Prime Minister Andrew Holness’s recent critique of the People’s National Party’s (PNP) reckless misadventure in the 1970s has called attention, once more, to the legacy of its political giant, Michael Manley. Essential to this misadventure was Manley’s flirtation with foreign political ideologies which did not serve the country well. Holness said that it was this misadventure which diverted the country from the path of economic growth, “selling the people of Jamaica false hope and unrealistic dreams for which the country is still paying today”.

The PNP has reacted with understandable ire at the prime minister’s statement. It accused him of being profoundly ignorant of the Manley legacy, especially in the promulgation of a raft of social legislation which uplifted underserved poor Jamaicans.

For many in the PNP Manley remains a sacred cow that cannot be criticised, not unlike, perhaps, what obtains in sections of the black community in the United States regarding the legacy of past President Barack Obama.

What is clear from these missives from Holness and the PNP is that any discussion of Michael Manley’s legacy will open the floodgates to a plethora of emotions on both sides of the political divide. In one sense, it mirrors the nature of the man and the politics which he espoused — the restless desire to free a downtrodden people from a colonial legacy which he considered psychologically debilitating, and the impatience of dealing with the dire constraints of the economic resources with which to so lift them.

Manley’s legacy is as complicated as it is contradictory. Whatever we may make of it, there is one constant that can be seen running through it; namely, his genuine love for the Jamaican people and a passionate desire to get them to a better place. This explains the continued adulation with which he is regarded by many who lived through the Manley era in Jamaica. The masses felt that he loved them and so loved him in return. They felt that he genuinely cared for their welfare and were prepared to join him on the road to the social transformation of Jamaica.

This was so even if the populism which defined his politics was governed by a tinge of charismatic hubris, even political narcissism, bordering on the messianic. “Joshua” was not just a slogan, but an adherence to an ideal of liberation, of self-reliance, of shaking off the detritus of a colonial legacy that had trapped the Jamaican mind.

Here, the people saw in Manley someone who was not afraid to confront his detractors in Jamaica and abroad. Thus, in time, he became an international voice in the Third World and beyond in the struggle against social injustice and economic imperialism. He single-handedly gave a small country an international respectability that belied its size.

But it is at home that the clash of social and economic forces undermined Manley’s liberation project. He failed to grasp the full measure of the negative economic headwinds that his policies were causing, especially on the poor and the extent to which they were being further impoverished by them. He promised much but failed to recognise the economic exigencies that could make those promises unattainable. There was a great chasm between his social fervour and the economic realities to bring these into fruition. While he promulgated the raft of social legislation of which the PNP boasts today, the economy was falling apart. In the seven years between 1973 and 1980 — when he was unceremoniously booted out of office — the economy registered negative growth, a remarkable departure from the phenomenal growth experienced in the 1960s.

This fact cannot be sanitised to fit a preferred narrative. It is this to which Holness spoke in his broadside against his legacy. No amount of protestation from the PNP can rewrite this history. Even when Manly returned to power in 1989, a chastened but wiser person, the party in Government was unable to maintain growth in the economy that was left by the Edward Seaga-led Jamaica Labour Party Administration. In fact, things went downhill for the economy. The social legislative programme continued apace. But while there was a kangaroo-like leap in social legislation, there was frog-like jump in growing the economy. The seed was sown for the longest, unbroken governance of the PNP in power and a consequential debilitation of the economy from which it was just emerging until COVID-19 struck.

When he returned to power in 1989 Manley must be given kudos for his epiphany in recognising the severe limitations of democratic socialism as a principle for robust economic change. He was man enough to acknowledge the mistakes of the 1970s and was willing to symbolically demonstrate his appreciation of the capitalistic imperative in discarding the bush jacket and donning the Western suit and tie. This was more than a demonstration of his willingness to go in a new direction. It was indicative of a new man who was seized with the imperatives of what must now be done to bring the change he sought. This took a great deal of courage on his part. Cowardice is not something that anyone could accuse Michael Norman Manley of. But it was too late. When he resigned from office due to ill health, those who succeeded him found themselves in a quandary which haunted them for the better part of the over 18 years they ruled Jamaica.

It can be said without any serious fear of contradiction that, more than any other politician before or after him, Manley was the most passionate leader who advocated real concern for the dispossessed masses of the Jamaican people. None could match his rhetoric, and hardly any could match his ability to persuade people of his love and concern for them as a political leader. This is the most significant reason he will be forever etched in the memories of those who lived through this turbulent, yet hopeful, contradictory period of Jamaican history.

And this history cannot be whitewashed nor denied. Real history is buried in the experience of people. Those who deny the problematic areas of Manley’s legacy for largely political reasons do that experiential history a disservice. Those who can only see the bad sides of his legacy and ignore and deny significant vestiges of his legacy, equally underserve the experience of many who benefited from his vast and brave legislative policies and continue to do so. The best thing that the PNP of today can do is to learn from the mistakes of the past and have the courage of a Michael Manley to correct course.

Dr Raulston Nembhard is a priest and social commentator. Send comments to the Observer or stead6655@aol.com.