By Oliver Mills From Caribbean News Now

In his recent, brilliantly discussed commentary in Caribbean News Now, David Jessop suggests that over the next ten years, our way of thinking about the Caribbean will radically change as a result of new discoveries in oil and gas, presenting new opportunities, and room for economic growth. Associated with these, are infrastructural developments, and allied spin-offs, along with the continuing development of tourism.

He infers that these developments make the case for a more confident, outward looking region, better able to make a positive case in the world, and encourage new thinking locally.

David then makes the point that few Caribbean leaders in government or opposition see the region this way, or try to analyse the implications. He ably presents both sides of the issues, giving a balanced picture of prospects and challenges, the latter relating to corruption and security. It is a convincingly argued article, with the kind of picture the Caribbean always wanted to project. Most importantly he mentions the need for regulatory frameworks, and engagement by civil society in the process.

I support the overall thrust of Jessop’s vision, but would make certain observations regarding a few of the ideas presented. He outlines a comprehensive development package, but Caribbean history has shown that much of the development that takes place has been placed in selected areas of the countries concerned, leaving a certain lopsidedness, where other areas are barely touched by these developments.

Although some jobs are provided, some locals barely benefit to the extent they could, while others are recruited for the upper and middle level jobs, with those at the lowest levels being done by cheap labour from abroad. In one case, investment providers insisted they bring in their people for a project, since they felt no one with this skill was available locally.

In a case involving the oil industry in one country, the industry did not recognize the degrees from the local university, resulting in locals having to settle with lower level employment. These episodes represent some challenges the development process brings, although there are positives, including more opportunities for locals, and more spending power, which benefits local businesses. And the enhancement of infrastructure (I recognize there are more possibilities brought about by the development process).

Jessop mentions that few Caribbean leaders in government or opposition see the region the way he outlines its possibilities. My view is that this is because these leaders still manage a feudal political system, which limits their perspective of its larger possibilities.

Feudalism implies class divisions, vesting of land in officialdom, a political economy mainly based on agriculture, and status based on wealth and land. Any new developments will be impacted on negatively by these feudal values. They will further complicate class structures making the upper class richer, and the others not endowed in the way the new economy is supposed to work.

The political class will manage things to their greater gain, so that they would have unimaginable sources of wealth despite a regulatory legal framework.

Officialdom will create myths and symbols of authority to further impress the body politic, along with its control of land and its distribution. This gives it immense psychological power, creating in society a dependent and compliant class structure, which is constantly manipulated to keep the political class intact, and in charge.

The authority to distribute land further creates a patron-client connection, recreating a feudal-colonial relationship. Additionally, some see development projects in areas of their country as something ‘out there’ not connected to their way of living. And they could result in territorial claims to the other country’s resources.

In many Caribbean territories, agriculture still plays a role, despite attempts at diversification, with status based on wealth and land. Land becomes a political and transactional product, to be either flipped for greater economic gain, or used as collateral. But expectations of development can be overdrawn, and projects agreed to sometimes have a gestation period, for example, the promised hub by investors for one Caribbean country. Plus, nationalistic policies by governments could cause issues with investors.

But with the expected radical change as a result of oil and gas finds, major corporations and investments will have an interest in acquiring land for infrastructure, other new projects, and their associated spin-offs related to the new economy mentioned by Jessop.

Governments will also gain needed revenues. So despite a potential change in our way of thinking, a feudal political infrastructure could remain in place, to constantly challenge the innovations presented by a new and expanded Caribbean economic order. What seems like change could be the same product packaged differently.

IMAGE: olivermills3.jpg
Oliver Mills is a former lecturer in education at the University of the West Indies Mona Campus. He holds an M.Ed degree. from Dalhousie University in Canada, an MA from the University of London and a post-graduate diploma in HRM and Training, University of Leicester. He is a past Permanent Secretary in Education with the government of the Turks and Caicos Islands

For more on this story go to: http://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/headline-Commentary%3A-The-influence-of-feudalism-on-Caribbean-politics-31832.html