Wrong-headed View Of Sir Alexander Bustamante

By Rupert Johnson

I was certainly taken aback by Ewart Walters’ characterization of Sir William Alexander Bustamante, first Prime Minister of Jamaica, in his book: We Come from Jamaica—The National Movement 1937-1962.

In this book, Walters not only portrayed Bustamante as a proponent of violence, but blamed him for Jamaica’s disunity and fractious political system. He writes: “Jamaica could have been much further ahead now, had William Alexander Bustamante remained as a supporter of the national movement in which Norman Manley’s People’s National Party played a major role, and not the adversary he became.”

What Walters is really saying is that Jamaica would have been better off under a one-party system led by Bustamante’s cousin, Norman Manley. He is upset by the fact that Bustamante broke away from the People’s National Party (PNP), and formed the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) in 1943.

Walters, therefore, blames Bustamante for Jamaica’s two-party system based on the British Westminster model of parliamentary democracy. He also blames the two-party system for Jamaica’s political divisiveness. He firmly believes that an opposition party is an impediment to Jamaica’s progress, and that its only function is to “oppose, oppose, oppose.”

He would have us believe that a one-party system of government devoid of opposition and criticism would have united Jamaica thus bringing about peace and prosperity.

But Walters fails to realize that there has been no empirical evidence throughout the world to support the notion that a one-party system of government is a prescription for political harmony and economic prosperity.

He should realize that the flirtation with one-party states in Africa, Asia, in parts of Europe, the Middle East, and Central and South America have only brought about increased violence, chaos and economic destruction. He also fails to realize that a one-party state is in fact a totalitarian state that crushes individual freedoms and initiatives.

Walters further fails to realize that if Bustamante had ultimately joined forces with Norman Manley and in so doing created a one-party state, Jamaica would have become a backward fractious, failed state like what exists in many African countries today. Contrary to Walters view, the existence of a one-party state in Jamaica without genuine elections could have set the stage for a violent civil war.

His accusation that Bustamante incited violence in the Jamaican political movement is totally inaccurate. As a youngster growing up in Jamaica in the 1940s and ‘50s (the heyday of Busta, the Chief) there is absolutely no evidence that the Chief ever incited or condoned any form of violence or disorderly conduct.

In those days, political campaigns were a form of entertainment in which thousands of ordinary people participated along the road sides and street corners across the Jamaican landscape. I attended many of those meetings without fear for my life, and the lives of my family and friends.

In bygone days everything was conducted in a very democratic way. It may be said that the Westminster model based on the two-party system may not be perfect, but it is the best system for laying the foundation of a vibrant democracy.

Rupert Johnson may be reached at: r.b.johnson@sympatico.ca.