Local voters invariably embrace the irrational over the rational when choosing who should govern the country. I do not agree with this view. It is popularly held by many supporters of the Jamaica Labour Party, (JLP), People’s National Party, (PNP), and indeed scores of Jamaicans who are not-aligned to either 20 Belmont Road or 89 Old Hope Road.

We have had 18 general elections since universal adult suffrage in 1944. Unlike some, I don’t believe the voter’s decision in these were the result of primordial and irrational tendencies.

“Seriously, Higgins, what about the general election of 1976,” some will certainly protest?

I previously pointed out in this space with copious evidence that the democratic wishes of the people of Jamaica were deliberately thwarted with the use of the sordid state of emergency in 1976.

For those of younger vintage, it was declared on June 19, 1976 and lasted for a year. The mother of all corrupt general elections was held in 1976. In the weeks and days preceding the December 15, 1976 poll, several key JLP people, including Olivia “Babsy” Grange and Pearnel Charles, were detained. Charles was jailed for almost a year.

The findings of the Smith Commission into the 1976 State of Emergency revealed that its calling was predicated upon the facilitation of political opportunism and not bona fide concerns about national security, as then Prime Minister Michael Manley had told the country.

The outcome of the 1976 General Election cannot be successfully fingered as an instance in which Jamaicans voted irrationally. On the contrary, the calculated suppression of a people’s democratic will should not and cannot be properly equated with claims of primeval irrationality by Jamaican voters.

“Was the democratic will of the people also stymied in 1983?” some will ask. I believe it was. Then Prime Minister Edward Seaga, as I understand it, did not act unconstitutionally when he called a general election for December 1983. I think, however, there is far more to the proper running of a country than abiding by what is set in the constitution. Recall, the Opposition PNP, led by Michael Manley, decided to boycott the election, charging violation of a bipartisan understanding on election reform.

Still, the outcome of the 1983 General Election cannot be correctly identified as an instance in which Jamaicans voted irrationally. The voters, who took time out to cast a ballot, effectively had one choice.

To date, I have not seen any credible evidence that the outcome of any of our general elections had been rooted in innate irrational proclivities of the voters who took the time to cast a ballot.

As I see it, except for 1976 and 1983, the JLP was victorious on different occasions because a majority felt the JLP was offering what they wanted/needed at a particular point in time.

Similarly, when the PNP was triumphant, on different occasions, it was simply because a majority felt the PNP was offering what was best aligned to what they wanted/needed at a particular time. The perspective that a majority of us will assuredly choose the worse of possible options during a general election is a dodge, a sour-grapes escape lever, and quite possibly self-hatred too.

Why the boot?

People vote in a Government to address their needs. When the servicing of those needs become hostage to prevarications, procrastinations, complacency, and diversions, folks seek an alternative. There is nothing ungrateful and/or irrational about that to me. It’s simply realpolitik.

In the 60s, and very early 70s, our economy during a JLP Administration grew by leaps and bounds. In 1970, for example, our economy grew by a whopping 11.9 per cent.

Employers, including some representing international brands which had massive investments in Jamaica, competed for graduates of The University of the West Indies, Mona, during the 60s — so says former Prime Minister Bruce Golding.

“In the 1960s factories were being opened with much regularity,” wrote ace reporter, the late Wilmot “Motty” Perkins, who worked at The Gleaner then.

In 1972, then Prime Minister Hugh Shearer and the JLP were booted from power. There are several scholarly studies which pinpoint that, despite the economic boom in the 60s, there was massive alienation and disaffection among the majority black population.

Some characterise the realities then this way: There was growth, but parallel development did not accompany the growth. The objective evidence says they are largely right.

“A plague on the houses” of the voters who booted a genuinely nice man like Hugh Shearer in 1972. This is the consistent response of some even to this day.

For obvious reasons this is not a very helpful approach. It is better, far better, in my view, that we take time to properly understand and, more importantly, not repeat the errors of the 60s.

I believe those who listened, not just heard, but listened to the recent budget debate presentation of Prime Minister Andrew Holness would have realised that the Holness Administration has ramped up its efforts to more effectively reduce alienation and disaffection — the political torpedoes which sank the Hugh Shearer Administration.

Nothing irrational at all

Voters want what they want, when they want it, and they want different things at different times, depending on factors operating especially in their personal lives. Wider societal, regional, and international factors also often play a critical role in who voters mark an ‘X’ for behind the screen.

Despite Michael Manley’s promise to “control the commanding heights of the economy” and, despite all his legislations and programmes — some were necessary, other mere tomfoolery, to correct the huge social deficits and alienation which afflicted the majority black population in the 60s — he was chucked out of office in a landslide defeat on October 30, 1980.

A majority simply could not endure the economic nightmares which Manley brought on the people. The “stoppages, shortages and outages”, as Seaga branded the hardships, were particularly devastating on the poor. Manley’s failures were all caused by USA’s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). This is the default position of some to this day. It is true that the CIA did help to destablise Manley’s Government, but his own grievous errors, coupled with those of some low-voltage people close to him, also did a great deal to devalue his Administration.

To this day, some in the PNP are mightily upset with the people of Jamaica for sending Manley packing in 1980. Some of them still believe that the decision to take away the keys to Jamaica House from Manley was an act of unequalled irrationality and betrayal. Similarly, there are folks who believe the decision of the Jamaican people to expel Seaga from Jamaica House in February 1989 was an act of sacrilege, because the JLP had brought back economic growth and put our fiscal accounts in the black. To me, the decisions of the Jamaica people in 1980 and 1989 were not acts of irrationality. Folks simply were demonstrating that they wanted a new path. The sitting Administration at the time did not sufficiently convince enough voters that they could deliver what people wanted, when they wanted it. Voters exercised their democratic right and, in either instance, got rid those who, to them, had become mere prevaricators.

Rational and different

We may not agree with the voting rationale of our fellow countrymen, but that disagreement does not make them irrational beings.

“Is the PNP’s 18½ years at Jamaica House and Patterson’s 14½ years as prime minister not concrete evidence that voters are irrational?” some will quiz. No! Notwithstanding the wrecking of our economy and massive deterioration in social order during the PNP’s 18½ years in office, which I have discussed previously, and notwithstanding the fact that voters gave P J Patterson four successive bites of the nation’s choicest political cherry, that to me still does not prove that the decision of voters was evidence of deeply rooted irrationality.

Recall that the JLP was enmeshed in internal skirmishes between 1989, and some say even up to January 2005 when Seaga exited the political scene.

Recall the gang of five, gang of 15, and gang of 11, divisions which bedevilled the JLP? Voters do not install a divided political party to manage the affairs of State. So, notwithstanding the political incompetence of the Patterson Administration, the people of Jamaica voted them in office on four occasions, because the alternative at the time was a worse option. There is nothing irrational about that.

On the return of Bruce Golding, the JLP quickly exited the mode of pressure group and rediscovered the raison d’être of a political party — acquiring and retaining State power. By that time the PNP had changed leader, with Patterson giving way to Portia Simpson Miller in March 2006, but the political miasma of the PNP’s mismanagement was difficult not to notice.

A united JLP defeated Simpson Miller and the PNP in September 2007. There was nothing irrational about the decision of the majority of voters. They were presented with clear policy choices; for example, free access to basic health care at public health facilities and the promise of major constitutional reforms.

Those who say voters were ungrateful and irrational to kick out the JLP in 2011 clearly do not remember the difficulties of the global economic collapse in 2007/8 and the debilitating impact, especially on the poor of this country. Maybe they also do not remember the dubious circumstances in which Bruce Golding demitted office.

Folks grew tired of the JLP and decided to take a chance with the still relatively new PNP leader Simpson Miller. Recall in the run-up to the December 2011 General Election the PNP rolled out a trailer-load of promises, including their trump card promise to abolish General Consumption Tax (GCT) on electricity. While the PNP was baiting voters with promises, the JLP was telling folks that “bitter medicine” was coming. “Welcome to hard times,” is not a winning strategy anywhere in the world. The PNP won. Where is the irrationality on the part of the voter here? Incidentally, the PNP reneged on its promise to abolish GCT on electricity.

Recall that between 2011 and 2016 the then de facto prime minister and Minister of Finance Dr Peter Phillips, under the strict guidance of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), was consumed with the continuation of the economic reform programmes started by the Bruce Golding Administration with then Minister of Finance and the Public Service Audley Shaw.

The public sector wage restrictions, low and no economic growth, and the stinging austerity took an awful toll on the people of Jamaica. Voters understandably wanted a different path. The JLP and Andrew Holness promised to ease the stress with, among other things, the removal of obligatory fees at the secondary school level and a $1.5-million income tax threshold for Pay As You Earn (PAYE) workers. People had grown weary from the pin prick of austerity. The JLP won.

When the COVID-19 pandemic landed on our shores in March 2020, the Holness Administration led from the front. Kudos came from local, regional and international bodies. The economy did not collapse. The people decided not risk a change. Were they irrational? No!

Of course, I know some will always vote PNP or JLP no matter what. But it is the uncommitted and swing voters who determine who wins or loses a general election, not the base of either party.

Efficacy is crucial

Voters, particularly in Western liberal democracies, want efficacy in the delivery of benefits. When people see their investments in an Administration slipping away, they will invariably adopt measures to protect themselves. Jamaican voters are not unique in this respect.

Recall, for example, that Sir Winston Churchill suffered a landslide defeat at the hands of Clement Attlee and the British Labour Party in the UK’s 1945 General Election. Churchill was a great prime minister, but voters felt he was not the best man to govern in peacetime. Many Britons said it was “irrational” to choose Clement Attlee, who some mockingly called Clam Attlee, because of his quiet public persona. History proved the naysayers wrong.

Jamaican voters do not suffer with a malady of irrationality.

Garfield Higgins is an educator, journalist and a senior advisor to the minister of education and youth. Send comments to the Jamaica Observer or higgins160@yahoo.com.