ONE of the most accepted perspectives about humans has a long tradition in human society. It is called the role of the individual in history. In Western countries, and in non-Western countries where European colonialism dominated, philosophy is said to have begun with Socrates.
Long before as an individual, Socrates changed the course of Athenian society, there were Eastern countries that addressed the role of the individual in history. Today, all countries accept that there could come into being one person who can bring about phenomenal changes or singlehandedly can destroy a nation.
The modern philosophical treatise on how the individual can shape the dialectic while the dialectic can shape him/her is the post-war, French philosopher, Jean Paul Sartre. Sartre’s profound philosophy text, “Critique of Dialectical of Reason”, is the best guide as to how the individual can emerge in circumstances and singlehandedly change the direction of those circumstances. Hazel Barnes, in 1964, translated Sartre’s book and renamed it “The Problem of Method”, but still, this is a very difficult book to read. One of the persons I met who mastered that book was Rupert Roopnaraine.
There can be no doubt that throughout history, the individual comes alone and in the interaction with the dialectic either sets history backwards or moves history forward, but there is little room for doubt among scholars and historians about the power of the individual to rise above the ordinary and change a country for better or worse.
The historical record is replete with examples. No doubt Guyanese students are familiar with Julius Caesar. In the modern world, there is the legacy of Vladimir Lenin in Russia, Mikhail Gorbachev in Russia, Hitler in Germany and Henry Kissinger in the US. Nelson Mandela in South Africa, Fidel Castro in Cuba. When we come to the present day, there is Modi in India and Trump in the US. It doesn’t matter if you like them or not, they shaped the dialectics of their country one way or the other.
The integration process in the Caribbean cries out for the personality that Jean Paul Sartre wrote about. CARICOM is more than 50 years old and there isn’t anything stellar, encouraging or optimistic about CARICOM. It simply limps along and it showcases, as it limps along, the deep chagrin about integration that lives within the soul of every Caribbean citizen.
Patrick Manning, the then Prime Minister of Trinidad, looked set to bring to the Caribbean the role of the individual in history. He announced what became known as the Manning Initiative, whereby Trinidad and Barbados would enjoy a meaningful integration. But Manning, though willing, did not possess the leadership qualities to make him transform the Caribbean.
He succumbed to political banality and became intoxicated with the wealth of Trinidad and used it profligately like spending 300 million American dollars to host the Summit of the Americas, money that could have been spent on regional integration. CARICOM is waiting for the individual that Sartre wrote about. CARICOM is waiting for the emergence of the human that rises above the ordinary and changed the course of history.
Only two leaders in CARICOM today possess the willingness to shape the dialectic – Mia Mottley and Irfaan Ali. I think Mottley hasn’t got the latitude to do it. Barbados’s economy does not allow Mottley do it. I believe she wants to. She is eager to make CARICOM a nation of one, but the space in Barbados is not there.
The only other person that is likely to bring out the phenomenal role of the individual in history is Irfaan Ali of Guyana. Guyana is an oil-rich economy. Resources could be used to harness integration. President Ali only has four more years in the seat of power. If he is going to be known for decades to come as the man who made CARICOM come alive, as the man who brought integration into the homes of each Caribbean citizen, he has to start now.
There are some directions that he must walk in. One is the complete abolition of visas for any CARICOM citizen to be in Guyana. CARICOM citizens in Guyana should not have to visit an immigration officer every 90 days. Secondly, Guyana must allow the free movement into Guyana of CARICOM citizens.
Thirdly, on a yearly basis, he should allow the presence of a small number of CARICOM public officials to work in Guyana. They will receive their home salary but will be given a meaningful allowance and housing facilities while living in Guyana. It doesn’t have to be on a reciprocal basis. Fourthly, twice a year, President Ali should have a tete- a-tete with two CARICOM heads inside Guyana as a confidence-building measure towards deeper integration. Go for it, Mr. President! History beckons!
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Guyana National Newspapers Limited.
