Dear Sir,

The recent to and fro in Parliament as well as in the media are indicators of an undercurrent of dissatisfaction within our community. When such dissatisfaction continues over an extended period of time in any society, it is either a harbinger of change in the society or of the proliferation of depression and other forms of mental illness therein. We as a community should consider our past history as a guide to the likely future direction of our community.

We tend to look at the 1959 Theatre Boycott as though it were a magical event that came out of nowhere and resulted in a sudden change in the relationship between the various subgroups in our island home. That could not be farther from the truth. All through the 1950s, there were expressions of discontent from the black population:

1, During the 1953 election, questions were asked about the lack of jobs for blacks. The powers that be responded that the Government would be opening up further jobs to blacks in the near future, but private firms could do as they wished. At that time, the Government employed blacks mainly for postal delivery or as trash collectors

2, Black government officials from the Caribbean were refused accommodation in local hotels in 1955 as they were passing through Bermuda on an official trip to London. The whites accompanying them were given accommodation

3, Blacks could not use any hotel facilities

4, Most restaurants in Hamilton did not serve blacks

The rationale given by the hotel and restaurant owners was that the presence of blacks as customers would cause them to lose business because white tourists from the United States would not like it. It was shown to be false, as the desegregation of hotels and restaurants during the 1960s was accompanied by a major tourism boom. The argument that was used is similar to the present argument, which is essentially that the needs of businesses means that the rights of blacks in their own country cannot be dealt with.

The politics of the 1960s and thereafter form an almost textbook example of a power group modifying behaviour to retain as much power as possible.

a, The white power brokers who were diehard believers in parliamentarians as independents rapidly formed the United Bermuda Party when they saw how effective the small group of Progressive Labour Party members were when they voted together; they used their economic resources to encourage blacks to join with them so that they could retain as much power as possible for as long as possible

b, They then worked to defuse black dissatisfaction by forming a multiracial commission — “The Plowman Commission” — to investigate and to report on ways of improving black employment

c, The Plowman Report, and accompanying reports, stated that black schools were underfunded and implied that whites could get jobs regardless of academic qualifications, but that that was not true of blacks

d, The report also stated that blacks needed to improve their skills if they were to properly serve the needs of the hotel industry

It is interesting how the issue of further training (or experience) is often raised in response to complaints from blacks. It is relevant as well that, during the 1970s, the power brokers closed the secondary school facilities that provided quality technical training and tourism-related training for our children.

I do not intend to continue with a litany of political actions that negatively affected the preparedness of the local population. I will say, however, that those in power take very few actions that do not support the maintenance of their relative power. It shows lack of wisdom when they refuse to hear the points of view of others, as the power still remains with them.

It is this lack of wisdom that raises concerns to me for the future of our island home.

J.T. CHRISTOPHER