WHO GETS TO SPEAK FOR JAMAICA? By Richard Hugh Blackford

POLITICAL TRIBALISM, DIASPORA EXCLUSION AND THE SILENCING OF DISSENTI grew up in a Jamaica where discussion and debate were integral parts of everyday life. Politics, economics, culture and community affairs were discussed in homes, schools, workplaces, bars, churches, barbershops and on street corners. Jamaicans did not always agree and often disagreed loudly; but expressing an opinion was understood to be part of citizenship. Today, if one were to take a cue from how national issues are discussed on social media, one might conclude that only those who voted for the governing Jamaica Labour Party are entitled to call themselves Jamaicans. Anyone who criticizes the Administration or questions one of its policies is immediately labelled a “Comrade” the moniker for a supporter of the People’s National Party. The substance of the criticism is rarely examined, and the facts presented are often ignored. The objective is simply to attach a political label to the critic and dismiss whatever that person has said.This is not debate. It is political tribalism masquerading as public discourse.

CRITICISM IS NOT DISLOYALTY A citizen does not cease to love Jamaica because he or she disagrees with the Government. Criticizing the Administration is not the same as attacking the country. In fact, holding governments accountable is one of the most important responsibilities of citizenship. A political party may win an election, but with that win, it does not acquire ownership of Jamaica, and neither does an electoral victory give its supporters the exclusive right to determine who is patriotic, who may participate in national discussions or whose opinions deserve to be heard.I believe it is critical that people be reminded that not only are Governments temporary, but also that Jamaica belongs to all Jamaicans, including those who voted for the Opposition, those who voted for neither party and those who live outside the country. Yet our political culture increasingly demands unquestioning loyalty. Every issue is filtered through a green-or-orange lens. Every criticism is treated as evidence of partisan allegiance, and every critic must be assigned to an enemy camp. This mentality makes reasoned discussion almost impossible. It also shields political leaders from accountability because inconvenient facts can be dismissed as “PNP propaganda” without ever being answered.

THE DIASPORA IS JAMAICAN TOO The hostility is even more pronounced when criticism comes from Jamaicans living overseas. Diaspora residents are routinely told that because they no longer live on the island, they are not entitled to comment on matters affecting Jamaica. This argument is both insulting and intellectually dishonest, because living abroad does not erase one’s Jamaican identity, family connections, property interests, cultural attachments or concern for the country’s future. Migration does not amount to the surrender of citizenship, memory or national belonging. Most importantly, the same people who tell diaspora Jamaicans to remain silent are quite willing to accept their money. This as Jamaicans overseas send just under US $4 billion home annually. The Bank of Jamaica continues to recognize remittances as an important source of foreign-exchange inflows, with the United States accounting for approximately 70 per cent of Jamaica’s annual remittance receipts. These funds pay for school fees, mortgages, rent, medical expenses, utility bills and grocery costs. They support households, sustain consumption and contribute to the country’s external economic stability. The diaspora is also among the first groups approached whenever Jamaica experiences a hurricane, flood, public-health emergency or other national crisis. Overseas Jamaicans are expected to contribute barrels, food, medical supplies, building materials and cash. Political parties also court diaspora donors and supporters when election campaigns require financing. Apparently, diaspora Jamaicans are Jamaican enough to send money, support political campaigns and finance disaster recovery, but not Jamaican enough to express an opinion. That cannot be a reasonable or sustainable definition of citizenship.

SOCIAL MEDIA DID NOT CREATE TRIBALISM- BUT IT WEAPONIZED IT It is important to remember that Jamaica’s political tribalism existed long before Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok and WhatsApp. Social media did not create the problem, but it has dramatically expanded its reach, speed and intensity. The proliferation of smartphones has placed an instant publishing platform in almost every hand. Political parties have responded by making social-media operations a permanent part of their communications machinery. That development, by itself, is neither surprising nor improper. Political organizations have every right to promote their policies, defend their records and present their leaders in the best possible light. The danger arises when political communication becomes a coordinated campaign of ridicule, intimidation and character assassination. Partisan operatives and online surrogates are deployed to repeat talking points, attack critics and overwhelm serious discussions with insults and propaganda. Rather than rebut an argument, they question the critic’s motives. Rather than address the facts, they search for a political label. Rather than engage the message, they attempt to discredit the messenger.

Some of these individuals may be enthusiastic volunteers. Others may be formally or informally connected to political organizations. Whatever the arrangement, the cumulative effect is the same: critics are relentlessly hounded until they retreat, fall silent or abandon the platforms altogether.

LEADERSHIP ESTABLISHED THE TONE Political leaders cannot distance themselves entirely from the conduct of their most aggressive supporters. It is true that individuals are responsible for their own words. But political leadership determines the broader tone of national engagement through its speeches, slogans, messaging and treatment of dissent. So, when leaders routinely portray criticism as hostility, their supporters learn to regard critics as enemies. When government representatives ridicule members of the public rather than answer their questions, party activists interpret that behaviour as permission to do the same. When political loyalty is elevated above truth, competence and accountability, public conversation inevitably becomes more hostile.I am of the view that after an election, responsible leadership should move quickly to unite the country. A government must recognize that it governs not only for those who voted for it, but also for those who opposed it. Thus, winning an election should mark the end of campaigning and the beginning of governing. But that has not sufficiently occurred in Jamaica. Too often, the posture of permanent campaigning remains in place. Political opponents are treated as obstacles rather than as legitimate participants in the democratic process, while ordinary citizens who ask difficult questions are categorized as agents of the Opposition. The result increasingly resembles the Trumpian political culture of the United States, in which opponents are described not simply as people with different ideas but as enemies of the country. Jamaica should be extremely careful about importing that model. Once political disagreement is transformed into enmity, democratic institutions and social cohesion become much easier to undermine.

THE CHILLING OF TRADITIONAL MEDIA This hostile environment also has consequences for journalism. When online mobs are prepared to target anyone who challenges the Government, editors, journalists and commentators may begin to practice self-censorship. Stories are softened. Hard questions are avoided, controversies are reported without sustained investigation, while commentators calculate the personal and professional cost of expressing an independent view. The silencing of the traditional media does not always require direct government censorship. It may be achieved through political pressure, restricted access, advertising influence, online harassment or the persistent suggestion that critical journalism is evidence of partisan bias.

That is how a chilling effect develops. People remain legally free to speak, but many decide that speaking is no longer worth the abuse, risk or retaliation. A democracy cannot function properly under those conditions. The press is not required to make the Government comfortable. Citizens are not obligated to applaud every policy. Diaspora Jamaicans do not need permission from political activists to participate in discussions about the country of their birth.

JAMAICA MUST RECOVER THE HABIT OF DEMOCRATIC DEBATE Jamaica needs to recover the distinction between criticism and betrayal, between political disagreement and personal hostility, and between party loyalty and national loyalty. At the same time, supporters of the Government must be free to defend it, as are Opposition supporters free to challenge it. Non-aligned citizens must be free to criticize both parties. Jamaicans living overseas must be allowed to participate without having their citizenship or commitment to the country questioned. Arguments should be tested against evidence; not against the party affiliation, residence or presumed motives of the person presenting them. The Government also has a responsibility to set a higher standard. Its leaders should openly discourage personal attacks, repudiate threats and insist that supporters respond to criticism with facts. That would not weaken the Administration. It would demonstrate political maturity and confidence. Jamaica does not belong to the JLP or the PNP. It does not belong exclusively to those living on the island, nor to those who agree with whichever party happens to hold office. Jamaica belongs to all Jamaicans. A confident democracy does not fear criticism. It welcomes scrutiny, protects dissent and recognizes that disagreement is not evidence of disloyalty. The people who ask difficult questions are not necessarily Jamaica’s enemies. Very often, they are the ones who care enough about the country to demand that it do better.

  Please follow me for more in-depth analysis of Jamaican public policy, social justice, governance, and national development.