The Manley Governments, 1972-1980

• Author: Amanda Sives
• Profession: Lecturer in Politics at the University of Liverpool
• Pages: 78-117

7878

7878

78 ELECTIONS, VIOLENCE AND THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS IN JAMAICA

The Manley Governments,

1972-1980

CHAPTER

four

IntroductionIntroduction

IntroductionIntroduction

Introduction

The partisan political violence of the 1970s was the most devastating of the

modern period. There was little indication of this in 1972 when Michael Manley

and the PNP were elected on a wave of popular support. Whilst much positive

legislation remains from his period in office, the ongoing legacy of the divisive

partisan political violence continues to have an impact on political culture in a

number of urban communities in the twenty-first century. Several factors are

significant in explaining the high levels of polarisation and violence during this

period. First, patronage based politics expanded under the Manley

administrations and this was seen both in the provision of housing and

employment. The decision of the Minister of Housing (and the PNP government)

to construct political strongholds in the newly built housing estates surrounding

the JLP enclave of Tivoli Gardens was an important factor in the escalation of

the conflict. Rival hardcore support bases were now located in close proximity

to each other making the outbreak of violence more likely. In addition, more

jobs and contracts were allocated to PNP supporters than to the JLP and as the

Manley administrations sought to expand the role and reach of the state,

opportunities for partisan distribution were increased.

In addition to the expansion of partisan politics, ideological division between

the parties was reignited and served to further exacerbate conflict between the

PNP and JLP during the mid to latter half of the 1970s. It manifested in a

number of areas: rhetorical clashes were more strident, allegations of external

interference were common and partisan differences were magnified by the

addition of an ideological ‘legitimacy’ so that gangs could be portrayed as fighting

for wider political goals than simple party supremacy. Partisan identities therefore

became suffused with an ideological dimension which, whether completely

grasped or not by the individual participants, afflicted communities which had

THE MANLEY GOVERNMENTS 79 79

79 79

79

previously lived without political conflict. The introduction of more efficient

firepower, evidence of military training and cross-community gang links spread

the violence far beyond the ‘traditional’ heartlands. In essence those with different

political views who had peacefully coexisted in one community before the mid-

1970s found themselves engaged in a political battle in which they were forced

to conform to the dominant political party in the area, or flee. Communities

became politically homogenous as a direct result of living through the partisan

political violence of the late 1970s. The partisan political violence during the

Manley administrations therefore demonstrates continuity with the earlier period,

regarding patronage politics and the garrison. However, the ideological

polarisation contributed another dimension which deepened levels of antagonism

and significantly heightened the level and nature of the violence. As with other

chapters, this one is organised around the electoral periods and it begins with

an overview of the elections of 1972 and 1976 before examining the development

of the garrisons and the impact of ideology. It ends with a discussion of the

1980 election.

Partisan Political Violence Pre-1972

In the period following the partisan political violence of 1966-67 and the

Rodney riots in 1968 there was a steady increase in the level of violent crime,

for example murder rates rose from 110 in 1968 to 152 in 1970 and 170 in

1972.1 After the 1967 election, politically motivated violence did not reappear

until the February 1968 by-election campaign in South West St Andrew. The

struggle to control this constituency, which had been held by JLP heavywieght

and former Minister of Housing D.C. Tavares, was important to both parties.

A victory for the JLP would have consolidated their support base in the western

part of the city and, if the PNP won, it would reaffirm their dominance in the

urban political arena. Supporters of both parties engaged in gun and bomb

battles, including gang violence in the early hours of election day morning.

Overt intimidation of voters also occurred.2 The violence in this by-election was

similar to that of the 1967 election, albeit on a much smaller scale and it

highlighted both parties were in a position to rapidly mobilise supporters for an

electoral battle. The seat was retained by the JLP (Wilton Hill was the candidate).

During the late 1960s and early 1970s, partisan violence remained focused

around specific electoral contests as aside from this incident, a minor fracas in

the south east Westmoreland by-election and a spate of violence during the

8080

8080

80 ELECTIONS, VIOLENCE AND THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS IN JAMAICA

1969 local government elections, partisan political violence did not reoccur

until the start of 1972. In January of that year, violence arose directly as a result

of conflicts over the partisan distribution of employment. Led by Anthony

Spaulding, PNP candidate for the constituency (South St Andrew), PNP

supporters demonstrated at the site of a new sewerage system in Jones Town,

delaying the project and demanding employment. Violence during the protest

led to JLP councillor Carol Ramsay being stabbed. Coming as it did in election

year, it led Minister of Home Affairs Roy McNeil to state that as the general

election was nearing he expected ‘there are persons who will be tempted to use

violence, intimidation and thuggery for political ends.’ 3 He instructed the police

to monitor political violence.

The 1972 Election

And there was certainly a great amount of ferment in the society and

I believe that if the PNP had not won [in 1972] there would have

been violent rebellion in Jamaica. It was out of that kind of feeling

that Michael Manley emerged, [he was] very responsive to what was

needed.4

The 1972 election date was announced by JLP Prime Minister Hugh Shearer on

January 31, nomination day was February 7 and the election took place on February

29. The symbolism and style of the 1972 campaign was significantly different to

previous elections due to a change in PNP leadership.5 Norman Washington Manley

had retired in 1969 and had been replaced by his son Michael. He had risen to public

prominence through leadership of the PNP-affiliated NWU. A charismatic figure,

with proven political experience at the grassroots and the ability to draw huge crowds,

Manley entered the formal political arena in 1962 when he was appointed as a PNP

Senator. In 1967 he campaigned and won the seat of Central Kingston (narrowly

beating JLP candidate E.K. Powell by 43 votes). During the 1972 campaign, Manley

skilfully adapted the delivery and substance of his political message to appeal directly

to all groups. In particular, through the use of popular culture, he appealed directly

to those who had previously felt marginalised from the political process. Known

as ‘Joshua,’6 Manley wielded the ‘rod of correction’, which he said was a gift from

Haile Selassie I. He was so successful in building cross-class support that, ‘The

masses thought he was Malcolm X and the bourgeoisie thought he was John Kennedy’.7

Manley reinvigorated the independence project which, after ten years, had become