The gracious pronouncements of party leaders Dr Keith Rowley and Kamla Persad-Bissessar in defeat and in victory respectively Monday night was a welcome, comforting experience at the end of a brief but bruising election campaign.
Even so, the injuries sustained, even by
celebrants, will require that we pay much closer attention to the way we engage
such contests in the future.
A few years ago, I met a woman during a Caribbean
assignment. She was a divorcee with two adult children resulting from a
particularly abusive marriage. She told me that several times after being
attacked, she awoke in a hospital bed.
There were short-term and lasting physical
and emotional injuries – some of them evident in the tone and manner of her
narrative and behaviour, and in visible features of her physical appearance.
Throughout the period of abuse there was
little to suggest that things had gone badly wrong. Everybody, including the attacker
and child witnesses, were putting on a pretty good show.
The conversation I had with that person came
to mind last week when a colleague said it appeared that every time we have an
election in T&T a period of emotional “recovery” is required, even by the
declared winners.
I used the word “convalescence.” Not the
paralysing type that brings silence and inaction, but of the variety that
generates a facade of normalcy. I thought, for example, of the numbness expected
to greet racist remarks, insults, disinformation, defamation, and other forms
of normalised verbal violence.
In other Caribbean territories I know well,
emotional cover is also required against the threat and experience of actual physical
violence. Instances of this are few and far between here, but there is
professional guidance that does not make a sharp distinction between the body
and the mind.
To reinforce this, my friend recommended I read
The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma by Bessel
van der Kolk. It’s not my kind of reading so I reluctantly listened to one
portion of the audio version.
The writer’s basic assertion is that “trauma
literally reshapes both body and brain, compromising sufferers’ capacities for
pleasure, engagement, self-control, and trust.”
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) also appears
to have collective, communal characteristics, in the sense that populations undergo
processes of denial, guilt, and pain while putting on a splendid show in the
face of internal convulsions – much like the wounded lady.
We occupy a Caribbean space in which the injured
abound. For instance, psycho-social wounds persist over 40 years after the fall
of the People’s Revolutionary Government in Grenada. Who can also deny that Jamaica’s
political violence between 1970 and 1980 (more than 800 people were killed in
the 1980 elections) has not left scars requiring continued treatment?
Guyana’s decades-long political trauma
spanning the late 1950s and into the 1980s remains evident in the tenor of the political
discourse and actions of 2025. There are open wounds left unattended after many
years. Examine closely, for example, current convulsions in Tuschen and Georgetown.
Any “recovery” clearly remains incomplete.
In T&T, we can begin the comparisons
years before 1970 and 1990, but much has already been said about the hangovers
from those dramatic events that remain today.
We have not had the death and physical
traumas of some of our neighbours, but our minds and therefore our bodies, have
kept the score. At election time, some politicians and their supporters ensure
the scoreboard keeps ticking.
Head of the Council for Responsible Political
Behaviour, Dr Bishnu Ragoonath recently reported on “racially charged and derogatory language,
character attacks, excessive negative campaigning, and the removal or
defacement of opponents’ campaign materials” when he described breaches of its
code during campaign 2025.
This is the limit of the Council’s responsibilities,
much like the requirements of the Sixth Schedule to the Representation of the
People’s Act which prescribes a Code of Conduct for Political Parties to “regulate
the behaviour of members and office holders of political parties, aspiring
candidates, candidates and their supporters, promote good governance and eradicate
political malpractices.”
It is not within the scope of either the
Council, which operates as an institutional check on political behaviour, or
the Code to monitor psycho-social impacts. That’s our brief as citizens.
It is however the responsibility of the
main political actors who provide the ammunition and triggers that routinely
take us to the A&E each time we are required to engage electoral
decision-making. This year has been no exception. We must endeavour to put an
end to this. Monday night signalled some promise – through both cheers and
tears.
No comments:
Post a Comment