When
the Elite Abandon Democracy - a Sign of Things to Come?
“An
individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines
of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity.”
- Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
As
always, my first full day in Belize starts in my barber’s chair. The “trim” is
accompanied by spirited conversations with other barbers and clients. The
topics run the gamut. Sports, weather,
sex and of course domestic and international politics merge and intertwine at
various junctures highlighted with grand gestures, fist bumping and laughter. In
the middle of a particularly animated discussion about the latest corruption
revelation, a young man walked in and started grooming his beard in the mirror.
Half under his breath he says, “Barrow di teef franh di poa” (Barrow is
stealing from the poor).
This
statement reflects the perception that he, as a poor individual, is being acted
upon or taken advantage of by the elite represented by the Prime Minister. The
term “elite” is grounded in a long history of study in political science. It
springs from the Greet notion of the “guardian” class of rulers or the best
among us to govern. This minority forms the leadership in a society and is
studied in political science as elite theory. Elite theory can be defined as
the perspective that a small minority of people are arguably best suited to
handle public affairs and that this arrangement is inevitable in modern
societies (Maloy). Lasswell
and Lerner point out that understanding the role of the elite is
indispensable to understanding politics and the processes by which we are
governed. We should also note that the term “elite” includes those with
political, economic/business, educational, law enforcement, faith/religious, national
defense and bureaucratic power and/or influence.
The elite,
therefore, should serve the source of its power and authority while working
against democracy because it has faith in the rule of the few. It rejects the
idea of rule by the people in general (Johari,
p.104). Therefore, Maurice
Duverger suggests that "government of the people and by the
people must be replaced by another formula, government of people by an elite
sprung from the people" (p. 425).
At the
expense of being an alarmist (or offending), I suggest that Belize is teetering
on the precipice of being a failed state. The Fund for Peace developed the Fragile State Index.
Based on these indicators, Belize rates
115th out 177 countries. Worsening from 2007 to 2017, we are one
stage below “Warning” (but not in “Stable” category) and one step in front of
Guatemala, which is in the Warning stage.
Further, the Belizean elites are more factionalized according to Index
declined from 5/10 in 2007 to 4.3/10 in 2017.
Failed states can no longer perform basic functions such as
education, security, or governance, usually due to fractious violence or
extreme poverty. Within this power vacuum, people fall victim to competing
factions and crime, and sometimes the United Nations or neighboring states
intervene to prevent a humanitarian disaster. However, states fail not only
because of internal factors. Foreign governments can also knowingly destabilize
a state by fueling ethnic warfare or supporting rebel forces, causing it to
collapse.
With
all this in mind, Belize is not a failed state (yet) but the elements are
present. Arguably, nothing is inevitable, but I suggest the current course is
unsustainable without change, or the likely outcome will be at best be a
contained intrastate conflict or, at the worst, adsorption by Guatemala (or the
former followed by the latter).
that
these are raised in disparate social groups is serious enough for concern. In
Belize, they blame the poor for being poor. They view the poor as lazy and
unambitious disregarding the inequities in society and institutional
indifference and neglect that frames the lives of many of poor and mostly
working strata of society. While I did see some people idle, most were working
or hustling in some fashion. Second, one more than one occasion that the use of
government sanctioned extrajudicial executions (a la the Philippines) is a
viable crime-fighting alternative to keep them safe found support in elite
discussions. They assume that they will be exempt for such a measure. Third, those
in Belize's upper echelons are overtly suspicious of any foreigners who are not
Caucasian, or wealthy. Fourth, the wisdom of universal adult suffrage was
questioned. The basis is that much of the voting public is stupid and/or
corrupt. Fifth, it is widely believed the government needs to be more
authoritative with a strong leader enforcing law and order at the expense of
civil rights and freedoms. This is reminiscent of the “big man syndrome” which
where one person or group exercises absolute control over others and ultimately
leads to instability, further neopatrimonial corruption and increased
disparities (Shawa
2012).
Sixth, people do not feel safe unless walled in at home. The rise of private
security is an indictment of public law and order institutions. The irony (if
you want to call it that) is that those employed to secure are guarding the
very ones who care little about their interests. Seventh, general disgust with
politicians (part of the political elite) and blaming the very people who
secure the interest of a portion of the elite. Eight, I was shocked at the
resignation to the notion that independent Belize has failed. This seems to
open the door to accepting dismemberment of the country within the realm of
possibility (even acceptability).
The
big question: how do all citizens (the voting public) ensure that public’s
interests are not ignored, and democracy is not undermined? There is no silver
bullet. I humbly suggest that a part of the answer rest with the elite. What is
expected of the elite, therefore, is that states men and women step forward in
their respective spheres of interest and influence (not everyone can run for
office) to put the general welfare before self-interest. Countries like Belize
have no dearth of politicians but a shortage of states-persons, which means
campaigning never transitions to governing after an election cycle. Policy
development with consistent and equitable implementation must be focused on the
most good for the most people. None of this is to say that individuals or some
civic groups do not do good works, but Belize is at the point where it must be
more widespread, coordinated and focused to address the systemic problems of accountability, corruption, and disparities that drive societal problems. Though
easier said than done of course, let us start with a public discourse of the
real underlying issues and our failures to hold the political elite
accountable. Are we really willing to live with the possible alternatives?
P. S. At my last visit to the barber three
weeks later, I was told that the young man was seriously injured in a shooting
a few days earlier.
Harold Young is a Belizean
currently an Assistant Professor at Austin Peay State University in
Clarksville, Tennessee. His research focuses Public Law and examines an
American and international perspective on judicial institutional changes and
decision-making. Previously, he works as a health communications manager,
a social worker and practiced law in Belize.