Opinion: Would Manley and Bustamante be proud of today's Jamaica?

Not many Jamaicans are still alive who were young adults during the era of colonialism, lived through the brief existence of the West Indies Federation, and experienced Jamaica's transition to political independence. Fewer still witnessed firsthand the roles played by National Heroes Sir Alexander Bustamante and Norman Manley beginning in 1938.

Those fortunate enough to have lived through that period readily praise the work of these two great leaders, who capably guided Jamaicans politically from colonialism to independence in 1962. These men were, without question, the founding fathers of the Jamaican nation. However, among older Jamaicans and students of Jamaican history, there remains debate over who was the more devoted and passionate nationalist: Manley or Bustamante?

Evidence suggests that both Norman Manley and Alexander Bustamante were nationalists, but they differed significantly on when and how Jamaica should become independent.

Manley is generally regarded as the stronger advocate for political independence. As leader of the People's National Party (PNP), he believed Jamaica should achieve self-government and, ultimately, full independence. He worked to expand Jamaica's constitutional powers and saw independence as a natural step in the country's political development. However, he also strongly supported the West Indies Federation, believing the English-speaking Caribbean would be stronger if the islands achieved independence together as a federation.

Bustamante, leader of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), was initially more cautious. His primary focus was improving the lives of ordinary workers through better wages, labor rights, and economic development. He believed independence should not come before Jamaica was economically and administratively prepared. He opposed Jamaica remaining in the Federation, arguing that it would not serve the country's interests.

After Jamaicans voted in the 1961 referendum to leave the Federation, Bustamante accepted that independence should follow. The JLP won the ensuing general election, and under Bustamante's leadership Jamaica became independent on August 6, 1962.

Many historians would argue that Manley was the true nationalist, while Bustamante was the shrewd opportunist. Manley advocated for Jamaica's independence earlier and more consistently, although within the framework of a federated Caribbean. Bustamante, recognizing that the working class he passionately represented did not fully understand the implications of Federation, forced Manley to call the referendum. The result was Jamaica's decision to pursue independence on its own.

One of the great ironies of Jamaican history is that Manley laid much of the constitutional groundwork for independence, while Bustamante seized the opportunity to preside over its realization. Both men are rightly honored as National Heroes because each made indispensable contributions to the birth of modern Jamaica.

Both men envisioned a successful future for Jamaica as an independent nation. Has their optimism been realized after 64 years of independence?

Truthfully, neither Manley's nor Bustamante's vision has been fully realized, although each has been achieved in part.

Manley envisioned not only a politically independent nation but also one that was well educated, socially just, and capable of governing itself through strong democratic institutions. Jamaica has certainly succeeded in some respects. It has maintained regular democratic elections, a respected judiciary, and a tradition of peaceful transfers of power that many countries admire. It has also produced remarkable achievements in athletics, music, education, and culture.

Bustamante's vision emphasized improving the lives of ordinary working people. There has been meaningful progress through expanded access to education, healthcare, housing, and workers' rights compared with the colonial era.

Yet many Jamaicans would argue that both men's dreams remain incomplete because of persistent challenges, including high levels of violent crime, significant poverty and income inequality, the migration of skilled professionals, and heavy debt burdens throughout much of the post-independence period. Instead of the infrastructure-driven growth that Manley envisioned, he would likely be disappointed by Jamaica's continued dependence on tourism, remittances, and imported goods. Most importantly, both men would surely be disheartened by evidence of public corruption and government inefficiency.

Many would argue that Jamaica achieved political independence but is still striving for greater economic independence and stronger social equity.

Manley, recognizing the challenges Jamaica currently faces both domestically and internationally, might even wonder whether the country would have been better off had it remained in the West Indies Federation. Those who share that view often point to the potential benefits of a larger combined population and economy, which could have created a stronger regional market; greater bargaining power in international trade and diplomacy; shared institutions such as a regional coast guard, diplomatic service, and transportation system; and a more influential collective voice for the English-speaking Caribbean.

Bustamante, however, and those who believe independence was the right decision, would argue that Jamaica might instead have been forced to subsidize poorer territories, that decision-making would have become slow and politically divisive, and that Jamaica's economic growth might have been constrained by the broader needs of the Federation.

It is impossible to know whether the Federation would have flourished or failed. Had it survived and matured, it might today resemble a small regional nation with a larger economy and greater international influence. Equally, it might have fractured under political and economic pressures.

As Jamaica marks its 64th anniversary of independence, the more relevant question is not whether independence has succeeded, but what kind of independence the country has achieved. The continuing challenge is to build an economy and society that provide broad-based prosperity, effective and honest governance, public safety, and opportunity for all Jamaicans. That remains a work in progress—and a challenge shared by many nations that emerged from colonial rule.