By Oliver Mills:
Caribbean politics in many ways can be regarded as being a closed-minded
activity. We as Caribbean people often have our allegiance to political
parties pre-determined for us by our political culture, and through
political socialisation. Through these processes, our minds from very
early are shaped to accept designated political beliefs, which very
often we do not question, or even revise, despite the fact that the
political organisations we support can often behave in unacceptable
ways. We therefore become the victims of our own choice. We are
therefore not open-minded about the political beliefs we hold.
William Hare, a former professor at Dalhousie University, says that
open-mindedness is the ability to hold particular views, but to revise
them when new evidence that contradicts them is presented. To me this
means we remain open to the possibility that what we currently hold to
be true; can be found to have no basis or substance when new evidence is
presented to the contrary. We should therefore revise our original
position, and adopt the new, evidence-based one, despite the
psychological unease we may experience, because of the changes necessary
to put things right.
The lack of open-minded thinking in Caribbean politics is seen most
starkly just before independence, when Caribbean governments had other
political systems to choose from, but instead retained the one they
inherited. This meant continued governance by the well-off and
parliamentary legislation being formulated to benefit the elites. Since
the system benefited only a minority at the expense of the majority,
there was no consideration of reflecting in an open-minded way, on
whether it needed to be evaluated, and replaced by one which was more
equitable.
A closed-minded view of politics therefore prevailed from the eve of
independence to the present. Independence itself was a gift to the
Caribbean closed-minded elite. This is why every Caribbean independent
country is experiencing the same problems in some form presently, since
the content of the gift was worse than the packaging.
Apart from not being open-minded about the inherited political
institutions, there was, and still is no attempt to politically educate
citizens of the independent countries in a serious way to rid their
minds of the myths their previous controllers had, and still have about
them.
One Caribbean author states that myths were used to make people
contented with their lot. For example, they were told the social order
under which they lived was natural, and even divine. This led to a cowed
ambition, and an existence without any serious purpose, since
everything was fixed. Few Caribbean countries since independence have
sought to free the minds of their citizens in a systematic way from the
complexes the pre-independence period imposed on them.
Because of this, unhealthy negative thinking remains, and some of the
coping mechanisms in the pre- and post-independence period were and are
to submit to the system and be contented with it, while seeking to be
recruited into the ranks of those who wielded, and still possess power
and authority, so they could be a part of the system of dominance, and
so help to keep their own people quiet and obedient. This is the
closed-minded way of coping, and these behaviours remain in the present
era.
Some who used this strategy, and still employ it, include the educated
middle class. Closed-minded thinking has therefore led to economic
stagnancy, exhausted political ideas and, most frightening of all, it
has led to ministers of government behaving like civil servants, rather
than transformational leaders.
The political directorate in the Caribbean has therefore become copycats
of other systems, because they have not employed open-minded thinking
to find alternative social arrangements that would work in their
respective countries.
In one area where the Caribbean political directorate has become most
open-minded though, is in the role of the maximum political leader, or
prime minister, simply because it gives them more power, and authority.
This is shown where, according to Trevor Munroe, the Caribbean prime
minister dominates the executive or cabinet, more than does the British
prime minister, and we also have a political culture which defers to our
leaders.
The prime minister in the Caribbean also exercises greater control over
his or her party than what obtains in Britain, since party candidates
are approved by the leader. In Britain, the candidate for election is
chosen by the people in the constituency. The Caribbean prime minister’s
power over the legislature is also greater than that of the British
prime minister, because he or she has the power to dissolve parliament.
We have seen, then, that open-mindedness in Caribbean politics exists
only where it benefits the leaders. If they see where being open-minded
gives them an edge, they revise their views on certain practices. If no
political mileage is gained, closed-mindedness prevails.
But open-mindedness goes beyond personal advantage. It is about being
constantly alert to the possibility that the political environment might
change and so endanger progressive policies. It is being constantly
open to the changes in the way the electorate measures the political
winds, and decides to change with them. It is being open to new
political ideas and philosophies, which are transformational in
character. And it is having the willingness to adopt, make decisions
based on evidence, and so provide citizens of the Caribbean with a
prosperous, happy, and viable society.
Most importantly, open-mindedness involves the willingness of Caribbean
leaders to give up their most cherished ideas, once new evidence shows
they no longer have credence, and change them for those that have.
April 03, 2014
Caribbeannewsnow