© W. B. Allen & C. M.
Allen
Willingly we traveled to Nassau for the three day
run up to the vote in the 2002 referendum in order to observe and comment upon
the pending constitutional issues and processes. Our schedule demanded that we fly back before the polling booths
had closed that Wednesday, but we saw enough to establish our conviction that
Bahamians could handle deciding their own fate. Though given little time, they were indeed deliberating! That central aspect of constitutional decision
making became clear in conversations with drivers, shop keepers, museum
docents, and countless others. Still,
without opinion surveys we were in no position to foretell the outcome of the
vote. There always existed the
possibility that the voters would be prevailed upon, not by their own
understanding of constitutional imperatives but, by deference to plainly stated
political imperatives.
What a stunning surprise, then, to read via the world
wide web the headline that declared all five measures overwhelmingly
rejected! While we immediately
attributed the results to superior organization and communication on the part
of the principals urging a “no” vote, we ultimately had to reflect on what this
experience said even more clearly, not about the politicians, but about the
citizens of The Bahamas. Reflecting
upon matters in that light, we come away with great pride in the
accomplishments of Bahamian citizens.
One might rightly ask, “What’s pride got to do with
it?” Why would academics from the
United States, with none more than a scholarly interest, care one way or the
other how the Bahamians reacted to the issues they deliberated? The best way to explain that is to expand
upon the reply we gave to the ZNS reporter, who asked in an interview whether
we could suggest something that Bahamians might learn from the experience of
the United States as they pondered their vote.
Although we said then, and would repeat now, that this
was a decision for Bahamians that could not be influenced by any notions of how
Americans might do things, there is an aspect of U.S. experience that is
directly pertinent. It is not, however,
the U.S. of the 21st century, the global super power, that is
instructive, so much as it is the newly independent, de-colonized United States
of the late 18th and early 19th century. For the United States began its independent
political life by declaring, in the Declaration of Independence, that it
submitted its appeal to a “candid world.”
In this move the young nation held that it was willing to be judged by principles it expected reasonable people everywhere to acknowledge, and the most important of these principles was the confidence that ordinary citizens could make these most important judgments. Self-government was not a slogan but rather a central motif of United States experience. To that extent, each time the principle of self-government is vindicated anywhere else in the world it redounds to ratify the original American decision. When that occurs near to U. S. borders, it takes on special value. We were proud that Bahamians showed the strength of judgment and courage to say to the world, we are in charge here, and we invite you to pay attention to what we’re doing! That contributed much to the understanding of our students, in our current class, “Politics, Culture, and Post-Colonialism,” as we shared with them this heartening experience.
W. B. Allen, PhD
C. M. Allen, MLS
Michigan State University
Department of Political Science