Book review

Trinidad and Tobago and Guyana: Race and Politics in Two Plural Societies by Anne Marie Bissessar and John La Guerre

THIS BOOK is a study of the race factor and its relation to politics in two countries of similar colonial backgrounds which were divided along comparable racial and cultural lines and exhibited demographic ratios of significance as well as segregated patterns of residence and occupation but in which political outcomes differed.

The book advances the view that the race factor in the politics of these two countries is neither a simple nor a static one but is complex and variable and its salience is influenced by a host of other factors in the socio-economic and international environment.

In definitional terms race is regarded as denoting distinctions based on biological and phenotypical features as the founding basis of group identity. These are then reinforced by other factors, particularly cultural propensities, symbols and historical associations, to demarcate the boundaries of the ethnic group which over time responds to and is affected by changes in the society. A plural society is characterised as one which is largely divided along racial, ethnic, occupational, geographic and cultural lines where ethnic groups of significant numerical proportions coalesce and occupy the same social space and where their relationship with each other has crucial consequences for the politics. The literature on race and ethnic relations is reviewed and found inadequate in significant aspects. It is claimed not to have sufficiently probed the question of “how ethnic issues are transmitted to the political system and how, in turn, the political system affects the functions, strategies and styles of ethnic politics.” Since the analyses offered in the literature are not comprehensive enough, its prognostications for political outcomes in plural societies seem too deterministic and do not acknowledge the nuances in the relationship between race and politics.

The study utilises the concept of predisposing factors which could exert a substantial influence in how race and ethnicity affect political formulations and outcomes.

Such predisposing factors are many and would include race, ethnicity, geographic location, demographic ratios, levels of education, stage of economic development, nature of the economy, origins of the various communities, complications of international politics, and levels and intensities of interaction.

Some of those factors are themselves subject to change with relevant consequences on the relationship.

There are, however, other factors which are deemed critical and pertinent to the analysis such as leadership, political structures and forms of political organisation.

It is the changing relationship between these factors and ethnic entities that are significant for the politics. With this frame of reference the study proceeds to examine race and politics in Trinidad and Tobago and Guyana over particular periods of time. In the socio- historical environment before the mid-fifties, the study points out that political mobilisation based on race and ethnicity was somewhat diffuse and was loosely concentrated on representations for the welfare of the ethnic group.

Moreover, inter-ethnic rivalry was muted since the colonial authorities controlled the State, decided on the distribution of public resources and facilitated the separate development of the major ethnic groups. Colonial control was therefore a significant predisposing factor in this period.

However, there were other noteworthy predisposing factors such as demographic ratios, segregated patterns of residence and occupation, geographic location and, particularly in the case of Guyana, the intrusion of international politics and the nature of leadership.

With constitutional change, the impending withdrawal of the colonial power and the prospect of independence and, with it, the passing of control over the State into local hands, group rivalry intensified.

Thus the period 1956 to 1976 was seen as the era in which ethnic rel a t i o n s assumed crisis proport ions and political mobilisation b e c a m e more assertive.