Former prime minister of Jamaica Bruce Golding, in commenting on the death of the Edward Philip George Seaga said, “He was a strong leader; firm in his convictions and fearless in his approach. He was never daunted by criticism or controversy once he was convinced that the path he was pursuing was the right one. In so many respects, history has vindicated him.” (RJR 94 FM news). But what exactly is meant by “history has vindicated him”?

It was H G Wells who said, “Human history, in essence, is the history of ideas.” Within this context, political leaders are judged on whose ideas are best suited for the development of nations. The emergence of two charismatic leaders (Michael Manley and Edward Seaga) in the 1970s, with contending opposing political paths for the social and economic development of Jamaica, resulted in “contradictory pressures and tendencies” (Bennett 1986) arising from competing interests of different groups within our society that have left this nation with a seismic economic price for the generations that follow.

Michael Manley’s vision for social reform clashed with Edward Seaga’s vision of social and economic development. Both were progressive political leaders caught in the web of the political cold wars between the East-West worlds of ruling ideas. However, Seaga’s “firm…convictions and [fearlessness] in his approach” as the then leader of the Opposition, was more about aggression than assertiveness.

Randy J Patterson, a psychologist who wrote The Assertiveness Workbook, explained that, “If you take an aggressive posture, you’re allowed on stage and your mission is to get everyone else off.” But note, Seaga’s aggressiveness was also reflective of the Jamaican national personality, described by Professor Trevor Munroe as a combination of ”certain passivity, a capacity for long-suffering with an extraordinary aggressiveness, individual self-assertiveness, and proneness to violence”. ( Jamaican politics: A Marxist perspective in transition)

The result of our collective Jamaican national personality continued to influence the dark side of Jamaica’s progressive political movement as manifested in our political tribal war, one-upmanship, corruption, and the deliberate destruction of the nation’s economy for political or personal gain.

The generations born after 1981 may have no clue about the history of Jamaica in the 70s. And we have failed as a people to continue the “Abeng” tradition of criticism of Jamaican society (Rex M Nettleford). But the fact that Jamaicans in 2019 are still struggling to pay for education, especially at the tertiary level, is the outcome of the era of the “opposing clash of ideas” of the 70s.

Many who wrote on, or boast about, the introduction of free education by Michael Manley, often overlooked the fact that privately owned educational institutions, especially those operated by the Church, became “grant-aided” in partnership with the Government because of the failure of the economy to sustain privately owned institutions — a reality we still experience to this very day. It was never due to the Government’s policy of free education. The quest for political power due to opposing contending political ideas of development in the 70s initiated a deliberate undermining of the Jamaican economy. These actions resulted in the creation of an “artificial shortage of goods” by our very own private sector, and the tribal war among the “orange” and “green” that forced the Manley-led Administration to rescue the education sector with the bauxite levy during its two terms in office. Education had to be free, as the people could no longer afford to pay. The 70s must, therefore, be seen as the decade that resulted in the flight of capital through our greatest financial earthquake, as our people literally took the “five flights a day to Miami”.

As one who attended the privately owned de Carteret College in Mandeville in the 70s, the school lost half its population to migration due to the ideological war and misinformation of the era, leaving school administrators with three choices — double tuition fees, close the school, or go grant-aided. The latter was chosen.

The Manley era was followed by Seaganomics (1980-89). The new prime minister, Edward Seaga, had dyed his Administration with anti-Socialism rhetoric and had vowed to eradicate its ugly head from amongst the people. One of the first acts Parliament accomplished in 1981 was ‘A Bill to repeal the Jamaica School of Agriculture Act’, tabled in Parliament in 1981. This saw the closure of the Jamaica School of Agriculture — an institution established under the leadership of the Enos Nuttall, Anglican bishop of Jamaica and first archbishop of the West Indies (1842-1916) to train people to enter the field of agriculture in Jamaica. The prime minister had seen the institution as a bastion of socialism and a threat in the East-West Cold War and Reaganism.

The Reagan Administration was anti-intellectual, against socialism, and did not appreciate free access to university education. As a result the Jamaican Government closed the Jamaica School of Agriculture in order to rid it of the socialistic rhetoric which allegedly permeated the school.

In 1983, the People’s National Party (PNP), under Michael Manley, made a grave error by not contesting the snap election called by the Government on December 15. Thus, the governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) won all 60 seats under Prime Minister Edward Seaga. This was the shortest JLP term in office in Jamaica’s history (1980-83). The new political term by the JLP created new constitutional challenges, as it was the first time that a governing political party found itself controlling all seats in the Houses of Parliament. To safeguard the tenets of democracy and the Jamaican Constitution, the Seaga-led Administration appointed independent senators in the Upper House, but had full control in the Lower House — a unique development in Jamaica at the time.

In February 1986, Minister of Education Dr Mavis Gilmour announced in Parliament that students at the tertiary level would have to pay a part of the cost of their education. The cess was proposed at between four per cent and 30 per cent of the cost. For the JLP Government, the cess was a final means of whipping out the last bastion of socialism within the tertiary institutions that had entered because of “free education”. This time, the People’s National Party (PNP) was absent from Parliament to provide effective opposition to this International Monetary Fund (IMF)-masked political onslaught on “free education”. Apparently, the prime minister had agreed with the IMF to end free education as part of the new Extended Fund Facility offered in 1985.

Students at The University of the West Indies (UWI) and the College of Arts, Science and Technology (CAST), upon hearing the news, were among those who boycotted classes and protested with road marches.

Like the education sector, the prime minister in 1984 extended his tentacles to weaken the institution of local government. He was like a veterinarian who castrated the bull leaving local government emasculated and devoid of all strength by weakening its functions. He removed public works with its responsibility for roads, laying off competent people with the knowledge of road construction, and created the National Works Agency (NWA). Garbage collection and water were also removed and became national agencies or regional bodies created for the purpose, on the grounds, that this move would improve efficiency and save cost. And the primary role of local authorities was no longer delivering services, but “making representation on behalf of their localities”. (Reporting Local Government Issues, 2012)

The Seaga of the 60s, and the Seaganomics of the 80s, led to two different outcomes. The latter fell victim to the history of the general elections since 1989 and the success of P J Patterson at the polls for 18 years. What Hurricane “Wild Gilbert” did not do as damage to Seaganomics in September 1988, the PNP finished by the deliberate dehumanisation of him that resulted in the people’s continuous rejection of the JLP at the polls.

Seaga also contributed to his own political demise due to his failure to step down as leader of the Opposition and the divisiveness of the internal political culture of the JLP.

It is noteworthy that the emergence of Seaga as the elder statesman, like the new and different Michael Manley of the 90s, was due to a willingness to critique his own political contribution to Jamaica. One such area that underwent a 180-degree turnaround was his attitude to free education after losing political power. In a September 2002 publication of Caribbean News, he expressed regret at removing free tertiary education from the people and spent his retiring years advocating for its reintroduction.

Five years later after the publication of that article, writing on ‘The Rise and Fall of Free Education’, Seaga said: “The restoration of free education insofar as covering the cost of payments for tuition was a strong platform of the JLP in the 2002 General Election when I made repeated calls for the abolition of the payment of tuition fees. Prime Minister P J Patterson promised to implement a policy of free tuition within two years, but it was not done. Bruce Golding, leader of the Opposition, has quite rightly revived the issue for the current election, but so far without success.” ( The Gleaner, July 29, 2007)

He concluded the article with an important statement, “Education, as a result, continues to be tossed around as part of a one-upmanship game without recognising that, with all the changes made over 40 years, the results remain the same: 75 per cent of the secondary school age students have no Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate passes and no marketable skills at all.”

That political one-upmanship — a remnant of the old political culture, rooted in our tribalism — continues to prevail in modern Jamaica is a sad comment on our current state of affairs. The maturity of the late Edward Seaga in recognising this truth is the sign of one who began the path of personal transformation so that history can vindicate him.