By Dr Frank McField
Listening to local radio talk shows and reading letters to the editor in our two main newspapers, one might become convinced that we have many people who possess solutions to Cayman’s social and economic challenges. But will any challenge faced by our society be easily overcome?
Is it not still true that complex issues demand deep and thoughtful analysis?
It has always been my conviction that the root causes of many of our present day contradictions and retrogressions are rooted in the lack of the general public’s willingness to acceptance structured analysis in political debates and policy implementations.
The individual with the loudest mouth and most bullying attitude has always received the attention and acceptance from the populace, while more tempered and rational thinkers are dismissed. All forms of public debates are acceptable in my view, but when they lead to reactions rather than planned platforms and programs, they only take us backwards every time we make a step forward. The present climate of discussions is doing just this.
Too many times I have suggested that we need to become more aware of our historical developments. I am not only talking about yesterday when modern economic development commenced. I meant and continue to mean that we should view our history in totality and stop condemning education and enlightened speeches and writings.
Knowing when these islands were discovered, why they were settled, who settled them and the socio-economic and political conditions of the first two hundred years is a prerequisite to a clear understanding of today’s socio-economic and political challenges. Knowledge of and talks on these conditions and events does not in my humble opinion make one “an educated fool”.
I would suggest we begin by taking note of the hardships and difficulties of the first settlers and their imported workers (mainly black slaves). We then quickly understand why the Amerindians did not settle or even visit our three islands.
My first conclusion from this lesson in our early history is that not only were these islands settled by Europeans and their enslaved black workers, but that those who settled permanently did so because they were already impoverished by the hardships of indentured plantation life in Jamaica or by the sometimes rough and rugged Caribbean sea. Those who try every which way to compare the Cayman Islands with other geographical areas of the Caribbean and the rest of the world avoid this truth for fear someone will regard us in a lesser manner.
I respect those brave but desperate first colonizers that risked death and lived in almost inhuman conditions in order to sustain their life and build some kind of settled existence. But the choosing of the Caymans was not an act of love, but one of necessity.
There is great truth to the saying that our men were iron men but so were the women; not out of choice but of necessity. Although the previously uninhabited Cayman Islands had scattered settlements after 1730, they remained a frontier society where individual family bonds and responsibilities were more important than the extended communities. The scarcity of resources prevented the growth of a tax base and the evolution of an extended social consciousness and responsibilities.
As late as the 1970’s, I, like many other Caymanians went abroad to seek better opportunities for sustainable existence. My hypostasis is therefore that prior to the 1950’s and 60’s the physical and economic conditions of the Cayman Islands prevented structured settled existence, of which Direct Taxation plays an integral role.
The lack of extended community interest and the absent of organized national objectives, compounded by the lack of taxes and local administration meant that the people remained divided into family and district circles and the Caymans never became an entity where a common national identity was paramount.
The attempts in the 1950’s and 1960 to forge common objectives in education, health and political advancement took the country to a new level of interconnection and common purpose, but since the main objectives were political, race, class, and district prejudices quickly destroyed the possibility of establishing a State with strong rational political leadership or objectives. Understanding the late emergence of the State as an inclusive and coercive institution is vital to an understanding of the current economic and political challenges facing our Public and Private Sectors.
Prior to the 1950’s the British Government played little if any role in the affairs of the Cayman Islands and therefore we did not, like other Caribbean, African and Asian colonies, benefit from the creation and maintenance of a British colonial state apparatus. A British colonial state structure would have demanded and forged formal responsibilities between the Government and its people that went beyond family and communal obligations.
The emergence of the Caymanian Government (or State) is a post-colonial phenomenon and has since the 1960’s been advanced by petty political rather than rational considerations. Politicians willing to use Government for their personal and family advancement, and with few if any political ideals to emulate or follow, have always won the day against imported political ideas and ideals.
The fight against the Development Plan of the 1980’s was a fight for the individual to retain control over the use and disposal of land without interference from the State. But most significant to my argument was the defeat of the possibility of any future political group or individual being able to use rationality and the general good, rather than self-interest and nepotism, to win elections and govern this country.
Listening to the hundreds of local opinions, I find it hard to see how we will be able to structure a communal approach and if one was structured, would it then become like Vision 2008, because the populace is schooled in quick fixes without sacrifices. Nevertheless, the time has arrived when the British Government can no longer stand by and play the role of observer.
The U.K hurried forward constitutional advancement because fortunately for them they think structurally and plan for future challenges. The U.K knew many years ago that the day would soon arrive when the demands on government by residents and the Private Sector would surpass the country’s ability to finance its needs and wants. Now that an operating revenue of CI$487 million has fallen short of the budget projection of CI$528 million, the situation is clear for all to see.
Our political leadership must now bite the bullet; realizing that historically and contemporary Cayman has and will have challenges that will only be properly addressed if we take full account of our unique physical and economic conditions. The present political leadership will have to lead the population in the direction of sacrifices (direct taxation) for the general good and future generations. But to do this they must have the courage to do so and the leadership skills to teach as we move forward in these serious times.
Otherwise we must turn again to handing out what few birthrights we have remaining and this is the unacceptable form of taxation!
But in conclusion, historical facts and socio-political analysis shows that Caymanians love weak Governments so that each person can feel they equally have access to the leadership and can influence policy directions in order to accomplish their immediate individual self-interest, rather than leadership which uses its authority to make decisions for the preservation of the general good.
The general good is not just achieving more luxury cars, homes and washing machines while receiving free education for our children. Sometimes the general good may mean that a generation must sacrifice a few years of luxuries in order for the future of their children to be more secure, or even possible. There has been very little evolution and acceptance of this proposition but necessity is the mother of invention.
Every form of direct taxation has been considered evil, even by those of us that would most likely escape the blunt of this burden, since we have very little or nothing. Why is taxation considered so great a burden to us when countries where many of the foreigners living, banking, or working here, require and expect of their citizens not only to pay taxes but give up their lives or the lives of their children to secure and preserve the general good?
As you read this commentary a young man or woman may have died in Israel or Palestine defending their individual people and State. In our country the evolution of the concept of social responsibility is now needed and it is not for the church but the State to enlighten us of our duties as citizens. The church already asks for sacrifices and collects tithes for its propagation and survival yet very few churches offer social security or physical protection to its congregation as does the State. The two things we cannot escape are death and taxation. | 
