucial to what makes us Jamaican. The slew of jokes which circulated across the Internet in the aftermath of Jennifer Bolt’s comments that she fed Usain on the good ole yam (and bananas), as well coco and the much vaunted cassava of recent vintage, a-la Agriculture Minister Dr. Christopher Tufton, masks a larger point. Not only is this the staple we had to eat, many times it was all that there was available. ‘We who have known nothing… [but the] Good earth, [that] God [gave us]…!’ were sustained even in the most challenging of times by Jamaica’s ‘coarse cuisine’. It nurtured our dreams simultaneously watered by a fair amount of tears, laughter, disappointments and joy! This is but part of the other half of the story which, controversial (?) Dancehall deejay Buju Banton reminds ‘has never been told!’

Thanks to Jennifer, Wellesley and Usain Bolt, we are a little nearer to setting the record straight!

PS: Pictures above courtesy of the International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF) website: www.iaaf.org.

Veronica Campbell-Brown of Jamaica reacts after winning the Women's 200M Final in Beijing, China;

Usain Bolt wrapped in Jamaica Flag after the finals of the Men's 200M in Beijing, China; and,

Asafa Powell anchors Jamaica to victory in the Men's 400M Relay Final.

“I Feel Like Mi Heart Gwine Burs’": Dominant Jamaican Athletes in Beijing!

2008-08-19T20:24:00.015-05:00

I know this entry is late, but...!

On occasions like the absolutely amazing display of Jamaica’s phenomenal athletic prowess in Beijing, China on Saturday, August 16 and Sunday, August 17, 2008, I am reminded of that celebrated Jamaican poet Dr. the Hon. Louise Bennett-Coverly’s poem – Colonisation in Reverse. Among others, the popular Miss Lou poem extols the virtues of a colonial subject in classic revisionist mode, renegotiating the terms of the enervating relationship established between super power and satellite state.

Miss Lou’s poem underlines the trajectory of Jamaicans who go to Britain in droves in search of ‘greener pastures’, almost as a way of reversing the traditionally lopsided terms of the colonial relationship; in the process, simultaneously imbuing themselves, at least in Miss Lou’s universe, with the power to ‘tun history upside dung’. They subvert the oppressive embrace of an ambivalent ‘motherland’ (Britain) by insisting on purposefully acting outside the proverbial box. Their efforts are epigraphed in Miss Lou’s words:

Oonoo see how life funny, (Do you see how funny/ strange life is,)
Oonoo see de turnabout, (Do you see how it can turn around,)
Jamaica live fe box bread (Jamaicans have lived to exploit opportunities)
Outa English people mout’. (At the expense of the English.)

There is no room for hesitation or staying in the back.

Like the Jamaican exodus in the fifties, the Beijing bound athletes know only too well that there is no joy in pointless work, often unsuitable to their dignity. They, like Jane who sits and reads romance novels all day on Aunt Fan's couch in cool Englan', are much keener on standing atop the podium to receive all the accolades and glory that go with that on the world stage. Usain Bolt, Shelly-Ann Fraser, Sherone Simpson and Kerron Stewart prefer another kind of fulfillment – winning races; setting records and standing aloft in medal ceremonies, while the rest of the world watches their dominant display.

In similar fashion to Miss Lou’s rupturing of the imposed silence(s) of subalternity through the technology of poetry, the Jamaican athletes literally ‘tun history upside dung’ in Beijing with their speed at the weekend! They not only took gold in the men’s and women’s short sprints – a first ever for us and the first in twelve years for any other country, Bolt, Fraser, Stewart and Simpson also set two separate though linked records.

Usain Bolt astonishingly trots to the tape in an astounding 9.69 seconds, notwithstanding the chest thumping. Kerron Stewart and Sherone Simpson, both place second; in the process, rounding out the top three spots of the Women’s One Hundred Metres! ‘I Feel Like Mi Heart Gwine Burs’, indeed! What ah (h)excitement! To add insult to injury, the severely distressed Americans in their petition to have a rerun of the race and or a bronze medal are firmly dismissed by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF).

Miss Lou’s ability to think, speak and act is a definite sign of hers and her country men and women’s empowerment in the face of the super power dominance of colonial Britain. Indeed, her victory, though largely intellectual is nonetheless occasioned by an important device – her consistent use of humour to overcome the paralyzing effects of (colonial) oppression.

The Jamaican athletes, on the other hand, use speed as their weapon to defeat their highly fancied rivals. The Jamaican Olympic exploits are comparable to Miss Lou’s ‘re-verse-ing’ of the oppressive discourse of Empire echoed in the actions of Miss Mattie, Jane as well as all the other un-named, though fundamentally present Jamaican characters in the poem. By shutting out the Americans from the medal podium the wily Jamaicans give new meaning to being ‘likkle but (wi) tallahwah!’ Definitely awesome!

On another note, it behooves me to add that, even as we celebrate and are justifiably excited for the Jamaican athletes, Asafa Powell’s crushing disappointment in the same Men’s One Hundred Metres event is as painful as it is real. Like the early Jamaicans settlers in Englan’ who brave cold weather and difficult work conditions some of which often does not suit their dignity, Asafa must be content, yet again, with criticisms that he is unable to translate all that talent into meaningful hardware on the world stage.

However, lest we forget, please recall that it was because of Asafa’s exploits in the international arena of record making which have, in part, created space in our imaginations for daring to dream the impossibility of setting world records as a standard. Had it not been for Asafa’s own refusal to give in to domination we might not have fielded so many confident, young Jamaicans in their unrelenting pursuits of excellence in Beijing as well as elsewhere.

I recall, for instance, that after his first world record run many athletes at the local high school championships, some of who are now in reserve on the Olympic Team and before that the World Championships, indicated that he was their inspiration. Even now, the twinned emotions of disappointment and joy so feelingly expressed in the One Hundred Metres on Saturday continue to light the path to a new dawn. Many are asking, as a result of Powell’s exploits, however dubious, what else is required to become the absolute best athlete there is.

No doubt about it, Asafa Powell is a trendsetter, if even of a different kind. His story surpasses Track and Fields Athletics and incorporates instead the passion, struggles, expectations and nascent ambitions of the early settlers in their ‘colonisation in reverse’ memorialized in poetry by Bennett-Coverely. Powell is the first arrivant in the epic struggle of colonial resistance; that is, should we choose to see the use of performance enhancing drugs (PED) in this way. Embodied in his pain are the seeds of self growth so urgently needed to purposefully throw off the limiting shackles of enslavement and colonialism once and for all.

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has aided the process by taking a decisive step in leveling the playing field in some way, it is now up to us to carry the baton all the way to victory. I am confident we will! Powell’s loss poignantly counterpoints Usain’s victory and underlines the twinned paradox of life in Jamrock. Damian ‘Junior Gong’ Marley reminds as a result that life here is gritty and problematic, which, in part, helps explain Miss Lou’s poetry insofar as the sentiments expressed therein become part of the push for a different take on colonial politics contemporarily.

Miss Lou’s ‘re-verse-ing’ of the terms of the colonial relationship act as a likely beginning point for discussion as well as understanding the power of Jamaica’s athletic genius and the vast potentials which reside in that largely untapped space. I am aware that Jamaican-American novelist and scholar Colin Channer has already given, through an analysis of Usain Bolt’s running style, a treatise on the theme of flight in Jamaican culture and its significance to our current Olympic exploits. It is not my intent to rehash this debate, necessarily. However, what I wish to highlight is that the texture of our celebrations must never loose sight of the historical dimensions, both on and off the field of play.

By making a comparison between Miss Lou’s ‘Colonisation in Reverse’ poem as well as her own attempts in that regard; that is, through the act of writing about this process in Jamaican language, I wish to underline the extent to which Jamaican athletes are conducting a similar campaign now in Beijing. In their dominant display at the weekend, the young Jamaican athletes many of who are trained and groomed locally, have eloquently displayed their refusal to be cowed by the politics of American/ super power dominance. Their rejection of the notion of sitting still and or bringing up the rear for other more established and resource rich countries is, therefore, especially commendable. This crop of Jamaicans prefer instead to run, and from the front to boot. Theirs is not a campaign about second fiddle. In fact, it is not a campaign about fiddling at all!…Jamaica has come of age!

Gone are the days when athletes were said to pay their own way to represent Jamaica in big meets. Hopefully, gone too is the lack of an appropriate ‘local programme’ to cater to the needs of those ‘stars’ who were not fortunate enough to gain scholarships to go overseas. Through the efforts of Glen Mills, Stephen Francis and others we have produced world record holders and Olympic champions right here at home. A clear indication, if ever there was one that there are good things going on in Jamaica. Like the ‘Lightning Bolt’, the colonized subject of the Jamaican imagination is uncontainable in its ebullience and energetic in its consummate display of world class abilities. Lead by the new generation of Jamaican athletes, especially those in Beijing China, most of who are in their early to mid twenties, we appear to have a different conceptualization of time and space. Our play ground has widened and we are taking it ‘to di worl’!

Hardly surprising then is Bolt’s continued dancing even while the metal filled mouth of Shelly-Ann Fraser smiles back at us with broad abandon. There is no reticence here. The colonial dominance of the Britain and America are as much a target as anything else. There are records to be set, gold medals to win and upsets to happen. That cannot be done from a spectator position.

We will not soon forget Merlene Ottey’s many near misses at the Olympics and World Championships and the unpleasant moniker ‘Bronze Queen’ so unceremoniously hinged to her by her critics. As the ‘perennial bridesmaid’, Ottey bears the dubious distinction of being caught at the crossroads of a traditional post colonial dialectics of struggling to defy being overwhelmed by super power dominance, albeit unsuccessfully. Shelly-Ann Fraser and before her Veronica Campbell, on the other hand, are the modern day reincarnations, then, of Ms Lous’s vision of the overturning, if not outright rejection of the colonial politics of (super power) domination. Their victories, like Bolt’s and the two other Jamaican silver medalists in the Women’s One Hundred Metres in Beijing, China are emblematic in many ways of the overthrow of the might of the giant Goliath by the seeming inconsequential shepherd boy David, both of biblical renown.

Bob Marley tells of the ‘small axe[s]’ can fall a ‘big tree[s]’; in the process, reminding that where as size can be threatening, in the overall scheme of things it is really the size of one’s heart and the stomach for victory which matter more. Here, the big tree is, without question the ‘great Americans’, with their long sporting traditions often presumed by some to be of questionable excellence, which is toppled by the seeming inconsequence of small Jamaica at the weekend.

Like the Jamaican Miss Lou who is embodied in her work in many ways, specifically as colonial subject in her refusal to sit still and to be dominated by the tyrannical regime of colonial politics, our athletes are also victors in the international narrative of sporting excellence. They, like Miss Lou in her ‘re-verse-ing’ of the Standard (English) through the use of the Jamaican dialect have made us all proud to be called Jamaicans!

PS: Congratulations to Shericka Williams on winning silver in the Women's Four Hundred Metres!

PPS: Photographs courtesy of the Intenational Ammateur Athletics Federation Website: (www.iaaf.org).

1. Asafa Powell and Lindell Frater of Jamacia comfort each other after finishing outside the medal placement in the Finals of the Men's 100M in Beijing, China.

2. Shelly-Ann Fraser reacts after winning the Women's 100M Final in Beijing, China.

3. Shelly-Ann Fraser in full flight!

4. Usain Bolt celebrates winning the Men's 100M Finals in Beijing, China.

...More later!

Pictures from Beijing: the Opening Ceremony; Drug Testing and the Athletic Prowess of My Alma Mater!

2008-08-13T12:23:00.018-05:00

The Opening Ceremony of the Games of the Twenty-Ninth Olympiad did ‘sell off’, as we say in Jamaica! However for someone like me who claims to be on ‘Olympic Watch’ it is downright unacceptable that nothing was said earlier about the Games here on the eve of the spectacular event in the appropriately named Bird’s Nest on Friday morning (Jamaica time!). Or, even afterwards when all the newspapers gushed about how awesome the Chinese display was to the world! Even the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) got caught up in the euphoria, despite its constant criticisms of the award of the Games to China and their record of human rights.

Notwithstanding the politics which surrounds the Chinese Games, however, something special is happening in Beijing. Way beyond the fanfare of Friday’s awesome display, these Olympics promise to yeild a record number of medals for Jamaica. More on that later.

Of course, there are reports of the lengthy delays in terms of the waiting period for athletes before they were allowed to enter the Bird’s Nest on Friday evening for the Opening Ceremony, as well as some fatal incidents, including the stabbing of an American. Then, there is the dubious distinction of star fated nine year old Lin Miaoke, who ‘sang’ “Ode to the Motherland”, on Friday. It has now been learned that the 'cute' little girl, actually, lip synched her way into the hearts of millions. Why? Because her predecessor, the actual singer, seven year old Yang Peiyi was declared not cute enough though her voice was said to ‘the most beautiful’!

Fast forward to Jamaican concerns. Gleaner reports contend that, Asafa Powell, former World Record Holder in the Men’s One Hundred Metres, is ‘talking tough’. Powell is frustrated with the numbers of doping tests to which he and some of his teammates have been subjected since arriving in Beijing. In Powell's case, the number comes up to four. According to him, he and the other Jamaican athletes will be weak by the time the Track and Field component kicks off this Friday. All of Jamaica commiserates with Mr. Powell's anxieties.

However, Dr. Paul Wright is chalking up Powell’s concerns to frustrations that the Jamaicans are ‘being targeted’. In his view, there is no likelihood of Powell and the other athletes who have been tested so far being weakened by the blood tests. He was speaking in the same Gleaner report today.

Dr. Herb Elliot, a Jamaican member of the International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF) Anti-Doping Committee argues also, that these are part of efforts to ensure a drug-free Olympics. According to him, Jamaica is one of the high profile athletic teams at the Games. This, in part, accounts for the high numbers of tests done on the Jamaican athletes.

Elsewhere, Stephen Francis, head coach of the local sprint camp Maximum Velocity and Power (MVP) who also has athletes participating in the Jamaican training camp, is asking back for his media accreditation. This after he refused to accept it a week ago. Francis’ accreditation allows him to gain access to his athletes while they are in training, though not to the Athletes Village.

Though not likely, Coach Francis’ very rash decisions may impact Jamaica’s ‘Olympic Dreams’ of gold in the relays. A week ago, Powell, Shelly-Ann Fraser and Michael Frater were named as signatories to a letter from the MVP camp, asking that these athletes be included in relay practice under very specific instructions. This was perceived to be part of a boycott of sorts by the MVP athletes, whose coach it is said also has long standing grouses with the Jamaica Amateur Athletics Association (JAAA).

Today, however, Francis has made an about turn…a case of Olympic madness taken too far? Perhaps. Not sure!

What is certain, however, is that on Monday evening I received an SMS text message from a former schoolmate that one of her former classmates, who will also be participating in the Women’s 3000m Steeple Chase event in Beijing, had sent her pictures from China. I was so excited I literally chased my other friend off the phone in order to receive them! They are at the top of the page, of course!...Right out of the horse’s mouth or more appropriately, directly from the Athlete’s Village in Beijing, China. (Second photo shows 3000M Steeplechaser Korine Hinds entering the Bird's Nest at the Start of the Opening Ceremony, in Beijing, China).

Most of the athletes in these pictures as well as the seated official, Bertland Cameron, former World Champion and National Record Holder in the Men’s 400m, are all past students of my much loved alma mater, St. Jago High School.

In fact, Delloreen Ennis-London (first left in the fourth picture), who is down to compete in the Women’s 100m Hurdles is also a classmate of mine. We sat in the same room for three consecutive years (third to fifth form)! Then, there is Kenia Sinclair, who will run in the Women’s 800m. Both she and her twin sister Kenya, herself a high school athlete, are former students of mine; that is, while I was a Prefect in Sixth Form. Ms Sinclair was also the classmate of one of my colleagues in my office at work! I am surrounded! I know! I will be cheering each and every one of them on, especially as they all seem likely to take home a medal in their respective events. 400m hurdler Markino Buckley, formerly of St. Jago High, rounds out those in the photographs above.

My sentimental favourites are, without question, Veronica Campbell-Brown, the Defending Champion in the Women’s 200m and Usain Bolt and Asafa Powell, the current and former World Record Holders in the Men’s 100m, respectively.

Other St. Jago notables in the team are: Kerron Stewart in the Women’s 100m; Melaine Walker in the Women’s 400m and, Marvin Anderson in the Men’s 400m Relays. All things being equal, the feelings are that the latter event will produce a World Record for the Jamaicans when Bolt and Powell take to the track! Kudos to all Jamaican athletes in their eagerly anticipated golden quest at the Olympics! Whatever the outcome we will all be proud of them!

Cheers!

PS: Fans of Veronica Campbell-Brown will be disappointed to learn that she will not run in the Women’s 100m in Beijing, despite her strong showing in the event, post National Trials where she finished fourth. JAAA’s rules indicate that she will not be considered.

PPS: Congratulations to Michael Phelps and his heroics in the pool! If ever there was a link between man and fish, it would have to be him! LOL!

PPPS: The Grand Gala was, from what I hear, very grand! I slept through most of it, sadly. I was not especially drawn to some of the early performances of the show on TV. However, some of the numbers were very energetic and well executed. Bi-ups to L’Antoinette Stines, one of the choreographers and former classmate of mine also (at university...name dropping!), who’s use of the mokojumbie dancers – the performers on stilts, really gave a welcomed lift to the programme. Large up to Nexus also! Excellent singing, indeed!...Oh, and take the poll at the top of the page!

…Till next time! Walk good!

Pictures courtesy of Korene Hinds, Jamaican 3000m Steeplechaser at the Beijing, Olympics 2008.

‘So, What Are You Doing Now?’ And Other Annoying Questions (…From People Who You Have Not Seen in Awhile!)

2008-08-04T11:02:00.011-05:00

‘So, what are you doing now?’ the seemingly innocuous question wormed its way into my consciousness long after the first day of the Culinary Arts Exposition, held at the Jamaica Pegasus Hotel on Sunday August 3, 2008. I had had the good fortune, earlier, of a member of my choir inviting me to the event. I jumped at the opportunity to see and learn some more about Jamaican cuisines, as well as to sample some of the goodies which were on display over the course of the two day event. Of course, I would have to figure out how to do that in between blogging, doing the laundry and finding something to eat on an otherwise lazy Sunday afternoon.

Still, I would gladly have reverted to blogging and trying to figure out how to increase the passage of traffic through this website. After all, I must have made about a dozen entries in the last week and still no comments…at the site! Ok, so I am stressing and loosing focus!

Back to the earlier question and the fairly longish title. This entry is not a rant. It is a discussion about how people ask difficult, often very perplexing questions, specifically people from whom you have become (very) distant and who you have not seen in awhile. As a result, it seeks to open up of a space for critiquing the elasticized boundaries of intimacy which often occasions our new configurations of ‘friendship’ currently.

As a matter of fact, let me make my position clear – I also ask these annoying questions, at times. However, I try only asking them of people with whom I am fairly close and who I think will appreciate the value of my reasons for asking after their welfare. Whenever this happens, I tell myself that I am very much prepared to engage in, if necessary, a long and soulful conversation about navigating the pitfalls as well as the joys of choosing to live within the borders of our urban jungles which we call home, et cetera.

In that regard, the reference above to ‘difficult questions’ is aimed, not so much at suggesting an inability to answer the question, as posed, more like a preference not to. Why? Such questions are often, without a context, very off-putting if not altogether intrusive. They presume a level of intimacy which often conflicts with the reality of the relationship established between you and your current interlocutor. Take the one in today’s title, for instance. It is never welcomed, especially when you are trying to chill out at the Jamaica Pegasus, while enjoying the sights and sounds of ‘Emanci-pendence’ (Emancipation and Independence all rolled into one! see earlier post!) celebrations.

Implicit in such questions is a competitive comparison intended to evaluate the worth of your life into tablet sized inflexions of time. Reductionist and usually offensive in their presumptuousness, they are often super inquisitive. Such questions deny the texture and complexity of an otherwise untamed and riotous existence lived fully out on the edge. They overlook all dimensions to see instead a flattened out surface meant to be consumed within milliseconds of time.

Forget the beauty of a life lived in Technicolor and Dolby Stereo. Forget sincerity, even! Your responses must be instantly formatted to conform to a few five seconds sound bytes related mostly to your personal advancements but especially your professional credentials, ‘since we last saw each other’!

Then, there are the even more vapid and vacuous attempts to commiserate by said perpetrators; that is, if you choose not to answer directly or not at all, as the case might be. In those instances, you cannot roll your eyes and sigh long-sufferingly. That might even seem disrespectful. Instead, you are required to play along and sound almost as if in tacit agreement with the implied eulogizing of your presumed ‘failed existence’.

There are also those even bigger moments which bring together people you have not seen in quite awhile, for various reasons. Though slightly different, in some ways, these are often intended to give little more than a detailed account of your movements and accomplishments in the course of the last whichever number of years! They usually circulate around dinner tables, coffee bars, et cetera. Marriage, children, lovers, (additional) degrees, jobs, cars and houses and not, necessarily, in that order become the hallmarks of this kind of conversation…

And, that is only the beginning! Here, you smile politely and stuff as much food into your mouth as possible hoping to dodge these vulgar displays of ‘accomplishments’ so conveniently entered into, presumably, in the interests of ‘information sharing’ – an update, as it were, on where we are now! (Developing a drinking habit, or running off to the bathroom never to return, don’t seem like such a bad idea, after all!)

Still, the meaningless exchanges of ‘critical information’ continue! Your turn is next! The next ‘life’ to be dissected under the probing microscope of ‘concerned peers’ in their near professional ‘empathy’ about your seeming inability to match strides with their over achieving quest to find out ‘what have you been up to, recently?’

I am, often, tempted to say, ‘Do you really want to know? Or, are you just asking because you think it is polite; that, by doing so, it shows your concern and compassion for my welfare?’ That, of course, would not do. So, you find whichever ‘polite’ way of ignoring the question, while simultaneously, smiling as understandingly as possible about the unwelcomed inquisition represented by your intrepid panel of interviewers…

(They probably mean well, though they somehow fail to see that questions like these, in a way, presume levels of familiarity, trust and regard that, in the intervening years, might have been completely eroded). In between the struggle to quell the rising tide of a sudden defensiveness, I am reminded of why I chose to make certain decisions and not others and try and relax before, smilingly, trying to search for the right words to deny this round of the intrusion! (I, genuinely, wished I had the magnanimity to ‘turn the other cheek’ so fervently preached in church!)

…I duck out of the Jamaica Pegasus and ensure I return long after the planned departure of my earlier inquisitor. In so doing, giving myself enough room (I hope!) to breathe and refocus on the critical ‘issues of life’, like breathing in the tepid air of the packed room. The anxious onlooker have all come for reasons very much like my own – to see and taste the creative Jamaican cuisine on their holiday evening out...

Having to figure out, how to tell people to piss off, politely, can be a real job of work!

Food Security, Emancipation Day and Denbigh 2008

2008-08-02T15:06:00.010-05:00

The question of food security and the Denbigh Agriculture Show, which coincide with the August 1 anniversary of Jamaica’s Emancipation from the physical shackles of slavery, is inescapable. Among others, the issue of Jamaica’s capacity to feed itself, coupled with sovereign authority is linked to the extent that food security foregrounds the inextricably twinned concerns of sovereignty and independence. Indeed, August 6, will also mark the celebration of Jamaica’s independence from British colonial rule in 1962. On that day, like August 1 which, up until recently was not a public holiday, Jamaica stops to review its history as a means of lighting the way forward.

For my purposes, however, I wish to discuss the Denbigh show, which I attended this year as part of my obligations as a Civil Servant whose work intersects with issues related to agriculture. Among others, I had the opportunity to see the Jamaica Tourist Board’s (JTB) flags waving in the breeze, as they cemented their connections to the festival. A number of other Caribbean countries were present. Sandals (hotel chain) were also on hand to lend support and credibility to the event.

Denbigh which is put on by the Jamaica Agricultural Society (JAS), usually runs for the first three days of August each year. Based on feedback, there was much to see and lots of food to buy, though the prices kept going up within relatively short periods of time. There was a running joke that, these were ‘Denbigh prices’, almost reflective, in a way to the ‘myth' of the global food crisis. I say ‘myth’; of course, because there is a belief by some that food suppliers on the international market, like those on the oil market, are hoarding food with a view to driving up the price and, therefore, make a killing in every sense of that word!

While, these views can certainly be challenged, it is important to remember that the notion of enrichment is not just about wealth but also power. By having others depend on us for food or other important commodities like oil, there is no telling the levels of influence we can amass and how that can be translated into real power to affect peoples’ lives, even at a global level. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), recently, aired a programme in which a guest understandably challenged the notion of ‘global food crisis’.

The BBC guest argued that food security is centred on some of these issues, notwithstanding that, the prices of wheat and grain have doubled in fairly short periods on the world market. In the process, placing stress on already poor governments to find food to arrest the problem of starvation within their borders. Pricing mechanisms, markets availability as well as the wherewithal to grow one’s own food supplies are intimately connected to the food crisis, he claimed.

By offering subsidies to farmers in developed economies, these governments are, effectively, aiding the destruction of local markets like Jamaica where the economies of scale, including production costs, are comparably higher than those in developed countries. Local markets are drowned in food supplies from elsewhere which, effectively, stifle all likelihood of domestic production. Import bills go up and rich farmers get even richer, while poorer countries like Haiti and others starve.

At Denbigh, there were several displays of food, including ground provisions like the infamous Cassava, following on the heels of Dr. Christopher Tufton’s, (Minister of Agriculture), recommendation that we ‘eat what we grow and grow what we eat’. This, incidentally, is the theme for Denbigh 2008, though it has been the theme for some several years now.

The upward movement of prices of food on the show grounds reminded that, notwithstanding the appeals to grow more food, locally, there is also a real need for a clearly articulated government pricing regulations to govern the operations of those who sell these items. According to local news reports there is also a need to find markets and such like for local farmers as a means of regulating the trade.

The only way of ensuring that Jamaica is, in fact, able to feed itself and, in the process, develop real wealth from the soil, as a result of it, is through a more modern approach to farming and agriculture even within the face of the above named challenges. Slavery is over; at the very least the physical chains have been removed, thanks to the actions of local freedom fighters and British parliamentarians like William Wilberforce and others.

However, ‘the long walk to freedom’, according to former South African President, Nobel Peace Laureate and Freedom Fighter Nelson Mandela, continues even in the present. Hopefully, we will use this ‘Emanci-pendence’ period to increase our awareness of some of these issues and act accordingly. Food security has to be one of the most critical issues impacting our growth as a nation at this time.

Pictures courtesy of the Rural Agricultural Development Authority.

Letters To The Editor

2008-07-31T13:29:00.015-05:00

NB: At the recommendation of Longbench, one of my faithful readers, I was advised to send this letter to the local media. It came out of a discussion we had further to the post about "drug taking and the 'Olympic Express..." (see below!). The letter was not published

Long Bench feels that, among others, I should perhaps consider calling the radio stations and shape this discussion, publicly. Though understandable, I do not feel thus pushed. However, I did write to the editor to discover the reasons behind the non-publication of the letter, especially as it was sent before news came that a Jamaican athlete had tested positive for drugs at the recent National Trials. There was no response.

That said, I thought it only useful to return to this topic, given the recent announcement that American-based, Jamaican sprinter Julien Dunkley may have been the athlete who reportedly failed a drugs test. Dunkley was dropped from the Jamaican Olympic Team.

Your insights, as always, are welcome.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Dear Editor,

Notwithstanding his obvious lack of credibility, recent comments made by the disgraced Victor Conte about Jamaican/ Caribbean sprinters and the calibre of our drug testing facilities are still important. This is especially when considered in the context of recent BBC/ New York Times reports, which look at how athletes beat the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) testing systems and whether it is possible to prevent them from doing so.

Though obviously important, it is very disturbing that, we do not seem to have sufficiently addressed the matter beyond vociferous denials that our sportsmen and women are drug cheats. Remember, Marion Jones' very voluble and incessant protestations which eventually turned out to be false?

The ideology of sports as other than competition on a field is somehow not being adequately addressed in this discussion. This is especially in terms of the agendas of those who criticise. Jamaican sports theorists, analysts and onlookers need to get with the programme and determine for themselves what is really going on; not only on the field of play, but also in terms of how sports can play an important part in building / generating national pride.

How far and to what extent might we learn something of significance from our athletic prowess? What are the implications of drug-taking, if ever discovered, for this process? Those, among others, are the serious questions which need to be asked, in my view. It is not sufficient for Conte and others to point fingers and complain, and for us to simply say that.

We have to tell our own story and know, in a very real way, the implications of a doping scandal for our much loved sporting programme vis-à-vis the larger society. Indeed, to the extent that we seem so bent on only seeing fast times is, itself, very telling in this regard.

So, I am agreed with the righteous indignation, however, only up to a point. Let's just hope that sports' key stakeholders get this before it is too late!

I am, etc.,

PS: Pictures courtesy of the International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF) website: www.iaaf.org. They show:

Veronica Campbell-Brown of Jamaica beating Shelly-Ann Fraser, also of Jamaica and Kim Gaevert of Belgium in the Women's 100m, at the recent London Grand Prix; and,

Asafa Powell of Jamaica winning the Men's 100m in Monaco.

A Tale of Two Socas: J’ouvert and SOS!

2008-07-29T12:19:00.025-05:00

J’ouvert! Drunken Excitement! (Part One)

Jamaica Carnival 2008 had, indeed, splashed its way into the heart of Kingston's unofficial business district! Even now, I can still hear the excitement...

I hurried to the Jamaica Pegasus Hotel from the Oxford Road based Mas’ Camp, where I stopped and waited for the mass of paint covered bodies which swarmed up Knutsford Boulevard like mosquitoes in sugarcane season. I was a little afraid of the crowd. Brimming with all the excitement of entranced mice enroute to their doom at the piper’s behest, they marched up the road, routinely stopping to ‘take a whine’ against some unsuspecting light pole. When that was not available the ground provided a convenient alternative. This was the scene at the J’ouvert fete, on the eve of the conclusion of Jamaica Carnival earlier this year.

I had attended the event, however, only by way of what a friend claimed, at the time, was the need ‘for a stress release!’ Doubtful about whether I would achieve this objective, I played along in the interests of being a good host. My friend is a student here from St. Vincent and the Grenadines. It was also shortly after my confirmation (as a practicing Catholic), which you can imagine was a very important moment for me. Occasioned by great amounts of self conflict, I became convinced I would burn in the ‘Hell Fires’ for agreeing to participate in such ‘debauchery’. Truth is, I accepted the invitation because I genuinely love Soca music, though, I was too tired to enjoy the night out.

A riot of colours and sweaty bodies were crushed together behind the music trucks. Their gyrations, coupled with the combination of electric lights and the ethereal glow of the early dawn was surreal. After the all night vigil of partying and drinking (I don’t drink, so this does not apply to me!), complemented by the excitement of the painting part of the ritual, the promoters gave orders to ‘fly de gate’.

Like ghouls let loose to roam the streets of Kingston freely, the revelers were unimpeded in their eagerness to paint the town red in the early morning. They pushed through the gates and made their way into New Kingston. Two silent sentinels wordlessly bore witness to the unfolding bacchanal, their ‘controversial’ nakedness dwarfed by the raunchy displays of flesh and frolic at the gates to the Emancipation Park.

I watched from a safe distance careful not to mingle with the buzzed excitement of the curiously energetic revelers, as they basked in the cool morning air. “How come they have so much energy at this hour?” I wondered.

Traffic was everywhere, as the floats lazily wound their way up Kuntsford Boulevard and onto Trafalgar Road. Burdened by their heavy music cargo, they blocked traffic for miles. Police were redirecting early morning motorists. Cars honked their horns loudly sounding their approval, as they vicariously joined in the festivities.

The raucous hedonists were impervious to reality now. They whined and drank their way into intoxicated oblivion, their very audible carousing disrupting the pristine morning air. Camera crews ate it up. They bustled about recording everything in sight. Careful not to be photographed, I kept out their way, as onlookers, revelers, vendors and the ubiquitous taxi-men, all, jostled to get in on the action.

Soon, I gestured to my friend to indicate my readiness to leave. However, not before another friend – a professional dancer, came over to hug me. We exchanged pleasantries, all the time keenly watched by her body builder boyfriend who was in close proximity. Before long they too were gone with the music, drifting 'down de road' behind the Zoukie trucks, ensnared in the wake of their mesmeric tunes. Comatose, from lack of sleep and standing all night, I tiredly drove home for a long day's rest…

Save Our Soca! Saving Our Lives! (Part Two)

My most recent encounter with Soca music came at the invitation of another friend who suggested that I accompany her to the ultra, exclusive Save Our Soca (SOS) party, which was held for the second time this year in June, in what is traditionally referred to as an ‘Upper St. Andrew’ community. Waterworks played host to the evening of jamming by hardcore ‘socaphyles’, who ditched their regular Sunday activities to dance the night away. This was an invitation only party that, surprisingly, started at four in the afternoon!

Several cars dotted the tree lined avenue, which gently meandered its way up a sloping hill to a two storey house nestled in a cul-de-sac where the party was held. The warm Sunday evening air pressed down on us, as we made our way to the venue. A ‘good little Catholic’ like me, I thought, had no place being at SOS, which, incidentally, also stands for “Soca on Sundays”.

Initially, I wondered whether I would get home in time for work which I eventually did. However, after some consideration, I went along for the ride. We covered the distance from where we parked to the entrance of the house in a series of anxiety ridden run-walk-jog steps. Periodically, my friend reminded me to “get out of the road!”

Finally, we were greeted by the pumping sounds of Soca coming from the back of the house. A small group of people met us at the entrance. The man and two women double checked our names on a list and gave us our arm bands. They informed that the bar was all-inclusive and that food was also available at a price. I noted the instructions but decided that they would be of little value to me. I was not hungry and did not drink. Still, I certainly looked forward to the music.

Our hosts directed us to the back where the party was already in full swing. There, several smartly dressed patrons of all ages stood around, drink in hand, chatting to each other. Some seemed to be catching up on random items of news; while others dissected the earlier concluded ‘clash’ between Usain Bolt and Asafa Powell at the National Stadium the day before. (See post below!). Others looked on in silent curiousity. They too seemed eager to see what was in store at the Sunday evening fete.

I threw myself into the party. Sweating and prancing around the dance floor endlessly. The energy of the music was great. The fifties Calypso and Pan Music was certainly a good way to take the edge off an otherwise stress filled day. There was just one problem - Soca Monarch King Shurwayne Winchester was in very short supply! How could that be? I wondered, even as several camera phones, not unlike the paparazzi, snapped away at the revelry…(If any pictures turn up with me anywhere sweating profusely, I am totally professing Amnesia like Shaggy and Rik Rok say in: ’It wasn’t me!’)

One of the evening’s highlights was a guest, dressed in a fire engine red mini dress and black pumps, who decided she would outdance me. Now, you should know that, I have danced for many years in a studio, notwithstanding my recent hiatus from those activities and the obvious weight gain concerns since. Though I do not regard myself a professional, it has been said that, I ‘do not to have any bones (in my body)’. That being said, I took up the challenge to join in the ‘wuk up’. Our excitement was infectious. Soon others were looking on, as we cavorted around the floor, laughing mischievously at our various antics. I left the party soaking wet – literally, my misgivings, finally, banished to outer reaches of my mind!

'SOS' started a little over two years ago for those who had returned from ‘playin’ mas’ in Trinidad and needed ‘therapy’ during the Carnival off-season. It quite possibly saved their lives. As for me, I was just happy to have taken a break! No alcohol needed just good music and a great party with wonderful people…definitely what the doctor ordered!

Picture courtesy of the Jamaica Star shows socaphyles at J'ouvert 2008.

Drug Taking and the 'Olympic Express': Jamaican Sprinting, Victor Conte and the BBC!

2008-07-23T13:10:00.008-05:00

Come August 15, 2008 most Jamaicans will be sure to pay special attention when the track and field component of the Games of the XXIX (29th) Olympiad, in Beijing, China, sprint out of the blocks. All eyes will be on the Men’s One Hundred Metres. Usain Bolt and Asafa Powell, the current World Record Holder in the event and the former World Record Holder, respectively, will be the major drawing cards. However, American double World Champion in the sprints, in Osaka last year, Tyson Gay has also been billed by an International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF) reporter as the last third in the triumvirate of premier male sprinters. He could spoil the Jamaican party.

In fact, a noticeable pall came over a group of revellers at the Save Our Soca (SOS) event in Waterworks, St. Andrew, at which I was in attendance, two weeks ago Sunday when news broke that American double World Champion Tyson Gay had run 9.68 seconds at the United States (US) National Athletic Trials. I became instantly worried by this ‘troubling development’, notwithstanding my later discovery that Gay had not broken Usain’s World Record. I tried my best to hide my concerns, at the time, by ensuring that my clothes were soaking wet when I left the fete. But that is for another blog…!

Of immediate concern is what will happen when the showdown happens in the Men's One Hundred Meters in Track and Fields in Beijing. Most are likely to be on the edge of our chairs even in the aftermath of Victor Conte’s very disturbing comments to the Los Angeles (LA) Times newspaper, at the weekend, that drug cheating is rampant in the Caribbean. We will not immediately concern ourselves, however, with the ‘warnings’ of the disgraced, United States (US) based, scientific nutritionist and founder of the defamed Bay Area Laboratory (BALCO), which was at the centre of sports largest doping scandal in 2003.

All the signs of a keenly contested battle between the three stars have been in the making for some time now. News of Tyson Gay’s injury at the same US Trials sent tremors fthroughout the US Track and Field circuit, as it did here and elsewhere! What would this mean for the outcome of the Olympics for the American and what of the American sprint relay team? Then, Asafa Powell pulled out of the finals of the 100m in Paris, recently, due to the flare up of a groin injury. An audible gasp was heard across Jamaica, as many wondered whether this meant that Jamaica would get only one medal in the premier sprint event at the Olympics, as well as our World Record ambitions in the Men’s Sprint Relays (4 X 100m).

Despite news from Powell’s press agent Paul Doyle that the injury was minor and that the Jamaican would rest for a few days before running again, shockwaves not unlike the recent earthquake which disrupted our Sunday evening routines on July 13, were coming fast and furious. Finally, the Powell-Bolt clash today (Tuesday, July 22, 2008) confirmed the hype, after the bust of the Jamaican National Trials, where both athletes literally jogged to tape, denying fans the much anticipated 'showdown'. Today, Powell got the upper hand of his countryman and the current record holder Bolt, by one one-hundredths of a second. They were timed in 9.88 and 9.89 seconds, respectively.

As you can imagine, excitement is more than fever pitch! And, that is only on the men’s side ; certainly, just in the shorter sprint. Bolt’s recent 19.67 seconds over 200 meters has clearly marked him as the man to beat in both events in Beijing. In that regard, the British Broadcasting Corporation 's (BBC) current coverage of doping violations in sports, which it is looking at as part of the run up coverage to the Olympics and Conte’s LATimes comments, only serve to train the search light even more on Jamaica.

Do not forget also that, Bolt’s May 31 World Record at the Icahn Stadium in New York was downplayed because of similar concerns about doping, at the time. Both Bolt and Glen Mills, his coach, were clear in highlighting that there was no likelihood of them failing a drug test as they are a hundred percent clean. Powell and his Maximum Velocity and Power (MVP) training camp partner Sherone Simpson, the fastest woman in both sprints in 2006, have routinely insisted that they do not take drugs and that they are tested all the time, both during as well as out of competitions. If true, Conte’s remarks about the notoriety of Caribbean athletes for missing out of competition tests would not apply either to Powell or Simpson, indeed, the entire MVP camp.

Mike Fennel, President of the Jamaica Olympic Association (JOA) solidly defended Jamaica’s testing capabilities, which Conte suggested was sadly lacking in the LA Times report. Quoted in the same story, Fennel said: "[a]ll our top athletes who are continuously performing abroad are tested every time they compete in these big meets abroad . . . so anybody who wants to make comments about our attention to testing, our anti-doping measures are doing that with malicious attempt and are just being bad-minded because we are good. And people don't like [you] when we are good." Fennel was speaking to Jamaica Observer, last Friday on the same matter.

So what, if any, can we learn from the Conte’s remarks and Jamaica’s sprinting prowess, especially as our Olympic Express targets Beijing in less than three weeks? If, indeed, the Jamaican sprinters are as clean, as Fennel maintains, then there is need to urgently question the integrity of the international agenda in its seemingly unusual focus on Jamaican/ Caribbean sprinting. Regardless of how you feel about Conte and his remarks, if ever proven to be true, they would most certainly implicate our much loved sporting traditions; our administrative capabilities; as well as, some of our revered heroes including current Olympic Champion Veronica Campbell-Brown (from the Athens Games) and the late, great Herb McKennley and others. The untold damage to our illustrious history as a small but potent sporting nation is obvious.

Note, I am not suggesting that Conte’s remarks, by themselves, are the only reason for this comment. After all, Conte, himself, has very little credibility. He recently spent time in prison for selling steroids to many highly decorated US athletes, including disgraced sprint sensation and former Olympic champion Marion Jones, who had constantly denied taking drugs. Last year, however, news broke that she had lied to government officials about drug taking and had also committed cheque fraud. Her connections with Conte and her former coach Trevor Graham, himself a Jamaican, effectively, made her a prime suspect in the case - a classic case of 'show me your company and I will tell you who you are'! Graham was convicted, after all, on one count of lying to federal investigators, recently, after reportedly sending a syringe with performance enhancing drugs to authorities.

'Secrets in the Blood'

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), in its new radio series Secrets in the Blood, is also committed to ferreting out drug cheats in sports by calling into question anti-doping mechanisms used by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). According to the BBC, WADA's current technology are not properly calibrated to catch all who try to beat the system. The programme looks, specifically, at the legitimacy of claims that substances like ‘EPO’ (Erythropoietin) are being widely abused by many athletes, especially those who will be competing in Beijing and what can realistically be done to address this. EPO which is also called hematopoietin or hemopoietin is produced by the liver and kidney, naturally. It is the hormone that regulates red blood cell production and also has other known biological functions. EPO plays an important role in the brain's response to neuronal injury and is also involved in the wound healing process.

It is fair to assume that athletes gain an edge on the competition by administering, in controlled doses, substances like EPO as way of ensuring that their endurance and performance levels are at peak. Less time spent recovering from injuries and such like means more which is devoted to being on the track and or in the gym training. This is necessary for the career defining moments like Beijing and before that, Osaka, Japan last year. Only yesterday the BBC’s World Have Your Say Blog looked at whether athletes should be allowed to use drugs. Though not in the majority, a vast number of respondents seemed in favour of this. Why?

According to some: very little is, actually, known about the effects of drugs and how to appropriately test for them. Most notable among the views expressed were those of one blogger who goes by the moniker Uncomfortable Reality. In his/ her view, performance ehancing drugs have been given a (very) bad wrap. Athletes should only be disqualified from taking drugs because the rules say so and not because they are, necessarilly, bad. By allowing athletes to use drugs like EPO, THG (also known as ‘The Cear’) and others, more athletes get a chance to push themselves to their 'real' limits. Such views, as you might imagine, only creates the impression that drug taking should be a 'natural' part of sport. Never mind actual talent. Indeed, never mind fairness, all that matters, according to the bloggers like Uncomfortable Reality, is that athletes are able to showcase their ‘talents’ for all to see - with the help of performance enhancing drugs, of course!

On the other hand, officially, the BBC maintains that, whereas the implications of the indiscriminate use of performance enhancing substances are known, very little information is available to determine their effects when carefully administered in a laboratory or medical setting. Both China, who will be staging this year’s Olympics, and India have been identified as the primary sites for purchasing these drugs at fairly cheap prices on the Internet. According to the BBC report, they were able to purchase knock-off EPO on the Web for approximately US$50. In the process, arguing that, WADA is only able to test for and catch those who use the standard versions of this drug. However, it fails abysmally in the cases of knock-offs.

Beyond the obvious issue of the questioning of WADA's credibility and the integrity of the Beijing Games, there is another worrrisome development here, as well. The possible conflation between suspicions about India and China, as outposts for criminality, and the reading of ‘Third World’ as a generic category to read as ‘not white and Western’ could, quite possibly, lead to the less than promising view that athletes outside of Europe and America are likely drug cheats. ‘Third World’ athletes like Jamaica's sprinters and others might, therefore, be viewed as indiscriminate abusers of said drugs. After all, Jamaica is neither, predominantly white nor, truly, Western. There can be no doubt, then, that Conte’s remarks are, somehow, connected to these claim, if even by way of coincidence.

Questions about our standards for testing athletes of the calibre of Usain, Asafa, Veronica and Sherone, are naturally counter productive; that is, in the absence of evidence to stake the credibility of such claims. They shift focus away from the commendable achievements of these bright, young Jamaicans to highlight instead fear and embarrassment. That Fennel’s defense may also be read as a forceful rebuttal of Conte’s smear campaign speaks volumes about what to expect when the Jamaican Olympic Express rolls into Beijing. Even Dr. Herb Elliot, a Jamaican member of the International Amateur Athletics Federation’s (IAAF) Medical and Anti-Doping Commission and top enforcement official here, was quoted by the LA Times story. He is reported to have told the Christian Science Monitor last month, "We are far in advance of the U.S. record for [preventing] doping. We preach, cajole, and test. . . . Sports is such a part of our culture that the disgrace [of doping] is so great that the Jamaicans that live here wouldn't even consider it."

While, I am not suggesting that the BBC is complicit with the obvious nastiness of the Conte remarks, there can be no doubting the anti-Chinese sentiments embedded in such narratives which call into question China’s legitimacy as a growing world power. As a matter of fact, several weeks ago the Olympic Flame, the ultimate symbol of the goals of the Games, had been attacked several times in Paris and other parts of Europe. And that was only the start. There were reports of protest marches and several other incidents in which Chinese Secret Service personnel were called in to defend the Flame against further attacks. Why?

People were upset about the award of the Summer Games to the Peoples’ Republic of China, largely, because of its less than impressive human rights and even trade record. Note, sports and, most certainly, the Olympics which had their roots in Ancient Greece are supposed to represent the highest expressions of human courage, grit and determination, to say nothing of joy and celebration and the anguish of defeat and the disappointment of failure. In the words of CLR James, Trinidadian scholar, academic and philosopher, sports, definitely, go ‘beyond the boundary’. Under the label “Citius, Altius, Fortius” (Faster, Higher, Stronger), the Olympics represent the crowning achievements of our highest human selves.

One has to be prepared, then, to expect some sort of backlash if Jamaica wins any of the premier sprints events in greater numbers than the occasional one or two reserved for non-American athletes. Our Olympic Express rolls into the Orient, as a result, under what appears to be a cloud of suspicion a-la Victor Conte, et al.

Sunday Night at the Fights: A Crisis of Leadership in the PNP?

2008-07-15T17:03:00.007-05:00

From all appearances the sitting President of the Peoples’ National Party (PNP) was to have expected a challenge from her former arch nemesis Dr. Peter Phillips, the most senior Vice President in the Party, despite previous claims to the contrary by him. He challenged her in 2006 and lost in a narrow defeat which brought the, then, very popular Party Leader to power and, ultimately, Prime Minister of Jamaica. In this regard, Mrs. Simpson Miller has always been in, what Frantz Fanon calls a “nervous condition”, in large part because so many of the Party’s top executives were said to be in opposition to her Leadership. That, however, did not change the fact that she became Prime Minister, though it did impact the extent to which she was able to perform successfully in that role.

With history against her, as it is felt that she did not live up to expectations, Dr. Phillips’ supporters are now licking their chops in preparation for what is perhaps felt to be a sure defeat for Mrs. Simpson-Miller, a sort of Cinderella character at the Jamaican political ball. However, is the timing of the challenge of the Party Leader a good move, especially considering that most people are of the view that the sitting Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) are failing miserably in their role as state administrators?

Indeed, on Sunday night when the dramatic announcement came during the Community Vision Media's (CVM) 8 o’clock newscast that there was a meeting at the Harbour View Primary School in St. Andrew, most people had expected to hear that this was to be the ultimate announcement. We were not disappointed. This leads us now to consider the implications for the timing of this announcement, especially as there may be a real (?) chance that the PNP might yet again take control of Jamaica House.

One cannot help but feel; however, a sense of deja-vu in relation to this auspicious announcement and how the PNP’s political machinery was handled in the weeks leading into the General Elections, last year. Mrs. Simpson Miller was eventually relieved of the post of Prime Minister and her Party declared runners-up in the very closely contested political battle. In the final analysis, there were only so few seats which separated the two which then ushered in current PM Bruce Golding to power.

Though, still considered a very popular woman, politician and leader, there is no doubt that the heady days of the near god-like charm and charisma that followed Mrs. Simpson-Miller to the helm of the PNP and, ultimately, the nation’s top job has now been significantly altered. By all appearances, her defeat at the September polls, in the aftermath of a very unpopular State of Emergency and a very devastating hurricane (Dean), from which many are only still recovering, has left the Party Leader a sitting duck in dangerous waters. Dr. Phillips and his supporters have bided their time and are now driving the final nail in the coffin of Mrs. Simpson-Miller’s political fortunes, almost as a means of ensuring that her campaign for being the first female head of state in Jamaica to take office, twice, will be effectively sealed off.

Indeed, one cannot help but feel that this is part of the “Drumblairites” efforts to deny the likelihood of a PNP Government headed by Mrs. Simpson-Miller, again. So, annoyed they appear to be that they are seemingly prepared to sacrifice the Party for the long term objective of keeping Mrs. Simpson Miller out of power. Remember the furore over the announcement of the second date for the elections when it was said that both Mrs. Simpson Miller and then Minister of Education Mrs. Maxine Henry Wilson engaged in a physical scuffle after the Education Ministry announced a date in keeping with the late reopening of schools? This was after the previously mentioned hurricane affected the first date of August 27, 2007.

Surely, there is no denying that the PNP stands a real chance at the polls, money issues aside. On the other hand, some pundits argue that, the PNP are cash starved and will remain so for as long as Mrs. Simpson Miller is head of the Party, as there are many who refuse to support her as leader. If the Jamaican proverb: “if fish come outta wata bottom come tell yuh sey dung deh dutty, believe im!” (If a fish comes out of the water bottom (of a river) and tells you that down there is dirty, you had better believe him!) is true and, political rumours of this kind are to believed, then efforts were made in the last campaign to starve the Party of funds. The Comrades Against Portia (CAP) group, it is said, had much to do with diverting funds away from the campaign and, quite possibly, into the coffers of the Jamaica Labour Party. At any rate, monies not received for the PNP, at that time, would naturally be a boost to the JLP, even if those funds did not go to the JLP.

So, what has Mrs. Simpson Miller done that has warranted this very serious crisis of support inside her own Party? Some have claimed that she is very clannish and does not listen to (good) advice and also that she talks too much! Indeed, we will not soon forget the credit card saga or even the “doan draw mi tongue” (don’t draw my tongue!) episode which both Dr. Phillips as well as the JLP used to full advantage in their respective campaigns. In the case of the latter, it helped cement a JLP victory whereas in the former the cracks in the once formidable armour of the much loved Party Leader were opened up for all to see. She has never recovered since. It was only a matter of time before it was widely reported that she was “out of her depth” and “could not manage the job of PM”.

This most recent challenge has caught both Mrs. Simpson-Miller and the Party under different circumstances. She is now Leader of the Opposition and the PNP has been out of power for the first time in eighteen years. The likelihood of another bruising battle, this time against a sitting Leader of the Party presents all other sorts of implications and possibly complications, especially considering that Mrs. Simpson Miller may have chance of winning the next elections; that is, if we are to believe the word on the street.

My barber tells me, for instance, that as a staunch supporter of the JLP and Mr. Golding, specifically, the “Cassava Government” as they are now widely referenced is not liked by the majority. He claims that an election at this time will mean sure defeat for the same Party that was touted as the answer to the corruption of the PNP and the only solution to poverty which stalks the land. As a matter of fact, it was in that same barber shop that I was pointedly advised that my, then, support for Mrs. Simpson Miller would not result in success as the PNP was on its way out. In the barber’s words: “Sista P cyan manage!”

If we are to invest faith in these pronouncements, bearing in mind that barber shops are the meeting places for all sorts of people from different walks of life, as well as that some of the predictions given in this barber’s chair as well as elsewhere have come to pass, can we realistically believe that the JLP will loose? That, of course, depends on whether Mr. Dabdoub succeeds in unseating Mr. Daryl Vaz as the duly elected Member of Parliament (MP) for West Portland and, therefore, forces PM Golding to call an election.

One friend and a business owner advises differently. In her estimation, the Appeals Process has the likelihood of dragging on for years, which will mean the JLP will serve out its term. This will possibly make way for the PNP if the JLP continues at the current rate. In that regard, the challenge to Mrs. Simpson Miller could not be better timed. After all, if Dr. Phillips wins the leadership race, as he is expected to do, then, the JLP would basically be campaigning for the return to power of the PNP under his leadership. The timing of the announcement and eventual challenge of Mrs. Simpson Miller, therefore, seems to have taken account of more than just a matter of a short term victory for the PNP at the polls but to look seriously at rebuilding the Party around certain core ideas about leadership, one of which is, undoubtedly, class privilege.

That, of course, has been a common theme in my entries here, in large part, because I feel it is not always sufficiently acknowledged in Jamaica and is taken for granted by those who have it. As a result, privilege is generalized to the rest of the populace to suggest a fictional equality which does not really exist for all. It is in that context that that Mrs. Simpson Miller’s failings as leader are to be understood.

You cannot be an average or even good leader when you are not born of the privileged social, political and economic elites in Jamaica, certainly if you are female. On the contrary, you have to be twice as good and twice as "nice" to make it for any length of time. Just ask the African-Americans in post-Civil Rights America and they will tell you an earful in that regard. Even then, it is said that you are still not allowed to excel to top positions whether in government, business, or some other area of industry.

We in Jamaica deny that these are real considerations in our constructions and, ultimately, the performance of identities on the socio-political landscape. Those who receive immediate support are those who come closest to embodying the ideal – white, upper-class, educated, Christian, heterosexual masculinity, or who can successfully appropriate it. Any projects which vary (too far) from this ideal, as in the case of the former PM Simpson Miller, will have a significantly harder time rallying support, especially from these social and political enclaves. These, unfortunately, are the realities in which we live in Jamaica.

Who will bell the cat and who will insist that projects of equality must be exactly that – equal? Who is going to demand for real development of all areas of the society through meaningful, lasting and appropriate policies; not just by responding to every criticism made in the public domain and certainly not just for the political ‘poor’? Who is going to include young professionals and ‘young people’ into the frameworks of governance, beyond the simplicity of platitudinous maxims like: “our youth are the future”? What is their role and is that defined in such a way as to appropriately reflect the commitment and mobilization of real resources for their integration into the development frameworks of the society?

Where is the parity in a system which awards heritage, colour and class over and above talent? Where is the justice which ensures that, those detained and placed in state lock-ups and are allowed to languish for years without trial or ever being seen by a judge, yet alone a lawyer? Where is the moral centre needed to understand the significance of adhering to core values of determination, trust, credibility, fraternity and respect for all? And, who will be the champion of this cause?

Where too, is the conviction of character needed to put an end to political corruption and various vices, nepotism, unfair systems of privilege and the scourge of crime that continue to undermine the fibre of the nation? What even is the ‘nation’ and how important is that in raising the profile of citizenship issues and rights throughout all sectors of Jamaica? Is this what the leadership bid of Dr. Phillips represents, at this time? If so, sign me up!

However, if it is simply to undermine “woman time now” sentiment and “teach Sista P a lesson” as a way of reminding her that she “does not belong” and “cannot cut it”, as a result, I will pass. Thank you very much!

The shifting tides of the political fortunes of the PNP Leader and the PNP, itself, are a source of extreme fascination for all, both inside as well as outside of Jamaica. After all, Jamaica is said to be “PNP Country”. Whether or not that is true or whether this new fight for power inside the Party will return it to its “soul”, as many claim, remains to be seen.

One thing is certain, however, the battle for supremacy announced on Sunday last by Dr. Phillips, at the Harbour View Primary School, throws open the door for another round of bloodletting from which the Party might not recover in time for a “snap election”, if one is, indeed, called.

Sunday Nights at the Fights, anyone?...Just curious!

Talking Sex…Jamaica-Style!

2008-07-14T15:29:00.012-05:00

I had the most amazing reaction to a presentation I made last week when I spoke at the ACS Cross Roads (Cultural Studies) Conference at the University of the West Indies (UWI), Mona campus. My paper which was entitled: “Enforced Heterosexuality and the “the fear of a Gay Planet”: Critiquing Contemporary Narratives of Masculinity in Jamaican Popular Culture” examined the current Jamaican sexual politics. It was located in the larger context of Adrienne Riche’s concept of a Western enforced heterosexuality and ‘the fear of a gay planet’.

I focused, however, on how Jamaican national identity is constructed, historically, by ancient, colonial jurisprudence which seek, in the main, to criminalize certain expressions of sex; in the process, enshrining a culture of sexual violence, hatred and gendered and racial discrimination. My presentation highlighted how race, class, colour and gender are subsumed under the sexual lingua franca of the modern West, with its great preoccupation with ascertaining and locating personal and cultural identities and subjectivities through sexual practise. The overall intent was to question the impermanence, albeit the seeming illogicality of applying labels like homo-, hetero- and bisexuality in our current Caribbean/ Jamaican realities.

In the post presentation discussion, a member of the audience – a Jamaican woman, who I later learned was also a Ph.D. and a film maker, announced that she was ‘queer’. Her comments came as part of a very heated exchange with another male member of the audience – an American, who originally challenged my contentions about the politics of sexual labeling here.

The Jamaican woman ‘came out’ as a way of shutting up the, apparently, obtuse American, at least this was how I read it. He, cynically, queried whether or not there were gay people in Jamaica. His comments were directed at me. The woman, however, demanded that he clarify his use of the word ‘gay’ as he seemed to have missed my point. He responded that, the distinctions were ‘semantic’.

Needless to say, this further ignited the woman’s already excited passions. She stated very loudly for all to hear: “I am queer! I am Jamaican! I live in Jamaica!...What do you mean by gay?” Her last question trailed off into an anguished appeal for more than just clarification, but also reflected what I thought was the pain of having one’s identity erased from the discussions. Incidentally, this was the very point I was making, at the time.

Discussions about sex here have been hijacked by an extreme focus on male homosexuality which, basically, denies the experiences of everyone else in the debate. The American, obviously, missed this nuance, in his blithe disregard for these apparent complexities which, in part, explain sex and sexuality in Jamaica as well as the woman’s own placement in that dialogue.

The ACS Conference was, certainly, living up to its billing. It was more than ‘filling a gap in the international cultural studies community’. By all appearances; it was also therapy. At one point, I wondered whether I was in church. After all, the audience’s contribution had an eerie feeling of an ‘altar call’ in which I was, fortunately or not, placed in the role of high priest.

Yes, all bets were off. It was open season and sex was the target! Indeed, this was only one panel. I heard there were others where the responses were even more dramatic. Pity, I only saw one other. I was preoccupied with professional work and church commitments as well as the need to catch up on needed rest.

For my part, I had never witnessed this much passion expressed in relation to a topic by any audience of this kind. But, then again, this was the start of a long weekend of ‘academising’! Plus, we were talking sex – the very stuff of our beings and, incidentally, the title of today’s entry which I thought would have made for interesting reading, especially with the "Jamaica-style" added!

The other panelist, herself, a Jamaican who teaches at Brandeis University in the United States expressed ‘concern’ that the Jamaicans might not have demonstrated the appropriate levels of meekness which it is claimed come so ‘naturally’ to us. According to her, we/ they (the Jamaicans) were in a rabid, no nonsense mood, causing fear and disquiet amongst the foreigners.

Indeed, the Jamaicans (in the audience) seemed eager to divest themselves of the ideological baggage of foreign imposed labels, with their narrow, taxonomical definitions authored by the West. Admittedly, I did not know what to expect or even how I was to dress for the occasion. One friend/ colleague had earlier questioned whether my jeans and blue striped polo shirt were appropriate. Notwithstanding that I had presented at other conferences, both here and overseas before, I was still uncertain because of the sheer magnitude of the ACS Cross Roads Conference.

I sought the advice of an older, female colleague on the matter. She, however, wasted no time in informing me that she had other, more urgent commitments. Left, then, with the full brunt of my anxieties, I was forcefully reminded that I had volunteered to bell the proverbial cat. The troublesome issues had been placed squarely on the agenda – sex in Jamaica! How very interesting! How very intimidating! The opportunity was clearly now mine to ensure that I saw my own way. After all, a presentation with a title like “enforced heterosexuality and the fear of a gay planet….masculinity…popular culture…Jamaica” was bound to ruffle more than some feathers.

Allow me a few indulgences, if I could, to share my position on some of these very troubling issues; that is, in the context of my presentation. Firstly, I make no special claims on the issue beyond a simple effort to argue that the limitations of sexual labeling, especially, in Jamaica are symptomatic of a society fundamentally vested in racist, colonial elitism. I wished to suggest that this be considered as a legitimate premise for rigourous academic interrogation of sexuality in Jamaica. As a result, traditional approaches to theory and methods must, by necessity, be reconfigured.

The standard academic practice of excluding rather than including the voices of those without conventional theoretical platforms or ‘authenticity’ on which to make their voices heard must be urgently revisited. Any efforts to read sexuality as a purely physical act is, largely, aimed at disregarding the likely nuances suggested by my position as well as to reify traditional systems of oppression in the society, as a result.

Rewind to the earlier mentioned confrontation and my presentation. With my recent encounters with some members of the ‘progressive liberal (pink) media’ (read the entry before the previous one!), uppermost in my mind, as well as the Jamaican Prime Minister’s now infamous remarks to the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC): “Not in my cabinet”, I eagerly anticipated the discussion. I was, however, completely surprised at the point at which the confrontation erupted between the American man and the self-declared ‘queer’, Jamaican woman.

Vainly, I tried to intervene by way of reiterating that the matter was not semantic, as the American had claimed. I stated, in between, the face-off, that the Western, white, male, intellectual, elitist agenda which is primarily responsible for demonizing Jamaica as ‘the most homophobic place on earth’, was vested in constructing the debate purely around sex. In so doing, other critical issues which were in need of being ventilated were suppressed such as the importance of desire in constructing fear of the ‘other’.

I argued that, if the matter was purely a question of sex, then, there was need for explanation of the phenomenon of ‘gay parties’ in Jamaica which do not sit well with the constructions of the country as either the ‘most homophobic’ or even a mildly homophobic place on earth. It also did not explain the vast numbers of ‘gay paraphernalia’ which complement this phenomenon, specifically the Jamaican media’s fascination with ‘gayness’. If sex were the only consideration, in other words, there would be no need for the trafficking and wholesale consumption of videos of gay parties, many of which have been circulated here in the last year.

Indeed, the fascination throughout all levels of the society with this state of affairs would cease to be, primarily, because the tapes were not explicitly sexual. If they were then surely the repugnance (?) of it all, (to strictly heterosexual sensibilities, that is) would result in a boycott. However, there was clearly more at stake than meets the eye, as reflected by media reports, on this issue last year.

It is possible that, the mostly upper- and upper-middle class owned and controlled Jamaican media have very real investments in maintaining ideas about ‘gayness’ as a purely ‘effeminate’, largely garish and definitely offensive. By so doing, they direct attentions away from some of the more problematic areas of sexuality and its relationship to constructing the national identity as well as citizenship issues, by forcibly placing it into the realm of ideological conjecture and, therefore, beyond the reaches of the so-called ‘common man’.

The collective commitment to maintaining ‘homophobia’ as part of the popular set of ideas which discursively govern the performance of masculinity in Jamaica begs questioning in the wider context of the complexities of the race-colour-class triad which originated in plantation hierarchies, historically. Though real for many, these are often difficult issues to explain in clear and precise terms.

The conflation of ‘uptown’ with ‘brownness’ and the transference of values of respectability to that group automatically renders its inverse – ‘downtown’, oppositional. The binary created means that to be black, at the very least to be perceived as black means that one starts from a place of deficit.

The anxieties of the brown, upper classes of Jamaican society, therefore, demonize the black under-classes, for the most part, the vast majority of whom exist outside of the reaches of privilege. Constructions of Jamaica as 'the most homophobic place on earth' locate these concerns squarely at the feet of the mass of black, disenfranchised bodies who populate Jamaica's underclasses. In so doing, further alienating black, lower-class Jamaicans from the 'nation' as an ideological construct.

It might even be reasoned that this is but another of the manifestations of the complex and disabling triple jeopardies of race, class and gender at work in post-independence Jamaica for many. The international gay lobby is in many ways, then, complicit with and exaccerbates these imbalances in the society's internal class logic and, therefore, further exposes vulnerable black youths to greater risks.

Obviously, talking sex 'Jamaica-style' is hardly sexual. No titilation and racing pulses here, at least, not in sense in which we traditionally consider sex. We are more likely, it appears, to come to blows rather than to make love on this one!

Turning Thirty (...Something) and the Politics of Change

2008-06-17T12:48:00.005-05:00

So, I have quietly joined the thirty-something generation. Last week, to be exact, I became an official member of the demographic! No, there was no cake, champagne or partying! I was quite content to stay home and rest in bed!

Before I go further, though, let me add that in reality the title of this piece is not altogether accurate, as I am really thirty-something rather than thirty (30), hence the parentheses.

That said, I thought the title catchy enough to elicit readership, which I have not been as dutiful in maintaining as I have not been updating my entries here as much as I could. Last time, I was bogged down in an international dispute (read the last entry!) and blogging elsewhere. The latter I still do.

Now I am preoccupied with being ‘thirty-something’.

I have been thinking: what does one do in one’s thirties? That question comes into my mind with much more frequency, especially as I battle weight gain and a decrease in my appetite for certain things, among them the “push” to want to do everything and go everywhere, all at once. I am much more interested in pacing myself compared to the ‘roaring twenties’, when fast and furious was the name of the game.

Indeed, there were many times when I would party the weekend away without missing a beat and then show up for work on Monday mornings, bright eyed and bushy tailed, or so I thought. Then, I was twenty-something and going on very fast…and baring all the signs that go with that – strong opinions, exhaustion, etc.

I should, of course, confess two things about myself in relation to the above – I do not drink, nor smoke. So, it actually remains to be seen just how much fun one can have when these two things were not part of the social equatuion.

In fact, some friends of mine are now trying to break me into the habit of social drinking. However, I still feel no such desire, except with the occasional “Stones Ginger Wine” which, because of its sweet taste, I have started adding once or twice to my juices and water. At thirty-odd, I feel less and less desire, even! Is that normal? Where did all the passion go? Yikes! I am getting old...!

…On a more sober note, I should let you know that I also became a Christian, recently. That I thought was perhaps the most dramatic change of all. Never would I have guessed that for all of my very vocal criticisms of the Church, specifically what I claimed was its contributions to a single-mindedness against which I was very opposed that I would now be a practicing Roman Catholic. I even sing in a choir there...go figure!

This, however, has been one of the more rewarding experiences I have had. I have developed, inter alia, a keener sense of concern for the welfare of others and have also become more aware of and patient towards criticisms, specifically of self-declared Christians, many of who I have learned are merely human beings doing the best they can.

That does not change that there are things about the Church as an institution which are to be continuously reviewed and assessed some of which I will address in future entries. I accept that the Church has had many shortcomings in terms of how some of its members have contributed to the formation of social issues over time, which has not diminished its overall personal and spiritual value for some people.

Still, I am convinced of one thing – true compassion does not come with a label. Nor is it, necessarily, part of a culture, religion, gender, sexuality or class. It is not so much about who wears which clothes and says what on whichever days.

Rather, love and tolerance are truly about the feelings you have towards yourself and others. This is what matters the most. How you treat with your fellow man, which also includes you!

Becoming thirty(...something) has perhaps been the best teacher for gearing me up for that sort of consciousness, which has lead to a new pace. Is this the rest of my life?

Well, if it is, then let me say categorically – slower does not mean better nor does it mean less. It’s just different.

Thank God for the thirties!

Blogging for the BBC and the Xtra Stress!

2008-05-08T21:57:00.011-05:00

Recently, I was invited by the BBC World Service to be one of two weekend editors for the World Have Your Say 'Blank Page', a blog, where people from all over the world are invited to make entries on various topics of interests. Katharina, my co-editor, from the Netherlands and I ratcheted up a record number of entries for that weekend – a grand total of 173, after an acknowledged shaky start. We were both, unavoidably, absent for the opening segment of the blog – work and family commitments. Katharina had gone to dinner with her family, whereas I was late in getting back from work that Friday.

Secondly, Xtra, the gay and lesbian newspaper in Canada invited me to be a source in one of their stories which looked at the planned boycott of Jamaica’s tourism industry by Canadian gay rights groups. Excited at the prospect of speaking to an international audience about elements of my academic research which, in part addresses this issue, I was sorely let down when the story was printed. Despite my original request and repeated efforts to get them to change this part of the story, I was misrepresented as a Jamaican Government Spokesperson on the subject.

I was attributed the dubious distinction of being “a public relations officer with the Jamaican Government”, which though true, had nothing to do with the contents of the interview. They eventually altered it to say “but stresses that he does not speak on behalf on the Jamaican Government…” Still, dissatisfied I forwarded a letter of complaint to the newspaper voicing my concerns. I recieved a response from one of the editors offering to edit my letter, as it had gone over the three hundred word limit.

I later recieved an email from a colleague and friend in which I was quoted in another story by the newspaper. This time, however, I was cast in the especially unflattering role as flippantly denying the reality of homophobic violence in Jamaica. Portions of an interview completed with an editor from the newspaper here in Kingston were used, despite my wishes to contrary. Indeed, I was also misquoted in the story. Again, I sent another letter of complaint as well as explanation of my thoughts on the matter, elements of which are included in this entry below.

Before leaving this subject, I feel it important to make two related points. Firstly, the title of this piece is intended to draw attention to two of the reasons that I have not been able to update my blog in the last month, as well as to emphasise the growing importance of discussions about sexual rights and freedoms as crucial parts of identity politics, currently. Of course, I can jokingly refer to the Xtra issue as "stress", almost by way of making light of the matter.

However, the gravity of representation in the current dispensation is real. In fact, it is downright political! Hence, I am not very keen on seeing this as a simple matter to be laughed away under the meaninglessness of a minor inconvience. Much to the contrary. My interests in the stories/ issue go well beyond the "stressfulness" of the matter to more directly target questions of trust in the context of media representations, especially where people are keen to (mis) judge you even without knowing who you are.

It may well be argued that there is no need for any more knowledge in a context where most Jamaicans seem to rally round certain expressed signifiers of identity, in this instance, the defence of the national identity as heterosexual, male, working class and black, for the most part. Hence, I am making this entry as a way of addressing some of the key issues which impact this (Jamaican) identity as well as how it is percieved, both locally and abroad.

Sexuality in Jamaica is a, largely, political issue given the complex ways in which race, class and gender intersect in its construction. (Homo)sexuality, as a result, is much more than a mere question of who one sleeps with but also an act of political affiliation. Discussions of same which do not adopt a condemnatory attitude towards male homosexuality, especially, runs the risk of being considered pro-homosexual and, by extension, opens one up to victimization. The rampant homophobia expressed in Dancehall popular/ culture, specifically, ensures the active policing of the boundaries of sexual desires, accordingly.

This does not mean there are no homosexuals here. Rather, that Jamaica is represented in our imaginations as a space in which heterosexuality is homogenised national identity. All Jamaicans are the equivalent of Bible thumping, religious zealots with a penchant for bigotry. Our raison d’etre is the persecution of all that is different which is also considered ‘un-Jamaican’.

The Xtra reports to which I refer, partly elide these concerns and seek to construct Jamaicans and 'Jamaican-ness', by extension, as a homophobic monolith. That the reporter, in the original piece, felt no pains in revealing my professional credentials, notwithstanding the fact that I had asked him not to, clearly highlight the contempt with which we are held. You are, in other words, guilty by national designation/ association. Beyond the clear breach of trust in terms of the revelation of other parts of my identity and the subsequent efforts to construct me as flippantly disregarding such ovewhelming hatred, these two incidents point very clearly to the troubling nature of these issues, currently. Any discussion of which, must necessitate common understandings.

I have long felt that a meaningful discussion of sex and sexuality in Jamaica is urgently overdue. Such a discussion cannot countenance the traditionally one-sided diatribes in which poorly disguised bigots articulate their own aversions to other expressions of sexuality, even while claiming the 'need' for tolerance. There can be no tolerance where there is no understanding, empathy and human compassion. Power struggles are not a sufficient substitute for real dialogue on this very important topic. Freedom has to encompass all members of civil society, a point I was especially careful to make to the Xtra editor who interviewed me in Kingston. By which means, one section of the population cannot be considered free and able to move about while others must operate under the cover of darkness, all the time fearful of infringing on the laws of the land.

Conversely, freedom also means respecting the rights of others, notwithstanding that we may sometimes be in disagreement. The ancient colonial laws in Jamaica which thinly veiled the xenophobia of the white colonial elite who drafted them, centuries ago, must be removed from the books as a matter of urgency. In their place, the strengthening of the institutions of civil society must be such that the notion of human rights are expanded beyond a mere question of "freeing unjust criminals" and granting rights to "batty man", et cetera.

The efforts to recapture Victorian manners and custom, through the bastardised versions of 'Britishness' enshrined in parts of the Jamaican constitution must go. We must approach the twenty-first century with readiness and purpose. Political apathy and cultural disaffection cannot be the course of action. It is not 'business-as-usual'. The effects of the colonial legal system, which it may be argued, were more about reconstructing Britain as an imagined space of desire, rather than a real society in which non-Britons (also) lived constructed ‘the natives’ as insignificant beings unworthy of rights and freedoms. These institutions must be abolished. We must come into the twenty first century and join the global struggle for human dignity in the post-slavery, postmodern era. We need to get with the programme!

Kevin Brown; the Amnesty Report: Jamaica’s PR Nightmare!

2008-04-08T10:50:00.015-05:00

To say that April Fools’ Day (Tuesday, April 1, 2008) gave us more than we had bargained for as a nation would perhaps qualify as a major understatement – perhaps the one of greatest significance so far this year. First, we heard the story of the Amnesty International Report entitled: “Let Them Kill Each Other: Public Security in Jamaica’s Inner-Cities”, in which the human rights group made the damning charge that the Jamaican government has, effectively, left the inner-city, urban poor to fend for themselves regarding the provision of adequate security by the state. Then, there was the even more distressing report that the thirty-two year old Jamaican-born, United States (US) army veteran Kevin Brown started acting strange during check-in for Air Jamaica Flight 80 at the Orlando International Airport (OIA). According to the Orlando Sentinel:

Brown was watched, questioned and detained Tuesday by Transportation Security Administration and Orlando police officers after he was deemed to be acting strange during check-in for Air Jamaica Flight 80.

A luggage search, according to an affidavit filed Wednesday by Orange County sheriff's Detective Kelly Boaz, turned up:

*Two galvanized pipes.
*End caps with holes drilled in them.
*BBs.
*A model-rocket igniter.
*Batteries.
*Lighter fluid.
*A lighter.
*Two vodka bottles with flammable nitromethane.
*Instructions on making explosives (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/crime/orl-airport0308apr03,0,5200541.story)

To say that this is a cause for concern is, of course, stating the obvious. Among others, these two reports together highlight the tragedies of war; in this instance, the war in Iraq and its lasting impact on world politics, currently, as well the far reaching political implications of crime in countries like Jamaica. On average we murder approximately 1500 hundred of our citizens each year in what might be rightfully entitled our undeclared civil war. Of course, what is more distressing about these alarming facts is that it is generally contended that crime statistics are deliberately under reported as a way of not alarming the citizenry any more than needs be…Psych! Too late! The proverbial puss is out the bag and amongst the pigeons, to boot!

Between Brown’s actions and the recent Amnesty International report which identified the Jamaican government as a fairly callous institution in terms of its abandonment of its citizens to the whiles of dons, community leaders and other thugs for hire, make the point only too well. Jamaica is an unsafe place to be, let alone in which to live. If you are not rich and possess the means by which to remove yourself from the violence, death and despair then you are a moving target, it seems, and even then there is no guarantee.

In an effort at damage control, Prime Minister Golding has pleaded with Amnesty International for clemency insofar as explaining the extent to which the Jamaican state has been rendered incapable of undertaking the types of interventions needed to critically address the crime problem here. According to the PM Jamaica’s debt servicing obligations, especially in light of the recent Estimate of Expenditures which were announced as part of the 2008-2009 Budget presentations is a real problem. In the words of PM Golding:

"I urge you to be sympathetic to the real difficulties faced by a Government that must find $723 million each day to service the national debt. You will, I am sure, appreciate the extent to which this constrains our ability to address the urgent need to provide social services and economic opportunities in these areas," he said in a statement released yesterday." (http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20080402/lead/lead4.html)

While, certainly a noble gesture in terms of the Government’s admitted recognition of the real needs to be addressed in such a context, the flip side is all the more distressing when considered against the background of world-wide price increases in basic food supplies as well as the rising cost of living, which, ultimately, also impact crime. The state’s recognition of the problem is a good start, however, it remains to be seen whether that by, itself, will prove a sufficient basis on which to request leniency and, therefore, a ‘letting off the hook’ regarding the significance of this report and Jamaica’s growing international reputation as a crime capital.

In public relations it is often stated that you cannot sell a bad product; that integrity and high standards speak for themselves; and that, where there is a scarcity of money to advertise, as is often the case, a good product will sell itself. But, is this really the case? And, how does this apply in the Jamaican context where these two incidents, which are only but the most recent developments in a very long line, likely to negatively impact the country’s public image; that is, as a hot spot for violence? This, notwithstanding that some of the violence does not directly emanate from us, as in the case of Kevin Brown.

Surely, the Jamaica Tourist Board (JTB) has its work cut out, as well as the Ministry of Tourism and the Ministry of Information, Youth, Culture and Sports. In the case of the latter, there is a generally held view that part of the aggression and energy of crime in Jamaica is also what accounts for our athletic prowess internationally. In effect, the same energy exerted in dodging bullets and outsmarting and outrunning the police is what is also used to break world records and win Olympic and other international sporting medals. Of course, this is only conjecture and reflects badly on our sporting image and our sports people. After all, there are no known studies which have yet made the link between these two things.

What can be said, however, is that if and when the academy finally catches up with public opinion on this issue, it will prove all the more obvious that there is a clear need for more creative solutions to be invested in the issue of governance, specifically as they impact crime fighting. This does not simply mean a removal of M16 weaponry nor penalizing officers for shooting randomly in public. Though the latter is cause for very real concerns, especially as an eleven month old infant was tragically killed in one such incident, recently.

Rather, there is need for more meaningful investigation skills and specialized training; an upgrading of our forensic and scientific crime detection skills; as well as fostering and enhancing public trust and engendering public/ private partnerships, as part of key crime fighting efforts. A master plan in which community policing plays a critical role is also essential. This must address too, the trade in illegal guns; narcotics; and the influence of politics on crime, as a matter of urgency. Indeed, the security budget has to be made into one of the priority areas of governance to the extent that social programmes which seek to alter the tense relations between the police and some inner-city communities are addressed. This might well prove the time for the application of specialized behaviour change and social marketing skills to crime fighting in Jamaica.

After all, the US Army just recently indicated that it has discovered that physical combat alone cannot stem the problems of regime change in places like Iraq. Hence, the Operation Hearts and Minds campaign, that also addresses the other needs of the country thus affected. While, surely we are neither in Iraq nor Afghanistan it does not hurt to learn from this example, especially where it is commonly felt that some members of the Jamaica Constabulary Force (JCF) play on both teams simultaneously – the good guys and the criminals.

I recall, for example; that in 2004 I was a victim of extortion courtesy of three police officers in Spanish Town, the old capital. Here is the story, for those who may be interested:

I was held up by three police officers while driving along the, then, newly opened Spanish Town leg of Highway 2000. Lost and confused, at the time, as I had never driven on this stretch of road before, my horror was further cemented by the fact that Jamaica had just begun recovering from a double dousing of very heavy rains from Hurricane Emily and Tropical Storm Dennis; and there were no street lights along the highway. In the case of the latter, I was not aware of this before, otherwise I would have stayed put in Kingston.

Afraid that I had gone too far off the beaten path, I became aware that there was a car following behind me. Soon there was the flashing of lights and the screeching noise of a police squad car siren. I was told via bullhorn to stop the car and get out. Frightened, lost and completely stressed out, I complied immediately. However, this was only the beginning of my ordeal which was compounded by the fact that I was driving in the wrong direction and with an expired driver’s licence, to boot! (I foolishly thought, at the time, that you were allowed a one month grace period, as in the case of the Road Licence. But alas! This was not to be!).

I was then accosted by three police officers bearing long weapons which were pointed directly at me. They insisted on knowing why I was driving in the wrong direction. They commented that they had been observing me for sometime and had noticed that I seemed lost and unsure of where I was going. At this, I immediately confessed my dilemma, hopeful, that I would be assisted by the officers of the law. However, this was not to be. I was told to show them my driver’s licence along with the other car documents. In between all this, they glared at me very sternly, oblivious to my plight.

Finally, the one who asked to see my licence indicated that it was expired and that I was to accompany them to jail (This was in the dark night; midnight for all I knew and cared then!). After all, the penalty for this breach is – you guessed it, a night in jail with all kinds of people! You can imagine my distress and consternation! So, it was obvious that they had me where they wanted me. They proposed that as an alternative I was to pay my way out of jail (And, God knows how long I would have been in lock-up, at that rate, right?).

Realising that I was being victimized by the classic “hol’ dung an tek way!”, approach as we say in Jamaica, I pleaded that I did not have any money and that; I was actually on my way to Portmore to see family members and had got lost due to the poor visibility and the state of the Mandela Highway which was badly flooded. Only one lane of traffic was opened, at the time. (Hence, how I came to take a wrong turn on the newly constructed highway).

Long story short, I was given two options – go to jail for driving with an expired licence and in the wrong direction to boot! Or, pay my way out of an otherwise unpleasant experience, the lasting consequences of which I did not wish to imagine. Consequently, I was told that they would accompany me to the ABM machine and that I was to approach the machine, just on the outskirts of Spanish Town (Brunswick Avenue, to be exact!) and not draw attention to myself.

After withdrawing the six thousand dollars (approximately 100 plus US dollars, at the time), which they had demanded I was to drive to a safe location and then pay them. Totally petrified, I complied with the request and then drove, very foolishly in hind sight, to a darker spot in the centre of town, behind the old Registrar General’s building where I handed over the money. When finally released; that is, when they had determined that I had been very compliant and that the money was, in reality, six thousand dollars, (which I could ill afford then as now!), I was told to go.

Needless to say, I sped out of Spanish Town and back to Kingston like bat out of hell. I was so distressed I sat in Café Deli at the Jamaica Pegasus Hotel, regarded as one of Kingston’s finer hotels, all night relaying my story to anyone who would listen. Before that, I had sat dazed at the bar of Christopher’s Lounge, at the Quad – a very popular night club in New Kingston. I subsequently made a report to the Professional Standards Branch (PSB) of the police force. However, as I did not get the number of the squad car or the badge numbers or names of the officers (like I had time to notice that!), I only received an apology and the matter was forgotten.
Hence, my conviction that police officers here tread a fine line between criminality and upholding the law in many instances.

It is useful hear news reports that more officers are being charged as a result of the actions of the PSB, though the matter is also very distressing at the same time. At last count, there were approximately twenty-four who are facing possible sanctions. Indeed, to address the problem of crime and Jamaica’s growing reputation as ‘Murderville’ there is an urgent need for more than just words – all of which are useful in drawing attention to the issue, but which are woefully insufficient in terms of allaying public as well as international fears on this subject. This reality is, of course, further compounded in the case of Kevin Brown by the fact that the allegedly unstable Iraqi war veteran was about to board a plane to Jamaica with bomb making equipment in tow. According to him he was going to assemble and show his friends in Jamaica how to make explosives like those he saw in Iraq. Do we really need to point out how serious all of this is? Of course, the answer is no!

Much more needs to be done to address this very worrying problem. Pronto!

Pastor Wright and the Obama Campaign: American Media Coverage & Race

2008-03-24T00:14:00.007-05:00

So what are Senator Obama’s views on race? And, why has he avoided talking about it till now? Well, the short answer is because it is never a good thing to discuss the subject that nobody else wants to “touch with a long stick”, as we say in Jamaica. Because, even while you give voice to what most people are thinking and trying to be very diplomatic about, yours becomes the lone voice of dissent. The one which “bite and tear out di excitement!”, which is never a good thing, as I said before.

But, alas, the good Senator – and the lone black candidate in ongoing elections in America, at that, has gone and done it! That very thing no one else wanted to discuss – the unpleasantness of race and its significance to and in America, specifically to the elections. How will that play out after the “Race in America” (my unofficial title!) speech on Tuesday, March 18, 2008? Well, CNN says that it has improved Senator Obama’s stocks. According to them, based on a recent CBS/Gallup poll, he has rebounded after falling almost five percentage points to Senator Clinton since the infamous Pastor Wright tapes surfaced. (Makes you wonder about some other tapes we have heard about, right?)

However, if you are like me, after his Tuesday speech you are especially convinced that Obama is more than just another sentimental favourite, or the proverbial 'great black hope', in other words! This is not just because he plans to end the war in Iraq – a dream which most Democrats, we are told, holds dear. But, in reality, Senator Obama represents a meaningful difference and possibly change in the winds, if not the foundations of American politics, especially its foreign policy. This is something to be looked forward to, specifically in terms of Senator Obama’s very crucially posed question of whether the war in Iraq has caused Americans to be any safer than they were before the tragedy of 9-11 stalked its land. (And, I would also add: is the rest of the world any safer, too?)

Recall if you might that the global ‘War on Terror’ has even come to the otherwise ‘peaceful’ (well, you know what I mean!) shores of the Caribbean. Some of our own nationals were said to be linked to plans to blow up planes in at least one American airport in New York City. Before that, there was the concern that countries like Trinidad and to a lesser extent Guyana and others have housed persons linked to military Islam and, quite possibly, Al Qaeda. That is certainly something to think about, specifically in the aftermath of the American media coverage of Senator Obama and his associations with the pastor of the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, Jeremiah Wright.

I have resisted commenting on this topic, for as much as I could, though the temptation has been great. In the last couple of days the ‘controversy’ about race in America has certainly heated up and looks likely to impact Senator Obama’s chances of earning the Democratic nomination and, ultimately, the job of President. It is like owning Obama’s difference, in terms of his physical blackness (even), somehow qualifies me to be considered a bad person according to the current tone of the discussion. Indeed, acknowledging race in today’s society is, many respects, definitely not politically correct. This is especially the case in the aftermath of criticisms of American super power imperialism, colonialism and slavery. It is almost equivalent to suggesting that the Holocaust never existed or that man did not walk on the moon. Both of which, as you are aware, remain contentious issues for many in terms of their critique of American media and their capacity to define our realities.

More significantly, the question of race in America has once again reared its ugly head and, of all places in an election campaign and courtesy of the only black candidate in the fray, at least through his associations with his minister of religion. In reality though, Senator Clinton also had earlier intimated her own dis-ease about race by appearing to question the legitimacy of the history of black Civil Rights leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. and others. Senator Clinton’s suggested that President Lyndon B. Johnson actually provided the grist for the achievements of the Civil Rights Movement and not the prominent African-Americans leaders amongst who King Jr. is to be counted. Naturally, the former First Lady was roundly criticized, both in the media and elsewhere, especially within the black community for such radical comments.

However, what is significant about Senator Clinton’s remarks vis-à-vis those made by Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Senator Obama’s spiritual guide, is that they are perhaps not as contentious and as “fiery/ incendiary” as the, mostly white, American media have characterized them. While, there can be no doubt that Pastor Wright’s comments are, indeed, flammable, especially in the context of the racial tensions which swim below the surface of American society, there can be little doubt that part of the response of the media is, itself, implicated in the discussion on race in that society.

American media outrage is to be viewed, I believe, in the wider context of whether there is justification for the fears about race (ism) that would, ultimately, lead an American like Pastor Wright to invoke the unforgivable charge – “God damn America!” Among others, this seems to be the piece which has caused the most consternation and has lead to the near two weeks of media efforts at “digging deeper” and the critical review of Senator Obama’s relationship with Pastor Wright. Which it is felt impacts his own vision of America and the American people and, ultimately, whether he is capable of the job of being Commander-In-Chief. Indeed, Senator Obama’s wife Michelle had also earlier said that now that her husband is running for President she is (finally) proud to be an American. That too drew the ire of Senators Clinton and McCain, at the time, and required immediate damage control in terms of clarification.

Most recently, President Bill Clinton’s remarks to the effect that Senators Clinton and McCain love America, (perhaps unlike other unnamed Senators, whose issues have intruded on the real concerns in the campaign?) have turned up the heat on the discussion. More than a jab as it has been called by some in the media, in terms of President Clinton’s ‘subtle’ rebuke of Senator Obama and his eloquent, presidential-like speech on race in America, this comment opens up a potential can of worms. It is somewhat reminiscent of the invocation of the Patriots Act during the post 9-11 period - the reality being that, ‘true patriots’ do not criticize America, especially during times of terrorism and war. Indeed, the witch hunts of Americans said to be linked to Communism in the 1950’s are somewhat echoed in these comments.

What is notable also is whether the efforts to criticize the unseemly parts of the discussion about race, especially from the campaign platforms, is not itself another of the efforts by the media to gag those who would otherwise have something meaningful to say on the subject? I am almost of the view that the white American media, regarded as a liberal in many respects, reserves the right to be able to set the tone of the discussion on this very emotive and potentially flammable debate. Of course, it does not help matters that most of the presenters are not black and that their positions seem fairly insensitive, if not intolerant, towards minority concerns in this discussion.

In fact, CNN journalist Lou Dobbs has criticized Senator Obama for not having what he regards as, “fully formed views” on a range of subjects, including race and immigration. Indeed, Mr. Dobb’s comments come in the aftermath of Senator Obama’s earlier criticisms of statements made by Dobbs approximately two weeks ago regarding Senator Obama’s vision of immigration. Among others, Senator Obama criticized Mr. Dobbs for “fear mongering” and, in the words of the CNN newsman, “made all kinds of charges”. In a way, this is also reminiscent of Senator Clinton’s campaign’s claim that she would “throw the kitchen sink at Senator Obama” just before the Ohio and Texas Primaries and Caucus. Needless to say Senator Clinton won the Primaries in Ohio and Texas, but lost the Caucus (in Texas) to Senator Obama.

Which makes me wonder whether this is not another of the Clinton campaign’s strategy to bog Senator Obama down in aside issues which she herself had started much earlier? It also makes me wonder whether the claims of some of the guests who have given their views on Senator Obama’s relationship with Pastor Wright should not be viewed with suspicion by these very media? That they are given a platform such as CNN and others on which to air, in some instances, some questionable views may well prove worrisome for the Obama campaign leading into Pennsylvania, in particular, where he is trying to woo blue-collar, white American voters.

In at least one instance, one of Lou Dobbs’ commentator said that there are (basically) two types of black people – those like Pastor Wright (who express the fire and brimstone approach to race) and those like Senator Obama who are, effectively, ‘bargainers’. In the case of the latter, ‘bargainers’ are those African-Americans who ‘bargain’ with white America as a means of achieving acceptability. In effect, there would be no other basis on which white Americans could accept blacks in the same society than through a process of ‘bargaining’.

The speciousness of this comment, of course, needs not be said as it also implies that it is blacks who need the acceptance of white and not everyone in the interests of living in peace. It further underlines that the sentiments expressed by Pastor Wright are, somehow, typical (that word again!) and that, therefore, all blacks are effectively not to be trusted if even because they hold, or share in such views.

The reverberation, however, is that the comments made in reference to blacks and Pastor Wright also indict whites for believing this to be the norm amongst blacks in America. To which end, I must agree with Lou about the potentially offensive remarks made by Senator Obama about his grandmother being a “typical white” American “of her generation” as regards her fears of young black men and the types of comments she would make about them in private.

By all appearances, neither Obama nor Dobbs seems to have gotten it that both remarks – whether said directly or facilitated in the context of an interview that is not challenged, is just as dangerous. The effect of which is that they serve to reinforce negative attitudes towards and about each other without seriously critiquing such views as a means of finding common ground. Senator Obama, of course, stands to loose much more in the short term in terms of his own political future.

Which begs the question of what is the real state of the union regarding race in America? And, why is it that beyond the ‘incendiary’ remarks made by Pastor Wright can there not be an understanding in and by the American media that part of the difficulty with reporting race in America is precisely that – reporting race in America? By giving this subject as much play as it has received in the almost two weeks of its existence has served to resurrect unpleasant memories, for many, about its turbulent history in that society, and how both sides were implicated in the discussion as well as the reality of racial politics in America.

By not accepting that there are flammable views on either sides, notwithstanding the importance of the elections and the fact that Senator Obama is, himself, a black man who must have been impacted in some ways by these views is to miss the larger opportunity for a meaningful resolution of this subject. Surely, Senator Obama alone cannot make that change. However, a vote for him must, by necessity, be a step in the right direction to help address this scourge in American history.

Hopefully, the American media as well as the American people will not loose sight of this vision and make meaningful decisions in terms of how they report on and, ultimately, choose the next President – be it Senators Obama, Clinton or McCain.

Dancehall: Jamaica’s Solution to Civil Society?

2008-03-13T13:43:00.001-05:00

Perhaps unlike other periods in its brief history, Dancehall today is a space of sharply contending views, notwithstanding its increasing visibility – owing in no small part to its growing international appeal, as well as better efforts to treat it as legitimate academic enterprise. The recent Global Reggae Conference (GRC), at the University of the West Indies (UWI), Mona campus in Kingston, Jamaica bears testimony to this fact.

Dancehall is said to promote the vast majority of negatives which, currently, besiege Jamaican society. Among others, the two primary voices argue between themselves, nearly oblivious to alternate positions. In the main, the ‘detractors’ say that, Dancehall is a, largely, violent, homophobic and misogynistic music which promotes uncivil values.

By contrast, ‘Dancehall’s defenders’ claim it as the ultimate space in which society’s downtrodden – the previously invisible and powerless black, ghetto youth are able to eke out an existence, and a good one to boot, as a result of their lyrical ingenuity. This sets them apart from the other, largely, disenfranchised if not dehumanized members of Jamaica’s working classes. By which means, Dancehall is a space in which Jamaican ‘ghetto culture’ is heralded to unparalleled prominence and economic benefit.

In this regard, Dancehall is not to be criticised, in large part, because of the historically imbalanced power relations between the ghetto/ working classes and the Jamaican middle-classes. As we say in Jamaica – “Come off ah di people dem back an gi dem a chance!” (Get off of the peoples' backs/cases and give them a break!).

Censorship?

At best, this position is to be questioned; in large part, because the relationship formed between society, art and culture is often more organic and, thus, much more interlinked than is usually reported. Carefully examining the music in this regard is not the same as censorship.

Nor, does this, necessarily, imply that Dancehall needs to be held to a higher moral standard than other institutions in Jamaica. Rather, it is to make the case that artistic expressions, specifically in societies like ours, occupy a complex socio-political juncture between the worlds of entertainment and, inter alia, other necessary developmental needs, notwithstanding Dancehall’s value as a social document.

Media Realities

There is no denying the links between real violence and the effects of media, for instance, whereby people usually associate ‘reality’ – such as it is, with that which is consumed in the context of the images, sounds and ideas of our current hyper-real, ‘mediatised’ realities. This means that, while one cannot easily trace a causative link between art/ media and their audiences, it is useful to note that media help to create (hyper) realities which are often inhabited by society’s consumers.

Think, for example, of advertising as a technology used to train audiences to desire that which is seen and heard, often to the extent that they will pay vast amounts of their disposable income in an effort to acquire/ embody the values reflected in such media. It would stand to reason, then, that if we desire to live in a better society – whatever that means, then, there is also an urgent need to properly educate those who sing of and report about our society.

Under/privileged

That, Dancehall artistes are, usually, men and sometimes women of under-privileged circumstances also means that education is not always considered a priority in their worldviews. This is especially the case in a society where young men are, by and large, not encouraged to stay in school and to maximize their potentials in that space.

Hyper-Masculinity

Cultural narratives of a type of hyper-masculinity and violent machismo premised on early sexual contact with the opposite sex; the need for material possessions as a sign of status and wealth; and expressions of violence as macho toughness are real issues which prompt young men, especially of working class backgrounds, to drop out of school and, ultimately, the education system.

Education/ Values and Attitudes

Not to be exempted from this discussion is the fact that Jamaica’s education system is in clear need of an overhaul. The recent claims of spending excesses (read, ‘scandal’ in Jamaican politics) in the Education Transformation Programme, under the previous Peoples' National Party (PNP) administration, are cold comfort in this regard. After all, the Transformation Programme was, inter alia, aimed at achieving some of these objectives.

Citizenship

Education about citizenship, values and attitudes and (Jamaican and World) history must figure prominently in the school curriculum from the earliest levels; that is, if we are to pull the society back from the brink of hysteria. In fact, basic crime fighting skills like supporting the need to give crucial information to the police, at community level, and self-defense; tolerance and the regard for law and order must also be given pride of place in the Jamaican education system. These are absolutely necessary if we are to cultivate a society in which all are free and are, therefore, able to maximize their potentials for the benefit of themselves and others, without fear of retribution and or extermination.

The Role of Music

Which raises the crucial question: what is the role of the music in this scenario?

Dancehall is, arguably, one of Jamaica’s most visible and profitable exports, currently, even if all benefits do not directly accrue to the country. The industry must be strategically revamped along important lines of professionalism and needed talent development. This is not just at the level of lyrical and musical abilities of individual artistes but also in terms of the respect for the rule of law such as, adhering to the financial and taxation systems of the country; becoming informed about a range of (other crucial) concerns rather than just a narrow focus on self; as well as respect for self and others. Government’s role is undeniable in this regard.

It is not enough to just, as we say in Jamaica, “eat ah food” or “earn ah bread” from the music.

The Academy

The academy must also become more meaningfully involved – not just at the level of reporting data on the music – which is obviously needed, but to simultaneously locate these in appropriate context. This is in terms of the key ideas which promote Dancehall’s genesis as a black music and Jamaican popular/ culture.

Academics must also engage in critical analyses which make pertinent projections for Dancehall’s future and, hence, attempt to shape public discourses on the significance of popular culture in articulating Jamaican values and concerns, both locally and abroad.

‘Out of Many, One People’

Until this is done, and there is respect for all, then, the goals of the motto, so curiously positioned in this mix of facts and fictions; feelings and emotions, might not be truly realized. “Out of many, one people” is, in the current context, a paradox as far as Jamaica goes. As it is stands, there are many people with many concerns. They hardly ever meet; it would seem, at a place of common agreement about the type of society in which we want to live.

Jamaican History

Dancehall as the common denominator in this equation affords us the wherewithal to, not only earn revenue from the sale of the music, but also provides us with a unique opportunity to look at ourselves in a critically reflexive way.

Indeed, as a Jamaican cultural art (form), Dancehall is fundamentally linked to the society’s history as well as its future. It would be folly to analyse it in isolation of other key realities that also crucially impact its evolution/ development; that is, in terms of the call for civic and social responsibility in Jamaica.

Words, Sounds and Power

Undoubtedly, words have power, as do the images they conjure up in their repetitive refrain in the context of music. A meaningful use of such powers, at least, may set us on a productive path towards re-constructing Jamaica as a place in which we will all want to live. Hopefully, we will not shy away from this responsibility!