Ian BoyneIT WAS Don Robotham from whom I first read the vehement demand that public sector employees, not just the Parliamentarians, give back their salary increases. Other voices in the media have taken on that siren call, but absolutely no one imagines that this would be done. Certainly not by Permanent Secretaries, nurses and the security officers.
Politicians might do it to gain political advantage-though even here, personal interest is so dominant in our culture that not even the Opposition politicians would do it to gain some badly-needed mileage and advantage over a beleaguered Government. No matter the cajoling and even harassment of the Opposition Members of Parliament (MPs) to give it up, they simply won't budge. Why should they when the Government MPs who have all the connections and access to the spoils are not giving back theirs?
As much as we have diligently crafted an anti "politrician" culture and so we effortlessly and reflexively stomp on the politicians, the facts reveal that their salary increases are a minor part of the $8 billion increase in salaries and emoluments which have contributed to the 100 per cent overshooting of the fiscal deficit. Sometimes the discussion on these economic matters are not made crystal clear so that ordinary people can understand what is being said, and while politicians have a vested interest in obfuscating issues, we can't excuse the media when they allow this.
It must be made clear that the Opposition and Government critics are saying that working class public sector workers, not just Permanent Secretaries and politicians, should not have had their increases last year. Now would these same public sector workers who support the Jamaica Labour Party and are fiercely opposed to Omar Davies prefer not to have had the increases in the national interest? Let me ask you, the reader: Would you prefer to defer an increase in your salary come April if you knew this would improve our national economic health and contribute to a buoyant economy? Everyone who is reading this article knows what the answer would be for almost every single Jamaican reader, if not every last one.
If this article is being read in Cuba, the Middle East and East Asia it cannot be assumed that the answer would be the same as in Jamaica. Culture affects human responses. This is a demonstrable fact and one does not need to read Levi-Strauss, Margaret Mead and other anthropologists and political scientists like Robert Putnam and Lawrence Harrison to know this is true. Culture values and attitudes, in other words matters. In Jamaica everybody is looking to everybody else to make the sacrifice. Everybody wants the country to have a better balance of trade and for the country not to "live beyond its means" by importing too many luxury goods. But everybody wants the latest overseas fashion; everybody wants the latest electronic gadgets, the finest appliances, and the best cars, no matter what that does to the balance of trade.
If only others could live within their means while we borrow and beg our troubles away and live out our American Dream. Don Robotham's article in The Sunday Gleaner of February 16, "Politics and Morality", resonated with many well-thinking and reflective people because it touched a nerve and was compellingly relevant to everyday experience in Jamaica. For those who really want to understand Jamaica's fundamental crisis not just the symptoms of that underlying crisis I again, as I have been doing for years in articles, on television and in speeches I have written for numerous clients, recommend Don Robotham's seminal Grace, Kennedy Foundation lecture 1998 titled, Vision and Voluntarism: Reviving Voluntarism in Jamaica.
The first order of business of the National Steering Committee of what has been called the 2003 phase of the Values and Attitudes Campaign should be to read and digest this significant piece of social analysis from one of our finest sociologists. Values and attitudes are more than just respecting our children and elders; displaying good manners and etiquette, being punctual, being nice and courteous to people. All these things are fine, but the importance of values and attitudes goes way beyond that.
Our survival as a nation and our hope of escaping disintegration socially, economically and politically lies with the inculcation of strong values and attitudes. I am glad that the economic discussion is coming down to a consensus on certain matters. The spokespersons for the political parties, both official and unofficial, have, thankfully, agreed that whichever party is in power there is an urgent, immediate need to cut expenditures, to tighten spending and cut back on the standard of living of the Jamaican people, irrespective of how unpalatable that is. Yes, we should be looking at improving the standard of living now, rather than contracting it, but we have to face the reality that there is no free lunch and we are not fortunate to be on the Security Council at this time where we could sell ourselves to the United States for a high price. Oh for a Security Council seat when we need it! But let's get out of fantasyland.
This is Jamaica in a globalised world, 2003, and there is a huge gaping hole in the budget. When Trevor Munroe raised the issue of taxing higher income-earners at a higher rate than low-income workers, Colin Steele immediately shot it down as "punishing the successful" and there is a theoretical argument for that. While this might not have been Colin's motive, I am sure that many in his high-income-earning group who want more and better acquisitions are not willing to bear that burden for any national interest. People of all classes, not just politicians want to get more, not less. Nobody in Jamaica wants to sacrifice for any nebulous "nation".
THE COMMON GOOD
The East Asians, when they were building their industrial revolution, collectively made sacrifices, and the workers agreed to accept low wages to build up their national industries. Yes, the regimes were hardly democratic so you can say we did not really know that the people really acquiesced. But the fact that there were not the massive revolts and sabotage that have attended other authoritarian regimes which did not have a strong base of positive cultural values proves that there was a high degree of willingness to sacrifice for the common good.
The Confucian culture which stresses the nation, co-operativeness, the postponement of gratification, hard work, resilience and optimism - provided the stimulus for the breathtaking economic and industrial achievements of the Tigers of East Asia. The fact that the East Asians bounced back so quickly after their financial sector crisis is also an indication of the strong social capital base which exists there. When you have the kind of national challenges which we have in Jamaica, you need a strong system of values which provide the basis of people's willingness to sacrifice for the common good.
Robotham, that master of clear communication, puts it well: "The problem is that for most people (Jamaicans) economic advancement is a means to an end and not an end in itself. The question, therefore, to be answered sooner rather than later would be, in true Jamaican style: 'Why should I put out an effort to increase the living standards of all Jamaicans as opposed to those of myself and my immediate circle of family and friends?" As Robotham pointed out in the Grace, Kennedy Foundation lecture, there is nothing that really unites and galvanises Jamaicans. The Reggae Boyz did that for a while but it could not last.
Hear Robotham again: "There is no rationale behind the term 'Jamaican' which expresses any sense of common purpose ...Therefore, there is almost no sense of what are our mutual obligations to one another." The problem Omar Davies and the PNP Government face as they nervously approach the tabling of the next Budget and inevitably demand sacrifices of the Jamaican people, is that that they know painfully and frightfully well that our people are not prepared to dance to that tune. Indeed, the people will attempt to "kill the sound bwoy", who come with dem tune deh, in dancehall parlance. Worse when there is the impression that the Government could have done better and that the PNP and its friends are doing well.
The Palestinian will give his life for the concept of something
called a free Palestine. Give his life-so he himself has nothing to gain from that Free Palestine; but he has a sense of identity, destiny and a sense of an obligation to his people that puts his very life as secondary to that overarching goal.
With all the terror Saddam Hussein has reigned on his people and as much as he is not the favourite of certain Muslim neighbours, especially the fiercely Fundamentalist ones, they will strenuously rally with him and against the United States because of what their Muslim identity and independence means.
Nationalism and religious ideology are stronger than personal likes and aversions. We have nothing like that in Jamaica. The Cuban people will make sacrifice for the revolution and will forego material benefits to retain their sense of cultural identity and independence rather than submit to "Gringo imperialism". We celebrate our freedom from all mutual obligations in Jamaica. We celebrate our modernity or post-modernity in which we subjectively and relativistically choose whatever whims and fancies suit the moment or the weekend.
Says another of our brilliant and highly accomplished sociologists, Harvard John Coles Professor of Sociology Orlando Patterson in his UWI Distinguished lecture Series done last year for Emancipation and Independence: "Modernity is the assimilation of material values and aspirations of advanced capitalist societies most notably. On this score we have been sadly successful. America indeed I often first learn of the latest fashions and trends in America on my visits to Jamaica". No matter how many Corruption Commissions are established, how many Commissions of Enquiry into this or that allegation of corruption which sit, how many go-fast boats we get, as long as our base of values remain as weak as they are we can forget economic development.
The National Consultative Committee on Values and Attitudes has to find a way to meaningfully stamp on the Jamaican consciousness the critical need for the values and attitudes campaign or else it will be the butt of criticism and ridicule and will get more sceptical letters of the day such as the one prominently published in last Tuesday's Gleaner.
Professor Patterson in his Emancipation-Independence lecture talked about certain attitudes from the plantation which still affect Jamaica negatively today. He referred to a recent study by an industrial sociologist which showed that only 24 per cent of Jamaican workers could be called motivated and a mere three per cent which are highly motivated. "Workers have withdrawn all enthusiasm for productive work and often engage in outright sabotage. Their combative relationship with management render the work place inherently flammable."
After mentioning that Jamaicans workers do very well in North America Paterson says, "Jamaican workers and Jamaican supervisors do not just seem capable of hitting it off. It is as if the ghost of the slave and post-emancipation past looms over every relationship in which someone must take orders from another. Until we get over this problem we might as well forget it as far as industrial growth is concerned."
All the talk, therefore, about GDP deficit, foreign exchange and all the highfalutin economic jargon we now hear frequently is pure idle chatter unless we deal with some fundamental, overarching values and attitudes.
