REMEMBERING
THE LIFE AND TIMES OF EBENEZER THEODORE JOSHUA
ON
THE 100TH ANNIVERSARY OF HIS BIRTH
MAY 23RD 1908 - MAY 23RD 2008
By
Michael S. Joshua
As we face the challenging and continuing task of nation building it is meet and right that we reflect on the contributions of the many “pioneers”, some of whom gave their lives to secure physical space for our homeland, others to secure political space and still others who devoted (and are devoting as we speak) their professional lives to expanding and maintaining the institutions which are the perquisites of nation building.
The status quo is clearly the result of the cumulative efforts of all those groups; each group standing on the shoulders of the previous group. Of course, there were those who stood at ground zero without shoulder support.
Ebenezer Theodore Joshua can be
regarded as one of those whose focus was on expanding socio-economic-political
space for the masses. May 23rd
marked the one hundredth anniversary of his birth in
In 1951 at the age of 43 years
Joshua returned to
While his main preoccupation was basic
social and economic reform in St.Vincent, he can be classified as a regionalist:
he believed those reforms though necessary would not be sufficient for real
self determination which requires comprehensive regional integration; he lived
and worked in different parts of the Caribbean: Grenada, Trinidad & Tobago,
British Guiana and Aruba and he collaborated with other regionalists in
competing for political power in the 1958 Federal Parliament. Joshua
contributed significantly to leading his people out of the dark days of British
Colonialism. The sojourn in that environment began in the late eighteen century
and the long walk to freedom lasted up to the late twentieth century. As we
reminisce on that long walk and the personalities in the leadership, it must be
noted parenthetically, that British Colonialism like the proverbial coin had
two sets of effects on the wellbeing of the majority : One positive and the other
somewhat negative. On the positive side the system established vital
institutional requisites of civil society: the governance system, the education
system, the legal system, the Civil Service and the cricket culture; on the
negative side, and indeed with more deleterious and lasting effects, is the
retardation of socio-economic development. The outward and visible signs of
this retardation are the development of a virtual dual society in which there
was a narrow modern sector geared to serve the interest of the colonialists and a
larger sector - ill housed, ill educated, ill clothed, not ill fed only because
its inhabitant lived “off the land”- served the plantation system; a political
economy that relegated the country to a vision of a dependency philosophy of
primary products (Arrowroot, Sugar, Bananas…) today, tomorrow and forever; but
the most critical is a political posture that virtually undermined the Caribbean
integration movement. My sense is that comprehensive regional integration is
the last best hope for the wider
Joshua was simply a social
activist whose goal was to engineer the upgrading of the social and economic
conditions of the functionally disenfranchised masses. While the life of Joshua
is in and of itself important, the times in which he lived must take precedence
here. Joshua like many other activists around the British colonial system had
bought into the hype accompanying and following the 2nd World War: a
war to end all wars and to usher in the era of self determination for all colonial
peoples. At the time self determination was seen as the necessary and
sufficient instrument to generate the political space (legislative and
executive) to provide the infrastructure to transform the socio-economic
conditions of the masses. The early nineteen
fifties marked the beginning of the end of camping outside the pale of the
governmental machinery for the majority of our citizens. Every person twenty
years or older, regardless of socio-economic station, was given the vote to
elect representatives of their choosing. This was a great day because it
appeared that the long march to freedom was about to end. But as usual the last
mile always seems to be the toughest. For example, the first four years of
adult suffrage were hell and scissors. There
was stiff resistance (or so it appeared) from the powers that be of the
plantation economy. Nothing was conceded without a struggle. During these four
years the struggle for upgrading the economic conditions of the workers was
very intense. Joshua raised the level of
attack on a system that seemed insensitive to needed change. The official
response was to indict him for sedition and public mischief. He was found
guilty by a jury of his peers. The verdict was upheld by the
. He returned committed to
the cause of political independence for
1)
Rudolph Elliot Baynes (
2) Julian Augustus Baynes (St. George}
3) George Hamilton Charles ( Central Windward)
4)
Evans
5) Ebenezer Theodore Joshua ( North Windward)
6) Samuel Eric Slater (North Leeward
7)
Clive Leonard Tannis (The
8) Herman Frazer Young (South Leeward)
In many ways the 1952 general election was a
watershed election: it was the first under universal adult suffrage; it would
give the people a majority in the legislature; Joshua began a very effective
political career and the so called EIGHT ARMY OF LIBERATION campaigned
throughout the country presenting a vision for a new day. Joshua was not in the
original lineup of candidates to contest the 1952 general elections, however
when the candidate of record for the North Windward constituency, one Robert
Milton Cato, withdrew the movement did not have to look too far to find a
replacement. Joshua was ready. He had just returned from
Before any ground, on the new
enterprise, could be broken a rift developed within the ranks of the Army of
Liberation. The congratulation from the
colonial Administrator included an invitation to visit Government House to mark
the occasion of the first election under universal adult suffrage. This
invitation for social interaction with the other side served to drive a wedge
in the ranks of the newly elected group. Four members indicated that they would
accept the invitation and four opted to decline the invitation and have a
celebration of their own. It was unfortunate and somewhat disappointing to see
an issue not germane to the core mission could drive what turned out to be a
permanent wedge between the two groups. Where was the cricket culture when it
was needed to develop consensus on procedural rules to govern such situations?
This was a failure of strategic leadership. After campaigning and motivating
the vast majority to rally behind a programme of hope no leadership could
emerge to save the day. On the contrary the groups drifted further and further
apart. In 1953 Joshua resigned from the labour movement and founded the
Federated Industrial and Agricultural Workers Union (FIAWU) and a political
arm- The Peoples’ Political Party (PPP). Effectively there emerged two
legislative groups: one radical led by Julian Baynes and Ebenezer Joshua and
the other somewhat conservative led by George Charles and Rudolph Baynes. From
1953 on the socio-economic-political transformation gained steady momentum. In
particular, there was the expansion of the political space to include executive
power. On the political front the PPP kept in touch with anyone who would
listen. It instituted the Wednesday night report in the
Executive power was granted to the people in 1956. The peoples’ representatives held ministerial portfolios in the executive council. The political discourse was translated into major public policies beginning in 1956 during the first PPP administration. Early emphasis was placed on basic public goods: education, health, roads (feeder roads) and pipe borne water. These low plums were given priority, not only because they could be reached with little difficulty, but because they were urgently needed to provide the capacity for the many to begin climbing the socio economic ladder. In addition major social infrastructure projects to strengthen the efficiency of the macro-economy: feeder roads to support the emerging banana industry; telecommunication and port development (deep water facilities) to improve the general efficiency of the business environment. The PPP was re-elected in 1961 indicating a mandate to continue the transformation. And so it did. As these developments were taking place the regional integration movement became real, the Federation of British West Indies was established in 1958, ushering in what seemed at the time a major opportunity for enhancing those assets common to all territories. However before one could say Jack Robinson the last best hope was gone and we were back to square one. The intervening 50 years have seen a regrouping: we have a “CARICOM” passport and continual interaction among governments. But more importantly we have the going concern of the OECS.
Outside the halls of government Joshua devoted a great deal of effort to upgrading the conditions of the working classes. This proved very challenging, but in the end there was substantial transformation.
Joshua was indeed a change agent. For the most part his grasp may have been much higher than his reach and as he confronted the system he was greatly misunderstood. At his state funeral, Dr. Kenneth John serving as the official scribe making a presentation on his life and times indicated that no one was neutral about Ebenezer Joshua. In fact, some saw the glass half full and some saw it half empty. I am inclined to side with the former group. He pursued his goal of a BETTER DAY… with great passion, “with malice toward none and charity toward all”.
What of the legacy of this man - Ebenezer Theodore Joshua- who spent about half of his life making a difference in the lives of others? At the macro level the answer may be found by comparing pre and post 1952 social balance sheets. In the pre 1952 social balance sheets the large majority of the disenfranchised appeared to be merely hewers of wood and drawers of water, without any stake in the equity of the country. If they paid any taxes, those taxes were with little or no representation. . The post 1952 social balance sheets reflect qualitative and quantitative changes that are very significant: increasing socio-economic homogeneity ( substantially fuelled by a robust communication system – telephone, radio, newspapers, TV and blogs; increasing basic public goods (education, health, roads, pipe borne water, upgrading of electrical, telephone and air transport systems). The newly enfranchised came to realize that they had an abiding equitable interest in the development of the country. As election after election rolled around the view of government as tax collector and magistrate court was gradually replaced by the notion that government in a developing country is responsible for the leadership that would stimulate optimal economic and social progress. At the micro or individual or family level there is much tangible evidence around. One only has to look at the housing stock from urban to rural areas; but there is also some anecdotal evidence available: for example, several months ago I met an elderly woman at a church service at New Grounds, after conversing with her for some time, I asked her what she remembered about Joshua and she indicated that he was responsible for her getting vacation with pay from her secretarial job at one the estates in the area.
As a social activist and policy maker Joshua was fully engaged in the formative years of the social transformation of his homeland, at every turn his modus operandi was to see things that never were and ask WHY NOT?
.