Dear Editor,

A few years ago Maroons aligned themselves with the authorities and went about assisting the capture and persecution of their fellow African descendants. This is not far removed from the actions of our security forces which resulted in the loss of a number of lives, the majority of which were young Jamaican men, who in a more equitable society would have represented the pulse of the productive sector.

The common factor here is that the revolting cohort of the enslaved population did so out of circumstances bred by a rule which was untenable, unsavoury and essentially treated them as “ole naygah”, a term which Opposition MP Mr Dean Peart used in reference to elements of society who continue to challenge and at times subvert the rule of law.

Sure enough, we had a situation where, like the Maroons of yesteryear, our security forces were summoned to “use whatever means neccessary” to eliminate on spot or bring in by-products of society who were compelled to challenge the status quo.

I am not persuaded to react to Mr Peart’s “ole naygah” reference like the average caller to talk shows and folks on the street, whose indignation was aroused because it was uttered by someone whom they percieve to be a “brown man”, closer to their idea of white and hence deserving of resentment. On the contrary, I believe abhorrence within this context smacks of an intolerable inferiority complex which can only stifle personal and communal development.

I allude to Mr Peart’s statement within the initial aforementioned context of our forefathers, oppressed and denied opportunity by the corrupt dominant forces a la our political directorate), then labelled brutish and heartless “ol naygaz”, who should be cut down, when their reaction spiralled out of what was considered outside the realms of cooperation and use to the dominant forces.

Could it be, Mr Peart, that your caustic reference to “ole naygah” who should be “rooted out”, should have been tempered by knowledge of the circumstances which bred the existence of these individuals whom you refer to with such derision? It is common knowledge that members of our past and present political directorate contributed to the development of these individuals whom several, including Mr Peart, now seek to label miscreants, thugs and criminals or simply “ole naygah”, at a time when they are visibly outside the control of the political directorate.

Mr Peart should be reminded that not so long ago these persons he seeks to disparage as “ole naygah” were called “protectors of the community” by some of his political colleagues.

Even as we abhor unlawful action by any individual, it is submitted that especially as a member of the political fraternity, Mr Dean Peart should be more guarded, aware and sensitive in his thought process and subsequent use of language.

Abka Fitz-Henley

abkafitzhenley@yahoo.com