This is the second in a two-part series

Having so successfully challenged two of the four political problems that faced those whose ancestors had come out of slavery when they were politically without power, it was logical that the black Community would now wish to ensure that they had a majority of those who would represent their majority status and their interest among the decision makers. It should be less difficult now that they had the vote, and the policy of segregation, though not totally eliminated, had been recognised as an unacceptable Government policy.

Ironically and unbelievably it proved not to be less difficult because it took thirty years. it wasn’t achieved until November 1998. But the difficulties were not a result of the system. It as a direct result of the leadership which undertook the task.

One has to ask why, with the power of the vote, did the black community take thirty years to elect a Parliament which they believed would represent their majority interest when the other goals had been achieved so quickly even though they did not even have the vote.

It was because those who took on the leadership forgot, or ignored, all that they might have learnt from the two earlier successes. They did not think. There is little doubt that those who took on the leadership believed that they had the best interest of the black community in their heart. But rather than looking at what black Bermudians had achieved for themselves in a relatively brief period, they looked to Britain and other European orwhite countries to determine what they should do now that they had the vote. The irony was greater because they were also men who talked of Independence from Great Britain who they viewed as theoppressor. Why did they use her as their example for a small, racially divided Island whose black community had been united by their painful history and who certainly had no experience or tradition of a hierarchal society. Nor was Bermuda a society which could claim to be one in which industrial capitalists were exploiting labour. It was a farming society, evolving into a service society, not an industrial society. It exploited on the basis of race and ex-slaves. It would not have mattered how much capital a black person had accumulated he would still be seen as inferior, exploited and excluded.

These men formed a political party in 1963, the Progressive Labour Party, based on European theories, not Bermudian realities. The existence of the party was a denial and a rejection of all the principles that had led to the earlier successes. These men clearly lacked analytical insight and creativity, perhaps they also lacked courage, selflessness and the ability for self direction. They certainly did not think. The first tragedy was that they immediately became far more concerned about the political party than they were about the actual issue of electing a majority among the decision makers to represent the interest of the black majority in the country. Political parties promptly created justifiable division within the black community when their earlier successes had come because the black community had been united in their quest for their goal of greater justice for the descendants of black slaves. In fact the PLP leaders, based on their own rhetoric, were not even representing the black community, they were representing labour, and hopefully white labour. White labour did not wish their representation. It was the black community, and others, chose to see the PLP as representing the black community, in spite of what the leaders attempted to do, and say.

The fact that concern about the PLP, as a party, replaced the concern for majority representation was only the first tragedy. Following the Westminster system they then elected a leader. Formerly the leaders had been those who emerged because of their commitment to achieving a specific goal that would benefit the entire community. In Britain and in Europe which had a tradition of a hierarchical society, the power and prestige given to the Leader of a party was tempered by the fact that he/she had an obligation or responsibility to those below him/her. Noblesse oblige was a part of the system. Blacks did not have this tradition or experience, thus those put in the position of leadership not because they were committed to a specific goal that would benefit the entire black community but because of personality, one way or another, exercised their power without any sense of noblesse oblige, or any sense of obligation or responsibility to those whom they led.

In the end it became all about a single leader. the leader was no longer flexible and every change led to conflict and further division and bitterness. The fact that the black Community was directed to spend their psychic energy on the role of the leadership rather than on an issue of concern to all of the black community was clearly illustrated when the PLP in 1984, threw away five black men who had been representing the black community with integrity. At a time when the black community needed a majority, the leader because of personality conflict, reduced the number of blacks in Parliament. This was just one outstanding example of the destructive results of party politics and the damage that it did to the interests of the black community ... and a more just society.

The divisiveness has already been mentioned. It was divisive in several ways. The first divide was that it gave some blacks a reason to turn their backs on the concerns of the black community which still suffered from some very obvious disadvantages, when they could justifiably join the UBP (the United Bermuda Party) which unabashedly represented the white power structure. There was another divide. It was when PLP members and supporters fought with each other over who should enjoy the power and prestige of the leader. Since blacks were used to being powerless, they permitted the leader to exercise a great deal of power over them and any leader can be ruthless under these circumstances. There was another divide which weakened their efforts to reach a goal that would benefit the entire black community.

Despite Bermuda’s rigid segregation policy and other exploitative and oppressive measures, there were always one or two whites who saw the injustice and silently gave their support to the cause. They may not have shown the courage of a Dr. Barbara Ball or a David Allen but they did show their position in some other small way. When Bermuda’s racial party politics arrived, these whites who were interested in a more just society, felt obliged to give their total support to the UBP, no matter how wrong it might be, just as many blacks felt the same way about the PLP. The euphoria which accompanied the PLP victory in 1998 was, in retrospect, very sad, not because of the disillusion which so quickly followed but because the joy was over a PLP victory and not because the black descendants of slaves had moved the society closer to being a more just society. The PLP had shown its lack of courage by completely ignoring its responsibility towards the black descendants of slaves that had been the victims of segregation and racism. It was as a result of this kind of leadership that the fourth problem of attempting to narrow the economic disparity between the two communities was not even on their agenda.

This was disastrous not only for the black community but for the entire society. In the first instance it meant that blacks were not directing all of their political and psychic energies to conflict over the leadership of the party and none towards creating a more just society. It also meant that as well intentioned blacks set their mind on positive social goals those goals became integration with whites and not justice for all blacks. Blacks began to feel virtuous if they were involved in integrated events, while the black underclass, about which Larry Burchall, has written, was evolving because black leadership had forgotten all about the fourth problem that they should have been addressing rather than concentrating on the political leadership of the PLP. This failure on the part of the black community and its leadership was not only disastrous for the black community but for the entire society. I watched the attitude of a large number of whites at the unveiling of the symbol to the Progressive Group. Many of them genuinely shared in the satisfaction which Blacks felt at that unveiling. It was difficult to remember the hard resistance that whites had put up, and their condemnation of, the Progressive Group as radicals and troublemakers, at the time of their action. I believe that there are very few whites who would condemn Universal Adult Franchise today. Racism undoubtedly still exists but even among those who still practice it there were very few who would argue for a full return of the old days, even among those who claim that we have a more corrupt government than we once had!

My point is that when blacks have taken a moral stand and fought for a more just society the majority of whites have eventually accepted it, often with relief. When blacks introduced party politics and all of the viciousness that has gone with the conflict over leadership rather than fighting for a more just society by uniting in the struggle to narrow the economic disparity between the two communities, they lost the moral high ground and introduced a destructive justification for divisions of every kind which has done none of us any good. Many of us have been angered by both the resistance and the dishonesty of the white community over the issue of the Equity Bill and the disparity between black and white salaries but it is the black community and their leadership which are primarily responsible. In the eleven years that the PLP has been in power, how much positive attention have they given to discussion about narrowing the economic disparity between the two communities? They were too cowardly to address the issue of race at the outset and they have done nothing to address the issue since which. Certainly not even the Big Conversation was about a serious concern about the economic disparity and those blacks who are most seriously impacted by this disparity.

Previous Governments were more interested in antiriot action than in addressing the economic condition of blacks and this Government is now much more prepared to address legislative repression in the face of the current crime crisis than they have been in addressing the economic circumstances that has created an underclass. Politicians like the current Westminster style of party politics. But the rest of us need to think about what it has done to us and the black stride towards a more just society. If we had not had party politics and all of its divisive tactics we might have narrowed the economic gap between our two communities and we might not have had all of these alienated young black youths. Even if anyone disagrees with my conclusions, they cannot disagree with the facts. We accomplished more for the entire black community before we had party politics than anything that has happened since. Let my people think!

Without party politics individual politicians would raise issues of concern to him or her and others would give their support or oppose it on its merits, that is, there would be changing coalitions rather than party politics. I do not doubt that under such a system there would even be occasions when some of those who are now white UBPers would agree with some of those who are now black PLPers. As it is, with cabinet secrecy, we cannot even be told what position a person took even if we voted for him or her. The current system where only a few do all of the work and get paid much more than others is absurd. When we were segregated we were all segregated alike. The fact that Britain has done it for centuries is a matter that is immaterial to us, or should be. The entire concept of the whip is absurd. The fact that MPs have a free vote on important issues is an indication that all issues should be considered of importance. Some practices that may be necessary in a very large assembly of hundreds become a practice of absurdity in our parliament of dozens. The fact that we do have an underclass of disillusioned blacks when we have had a black Government for eleven years is a clear indication that something is terribly wrong with the system.

It is not only because some problems are very difficult to solve, it is because there is a sense that the leadership is indifferent to those problems that impact others. So many blacks who are integrated or doing okay for themselves have shown that they feel no responsibility to create a more just society for those blacks who (a) are notintegrated, and (b) worse, who are struggling to just survive. Some in leadership roles believe that they are supposed to live much better than other blacks, even those who have struggled to be good citizens. We need to find a more rational and just fashion to govern ourselves, a way that is more respectful to those who vote. Changing coalitions and changing flexible leadership is what this tiny, deeply divided society needs.