Jamaica looks to cut ties with British monarchy

The Jamaican prime minister told Prince William and Kate that he wants Jamaica to be fully independent, which would mean breaking ties with Queen Elizabeth II. There was no immediate reaction from the royal couple.

Link DW

So will Queen Elisabeth lose another title? Barbados has become a republic recently, as of 30 November 2021, and Jamaica might follow soon. The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are currently on a tour in the Caribbean and aren't receiving a very warm welcome.

If only Australia would do the same thing (become a republic that is).....

In a country built on slavery, I can see why a movement for a republic can gain real traction.

The rise of the BLM movement in the USA, especially as to history of slavery in the Americas, has spread to other countries and they want to dissolve their colonial ties. Many in those still colonial entities like Jamaica are becoming more aware of how the Royalty and the historical very rich of the UK made massive profits from the obscene inhumanity of slavery along with continuing segregation, discrimination and enrichment (like being tax and corporate tax dodges protected by the UK courts). They feel the Queen and the inheritors of her crown shouldn't be able to continue to profit from them, that the income stay in their islands for their own benefit, to no longer be 'subjects' of a White leader. One has to wonder if this will spread to the other territories of the UK, The Netherlands, France and yes with the USA too as to Puerto Rico, USVI and the Pacific regions islands.

The Slavery Abolition Act took effect in 1834. It took 188 years of sucking on the teat of Mother England before the Jamaicans decided it’s time to throw a hissy fit?

It’s been almost 65 years since the first of the African colonies became Republics. India and Pakistan were even earlier. Subsequently Britain hasn’t stopped any colony that wanted independence from attaining it. So it’s only the Jamaican’s fault they aren’t already independent, if that’s what they want.

Don’t get me wrong. Slavery was evil and horrific but it’s not like its history in the Americas is just being discovered.

If the Jamaican people want to be a Republic that’s their choice. I for one fully support that.

But spare me the histrionics about what’s driving it.

QF7 wrote:

The Slavery Abolition Act took effect in 1834. It took 188 years of sucking on the teat of Mother England before the Jamaicans decided it’s time to throw a hissy fit?

It’s been almost 65 years since the first of the African colonies became Republics. India and Pakistan were even earlier. Subsequently Britain hasn’t stopped any colony that wanted independence from attaining it. So it’s only the Jamaican’s fault they aren’t already independent, if that’s what they want.

Don’t get me wrong. Slavery was evil and horrific but it’s not like its history in the Americas is just being discovered.

If the Jamaican people want to be a Republic that’s their choice. I for one fully support that.

But spare me the histrionics about what’s driving it.

Hear hear, well said

Kent350787 wrote:

If only Australia would do the same thing (become a republic that is).....

In a country built on slavery, I can see why a movement for a republic can gain real traction.

Australia was built on convict labour, and most Australians embrace that now

A101 wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

If only Australia would do the same thing (become a republic that is).....

In a country built on slavery, I can see why a movement for a republic can gain real traction.

Australia was built on convict labour, and most Australians embrace that now

How that?

"My great-great-(etc) Grandfather was a convict so to honor him I'm going to slash your tires"??

ltbewr wrote:

The rise of the BLM movement in the USA, especially as to history of slavery in the Americas, has spread to other countries and they want to dissolve their colonial ties. Many in those still colonial entities like Jamaica are becoming more aware of how the Royalty and the historical very rich of the UK made massive profits from the obscene inhumanity of slavery along with continuing segregation, discrimination and enrichment (like being tax and corporate tax dodges protected by the UK courts). They feel the Queen and the inheritors of her crown shouldn't be able to continue to profit from them, that the income stay in their islands for their own benefit, to no longer be 'subjects' of a White leader. One has to wonder if this will spread to the other territories of the UK, The Netherlands, France and yes with the USA too as to Puerto Rico, USVI and the Pacific regions islands.

As for the Netherlands, we are good if they decided to go on their own. However, they decided against that in 2010.

A101 wrote:

Australia was built on convict labour, and most Australians embrace that now

Then why did I have to apply for a special visa a few years ago because I had a 29 year old Driving While Impaired" conviction? I would've thought they'd say, "he's one of us, let him in!".

johns624 wrote:

A101 wrote:

Australia was built on convict labour, and most Australians embrace that now

Then why did I have to apply for a special visa a few years ago because I had a 29 year old Driving While Impaired" conviction? I would've thought they'd say, "he's one of us, let him in!".

I imagine because you are not a couple of hundred years old and on the Australian Convict Transportation Register

ltbewr wrote:

The rise of the BLM movement in the USA, especially as to history of slavery in the Americas, has spread to other countries and they want to dissolve their colonial ties. Many in those still colonial entities like Jamaica are becoming more aware of how the Royalty and the historical very rich of the UK made massive profits from the obscene inhumanity of slavery along with continuing segregation, discrimination and enrichment (like being tax and corporate tax dodges protected by the UK courts). They feel the Queen and the inheritors of her crown shouldn't be able to continue to profit from them, that the income stay in their islands for their own benefit, to no longer be 'subjects' of a White leader. One has to wonder if this will spread to the other territories of the UK, The Netherlands, France and yes with the USA too as to Puerto Rico, USVI and the Pacific regions islands.

Puerto Rico voted multiple times in favor of become a US state. It didn't happen only because US legislature didn't accept it.

A101 wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

If only Australia would do the same thing (become a republic that is).....

In a country built on slavery, I can see why a movement for a republic can gain real traction.

Australia was built on convict labour, and most Australians embrace that now

I have First Fleet convict ancestors, plus a second fleet soldier. I'm ultimately glad they were sent here, but I still see no value in the monarch of the UK being Australia's Monarch also.

The Jamaican reasoning is quite different to that of most Australians.

Kent350787 wrote:

A101 wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

If only Australia would do the same thing (become a republic that is).....

In a country built on slavery, I can see why a movement for a republic can gain real traction.

Australia was built on convict labour, and most Australians embrace that now

I have First Fleet convict ancestors, plus a second fleet soldier. I'm ultimately glad they were sent here, but I still see no value in the monarch of the UK being Australia's Monarch also.

The Jamaican reasoning is quite different to that of most Australians.

Most likely a subject for another thread but what would you like replace it with?

Having the Queen as Monarch does not cost Australia a cent and has no legal responsibilities after the Statute of Westminster in 1942 was ratified her role is basically ceremonial unlike the role by the Governor‑General whom does have reserve powers which I think the current system has more checks and balances than say the American presidential system

Would you also object to Australia still remaining as part of the Commonwealth of Nations as Queen Elizabeth II being the Head of the Commonwealth of nations


Yes I too have a convict past on my mothers side having a bit of chuckle with that, as you must and with your own past being both convict and convict fleet solder

A101 wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

A101 wrote:

Australia was built on convict labour, and most Australians embrace that now

I have First Fleet convict ancestors, plus a second fleet soldier. I'm ultimately glad they were sent here, but I still see no value in the monarch of the UK being Australia's Monarch also.

The Jamaican reasoning is quite different to that of most Australians.

Most likely a subject for another thread but what would you like replace it with?

Having the Queen as Monarch does not cost Australia a cent and has no legal responsibilities after the Statute of Westminster in 1942 was ratified her role is basically ceremonial unlike the role by the Governor‑General whom does have reserve powers which I think the current system has more checks and balances than say the American presidential system

Would you also object to Australia still remaining as part of the Commonwealth of Nations as Queen Elizabeth II being the Head of the Commonwealth of nations

No problem with the Commonwealth, which itself includes a number of republics. I supported the model proposed at the 1999 referendum and ultimately still do.

It will be very interesting to see whether the Jamaican republican movement gains significant traction and, if yes, what model is proposed there.

Kent350787 wrote:

It will be very interesting to see whether the Jamaican republican movement gains significant traction and, if yes, what model is proposed there.

Probably they would follow Barbados's suit and become a parliamentary republic with a ceremonial indirectly elected president as head of state. That doesn't change the system too much, but will sever the ties with the Royal family.

A101 wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

If only Australia would do the same thing (become a republic that is).....

In a country built on slavery, I can see why a movement for a republic can gain real traction.

Australia was built on convict labour, and most Australians embrace that now

Those convicts were white, if they were black it would be a different matter. NZ was built off the backs of the colonial farmers and men like my great great grandfather who started NZ's export driven economy. That's now glossed over and forgotten because those men accomplishments are no longer important to the NZ story anymore.

Kent350787 wrote:

A101 wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

If only Australia would do the same thing (become a republic that is).....

In a country built on slavery, I can see why a movement for a republic can gain real traction.

Australia was built on convict labour, and most Australians embrace that now

I have First Fleet convict ancestors, plus a second fleet soldier. I'm ultimately glad they were sent here, but I still see no value in the monarch of the UK being Australia's Monarch also.

The Jamaican reasoning is quite different to that of most Australians.

Her role as Monarch of Australia is not relevant to her role as Monarch of the UK, NZ, Canada...........

ltbewr wrote:

The rise of the BLM movement in the USA, especially as to history of slavery in the Americas, has spread to other countries and they want to dissolve their colonial ties. Many in those still colonial entities like Jamaica are becoming more aware of how the Royalty and the historical very rich of the UK made massive profits from the obscene inhumanity of slavery along with continuing segregation, discrimination and enrichment (like being tax and corporate tax dodges protected by the UK courts). They feel the Queen and the inheritors of her crown shouldn't be able to continue to profit from them, that the income stay in their islands for their own benefit, to no longer be 'subjects' of a White leader. One has to wonder if this will spread to the other territories of the UK, The Netherlands, France and yes with the USA too as to Puerto Rico, USVI and the Pacific regions islands.

I think that is high-minded, but we should also ask, which government system is associated with high living standards. Haiti has done poorly. Denouncing slavery simply is not enough. Slavery is a big issue, but there are others in life. And we should not equate "Slavery >100 years ago" with "Slavery now."

I have met a man who was a slave in Myanmar 35 years ago. He got sold for $120 to a fishing boat captain. He later escaped, and has a successful family in the USA now. Jamaica got rid of that tradition a long time ago, which is a really proud event for them. But it is not the ONLY proud event. There are many other achievements to focus on.

LCDFlight wrote:

ltbewr wrote:

The rise of the BLM movement in the USA, especially as to history of slavery in the Americas, has spread to other countries and they want to dissolve their colonial ties. Many in those still colonial entities like Jamaica are becoming more aware of how the Royalty and the historical very rich of the UK made massive profits from the obscene inhumanity of slavery along with continuing segregation, discrimination and enrichment (like being tax and corporate tax dodges protected by the UK courts). They feel the Queen and the inheritors of her crown shouldn't be able to continue to profit from them, that the income stay in their islands for their own benefit, to no longer be 'subjects' of a White leader. One has to wonder if this will spread to the other territories of the UK, The Netherlands, France and yes with the USA too as to Puerto Rico, USVI and the Pacific regions islands.

I think that is high-minded, but we should also ask, which government system is associated with high living standards. Haiti has done poorly. Denouncing slavery simply is not enough. Slavery is a big issue, but there are others in life. And we should not equate "Slavery >100 years ago" with "Slavery now."

I have met a man who was a slave in Myanmar 35 years ago. He got sold for $120 to a fishing boat captain. He later escaped, and has a successful family in the USA now. Jamaica got rid of that tradition a long time ago, which is a really proud event for them. But it is not the ONLY proud event. There are many other achievements to focus on.

Like South Africa and Zimbabwe's economic and political history illustrate negative possibilities quite well after having such achievement.

ltbewr wrote:

The rise of the BLM movement in the USA, especially as to history of slavery in the Americas, has spread to other countries and they want to dissolve their colonial ties. Many in those still colonial entities like Jamaica are becoming more aware of how the Royalty and the historical very rich of the UK made massive profits from the obscene inhumanity of slavery along with continuing segregation, discrimination and enrichment (like being tax and corporate tax dodges protected by the UK courts). They feel the Queen and the inheritors of her crown shouldn't be able to continue to profit from them, that the income stay in their islands for their own benefit, to no longer be 'subjects' of a White leader. One has to wonder if this will spread to the other territories of the UK, The Netherlands, France and yes with the USA too as to Puerto Rico, USVI and the Pacific regions islands.

How exactly in 2022 does the Queen benefit from being the titular head of some former British colonies. Does one think that Jamaica, a dominion with the Queen as its head, is less independent than is Guyana which became a republic since 1970, or Dominica which became a republic immediately upon receipt of independence in 1978.

Ties between the UK and its former colonies are frayed. The sale of tropical products under the control of British companies ended a while ago. The UK banks withdrew from the English Caribbean a while ago When most people in the English Caribbean saw this royal couple they probably yawned and wondered why the more interesting Meghan wasnt sent instead.

The Commonwealth does NOT matter to the Caribbean anymore than does the OAS to the USA. I always am astounded at people in the USA who seem to think that the UK matters anymore. Let us look at the few UK territories left. The Cayman islands have their own currency. Turks & Caicos and the BVI use the US$. Anguilla uses the Eastern Caribbean (EC)$. These territories also restrict what citizens of the United Kingdom can do in their territories if they lack "belonger" status.

So Puerto Rico has its issues with the USA. Blacks in the USA, Canada, the UK, France and Brazil have issues as marginalized minorities living within white dominated racist structures. The English Caribbean is different and its issues are different and it did NOT need BLM to draw attention to the problems that these former colonies face.

If you want to know what bothers people in these nations. Its is the corruption, nepotism and inefficiency and poor governance which faces all of them, both independent and non sovereign. It is those leaders that Caribbean people blame for their problems and not some ageing white lady who is too old to even be able tp board a plane that she sent her insipid grandson and his boring wife who just learned that NO ONE cared about their presence.

QF7 wrote:

The Slavery Abolition Act took effect in 1834. It took 188 years of sucking on the teat of Mother England before the Jamaicans decided it’s time to throw a hissy fit?

I.

What hissy fit did the Jamaicans throw. The irrelevant British monarchy wanted to use Caribbean people as a prop to pretend as if they are relevant. The loud snores in the Caribbean while they watch CNN, and MSNBC to see what Biden is up to were palpable.

Go to the supermarkets in these islands and one would think that one was in the USA. And one would be right when one considers that every time people in the Caribbean have reason to think that the supply chain out of the USA will be interrupted they will starve. 60% of the food that they eat comes from the USA and KFC is now the "national dish" of many of these places, with the result being some of the world's highest obesity rates.

I will like someone to tell me what exactly does the British Queen do that impacts their lives. If there is a person who concerns the Caribbean it is which ever man the USA elects as President because without a doubt ALL of these countries fall under the USA's shadow.

c933103 wrote:

ltbewr wrote:

The rise of the BLM movement in the USA, especially as to history of slavery in the Americas, has spread to other countries and they want to dissolve their colonial ties. Many in those still colonial entities like Jamaica are becoming more aware of how the Royalty and the historical very rich of the UK made massive profits from the obscene inhumanity of slavery along with continuing segregation, discrimination and enrichment (like being tax and corporate tax dodges protected by the UK courts). They feel the Queen and the inheritors of her crown shouldn't be able to continue to profit from them, that the income stay in their islands for their own benefit, to no longer be 'subjects' of a White leader. One has to wonder if this will spread to the other territories of the UK, The Netherlands, France and yes with the USA too as to Puerto Rico, USVI and the Pacific regions islands.

Puerto Rico voted multiple times in favor of become a US state. It didn't happen only because US legislature didn't accept it.

The smart ones in the Caribbean are the Dutch Caribbean islands. They do as they wish and when they get into trouble the Netherlands governments foots the bill. The independent nations have no Mummy to bail them out and so many have gotten into trouble with the IMF, and until recently were some of the most indebted islands out.

France tells the French Caribbean people what to do and command them to be silent if they complain, even when white gendarmes arrive from France to "manners" them when they get too boisterous.

The US Caribbean what can I say? They do not want independence because they cannot survive on their own, so they are stuck in a weird scenario where they must do as the USA says, but the USA barely supports them when they need the help. Contrary to what they think statehood changes nothing as the travails of Detroit and Flint Michigan and New Orleans will show.

In 2022 the UK means no more to Jamaica than Spain does to the Dominican Republic. Both are caught in the claws of the USA and must be careful not to trigger their ire.

caribny wrote:

QF7 wrote:

The Slavery Abolition Act took effect in 1834. It took 188 years of sucking on the teat of Mother England before the Jamaicans decided it’s time to throw a hissy fit?

I.

What hissy fit did the Jamaicans throw.

“SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico -- Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness told Prince William and Kate on Wednesday that the British commonwealth intends to become fully independent in an unexpected announcement…”

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wi ... e-83630705

The irrelevant British monarchy wanted to use Caribbean people as a prop to pretend as if they are relevant.

The royals only make official visits at the invitation of the local governments.

If I invite you to visit me in my home and when you arrive I tell you to leave and not let the door hit you on the behind on the way out you could reasonably accuse me of throwing a hissy fit.

QF7 wrote:

caribny wrote:

QF7 wrote:

The Slavery Abolition Act took effect in 1834. It took 188 years of sucking on the teat of Mother England before the Jamaicans decided it’s time to throw a hissy fit?

I.

What hissy fit did the Jamaicans throw.

“SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico -- Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness told Prince William and Kate on Wednesday that the British commonwealth intends to become fully independent in an unexpected announcement…”

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wi ... e-83630705

The irrelevant British monarchy wanted to use Caribbean people as a prop to pretend as if they are relevant.

The royals only make official visits at the invitation of the local governments.

If I invite you to visit me in my home and when you arrive I tell you to leave and not let the door hit you on the behind on the way out you could reasonably accuse me of throwing a hissy fit.

Did the Jamaican government invite them, or did they invite themselves? The British monarchy is trying to justify their meaningless existence and they are sad that the "natives" find their presence irrelevant. So all of this nonsense being written. What does the Queen do for Jamaica? How does she impact the daily lives of Jamaicans? The Queen knows fully that she had better stay out of Jamaican domestic affairs. This whole issue is symbolic and people need to stop making a storm in a tea cup. Since the dominion of Barbados became the Republic of Barbados all that changed was that the Governor General is now the President and there will be no more Queen's awards. Only a few Rastas think that life in Barbados has changed.


There is absolutely no reason for Jamaica to run behind the royal family begging them to visit. What benefits does this bring to Jamaica? How does this politically benefit the Jamaican political establishment, given that few Jamaicans care for this?

Listen even Australia is now showing signs that some wish this whole episode with the Queen to end and most of them are ethnically British, so why the angst that Caribbean people now ask themselves why they didnt pull away before? As indeed Guyana, Trinidad & Tobago and Dominica did almost 50 years ago. I really suspect that British people care no more about this than do people in the Caribbean. I am willing to bet that when The Queen's reign ends there will be major changes in the role of the British monarchy even within the UK, so this mock concern that some peddle is just performance.

Jamaica is no less independent than is Guyana and in fact the UK government interferes in the domestic affairs of Guyana way more than it does with Jamaica, even though Guyana has been a republic for 52 years!

caribny wrote:

QF7 wrote:

caribny wrote:

What hissy fit did the Jamaicans throw.

“SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico -- Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness told Prince William and Kate on Wednesday that the British commonwealth intends to become fully independent in an unexpected announcement…”

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wi ... e-83630705

The irrelevant British monarchy wanted to use Caribbean people as a prop to pretend as if they are relevant.

The royals only make official visits at the invitation of the local governments.

If I invite you to visit me in my home and when you arrive I tell you to leave and not let the door hit you on the behind on the way out you could reasonably accuse me of throwing a hissy fit.

Did the Jamaican government invite them, or did they invite themselves? The British monarchy is trying to justify their meaningless existence and they are sad that the "natives" find their presence irrelevant. So all of this nonsense being written. What does the Queen do for Jamaica? How does she impact the daily lives of Jamaicans? The Queen knows fully that she had better stay out of Jamaican domestic affairs. This whole issue is symbolic and people need to stop making a storm in a tea cup. Since the dominion of Barbados became the Republic of Barbados all that changed was that the Governor General is now the President and there will be no more Queen's awards. Only a few Rastas think that life in Barbados has changed.


There is absolutely no reason for Jamaica to run behind the royal family begging them to visit. What benefits does this bring to Jamaica? How does this politically benefit the Jamaican political establishment, given that few Jamaicans care for this?

Listen even Australia is now showing signs that some wish this whole episode with the Queen to end and most of them are ethnically British, so why the angst that Caribbean people now ask themselves why they didnt pull away before? As indeed Guyana, Trinidad & Tobago and Dominica did almost 50 years ago. I really suspect that British people care no more about this than do people in the Caribbean. I am willing to bet that when The Queen's reign ends there will be major changes in the role of the British monarchy even within the UK, so this mock concern that some peddle is just performance.

Jamaica is no less independent than is Guyana and in fact the UK government interferes in the domestic affairs of Guyana way more than it does with Jamaica, even though Guyana has been a republic for 52 years!

I don’t quite understand who or what you’re mad at? On one hand you talk about how pointless and ineffectual the transition to a republic is given how little it actually changes…and yet you also seem VERY anti-Monarchy? So which is it…should Jamaica become a republic, or does it a just not matter?

Also, since BLM there's very much been an Anti-BLM "neocolonial renaissance" among some portion of the UK population (not by any means a majority, but they're certainly very loud). These people complain furiously to stop the National Trust putting up placards in stately homes to explain where the wealth that built them came from, argue that slavers weren't bad people (only bad when judged by modern "woke" values.....seriously, just imagine trying to make that argument about Nazi Concentration Camp guards ) and generally try to argue that colonialism was a good thing. It's also noteworthy that the one black member of the Royal Family seems to get treated worse than the one who is allegedly a paedophile (and recently paid tens of millions of pounds to settle a lawsuit to that effect) by both the press and the Royal Family itself.

I can definitely see how all that would leave a very bad taste in the mouth of someone from the Caribbean Commonwealth.

caribny wrote:

These territories also restrict what citizens of the United Kingdom can do in their territories if they lack "belonger" status.

The UK also makes it a bit difficult for people of the Caribbean Commonwealth to live and work in the UK.

flyguy89 wrote:

I don’t quite understand who or what you’re mad at? On one hand you talk about how pointless and ineffectual the transition to a republic is given how little it actually changes…and yet you also seem VERY anti-Monarchy? So which is it…should Jamaica become a republic, or does it a just not matter?

^^^
Agreed.

Just guessing from the user name, caribny left the island and migrated to New York. A quick Google indicates something like 800,000 Jamaicans are living in Great Britain, which if it is such a horrible oppressor one wonders why they would do that. Easy to whine and complain from the comforts of the places you are whining and complaining about.

To be clear, slavery was awful and much of British colonialism was exploitative and that history cannot be forgotten. But times have changed.

As even William said in so many words, if Jamaica wants to be a Republic, go for it. No one is stopping you. Least of all the monarchy.

flyguy89 wrote:

caribny wrote:

QF7 wrote:

“SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico -- Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness told Prince William and Kate on Wednesday that the British commonwealth intends to become fully independent in an unexpected announcement…”

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wi ... e-83630705


The royals only make official visits at the invitation of the local governments.

If I invite you to visit me in my home and when you arrive I tell you to leave and not let the door hit you on the behind on the way out you could reasonably accuse me of throwing a hissy fit.

Did the Jamaican government invite them, or did they invite themselves? The British monarchy is trying to justify their meaningless existence and they are sad that the "natives" find their presence irrelevant. So all of this nonsense being written. What does the Queen do for Jamaica? How does she impact the daily lives of Jamaicans? The Queen knows fully that she had better stay out of Jamaican domestic affairs. This whole issue is symbolic and people need to stop making a storm in a tea cup. Since the dominion of Barbados became the Republic of Barbados all that changed was that the Governor General is now the President and there will be no more Queen's awards. Only a few Rastas think that life in Barbados has changed.


There is absolutely no reason for Jamaica to run behind the royal family begging them to visit. What benefits does this bring to Jamaica? How does this politically benefit the Jamaican political establishment, given that few Jamaicans care for this?

Listen even Australia is now showing signs that some wish this whole episode with the Queen to end and most of them are ethnically British, so why the angst that Caribbean people now ask themselves why they didnt pull away before? As indeed Guyana, Trinidad & Tobago and Dominica did almost 50 years ago. I really suspect that British people care no more about this than do people in the Caribbean. I am willing to bet that when The Queen's reign ends there will be major changes in the role of the British monarchy even within the UK, so this mock concern that some peddle is just performance.

Jamaica is no less independent than is Guyana and in fact the UK government interferes in the domestic affairs of Guyana way more than it does with Jamaica, even though Guyana has been a republic for 52 years!

I don’t quite understand who or what you’re mad at? On one hand you talk about how pointless and ineffectual the transition to a republic is given how little it actually changes…and yet you also seem VERY anti-Monarchy? So which is it…should Jamaica become a republic, or does it a just not matter?

I can tell that you do not know nuance. I state FACTS. You may be angry at this. I simply state FACTS.

1. The monarchy is irrelevant.
2. Jamaica becoming a republic changes nothing for Jamaica because the monarchy is irrelevant and so has no impact on the lives of Jamaicans.
3. Few Caribbean people waste time on this topic because of responses 1 and 2. I can tell that those who think this is is a "hissy fit" or that this is some grand "BLM racial reckoning awakening" are NOT Caribbean people. Barbados is now a republic. Do you think that this is an over riding concern now in Barbados? Here is what concerns Barbadians. The continued adverse impacts of the pandemic on an economy which was already in poor shape. The Queen had absolutely no relevance to this, so her absence doesnt either.

In addition any monarchist making an issue of this is a hypocrite. Does anyone think that anyone in the Windsor family cares whether Jamaica tosses out the monarchy? One less trip to make to an island where no one cares about them.

QF7 wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

I don’t quite understand who or what you’re mad at? On one hand you talk about how pointless and ineffectual the transition to a republic is given how little it actually changes…and yet you also seem VERY anti-Monarchy? So which is it…should Jamaica become a republic, or does it a just not matter?

^^^
Agreed.

Just guessing from the user name, caribny left the island and migrated to New York. A quick Google indicates something like 800,000 Jamaicans are living in Great Britain, which if it is such a horrible oppressor one wonders why they would do that. Easy to whine and complain from the comforts of the places you are whining and complaining about.

To be clear, slavery was awful and much of British colonialism was exploitative and that history cannot be forgotten. But times have changed.

As even William said in so many words, if Jamaica wants to be a Republic, go for it. No one is stopping you. Least of all the monarchy.

I
The reason why so many Caribbean people found their way to the UK is that they had no choice. Despite the tremendous wealth that UK entities derived from the slave trade and sugar all of this wealth was transferred from islands like Jamaica, St Kitts and Barbados, among the wealthiest places in the 18th century had profits generated not been transferred to the UK. So from the 1850s they had to migrate and they migrated to North America, Central America and elsewhere and NOT just the UK, where migration only began in the late 1940s.

Furthermore there are NOT 800k people of Jamaican descent in Jamaica because the UK census indicates that only 600k people are of Caribbean derivation, so Jamaicans are more like 300k. There are MORE people in Florida of Caribbean origin than in ALL of the UK. NYC alone has more people derived from the English speaking Caribbean than does ALL of the UK. This migration having begun in the late 19th century and remains alive and well now.

I can suggest to you that many of the offspring of those UK based Caribbean people are very upset about the lengths that contemporary Britain goes to trivialize the impacts of past behavior on their ancestors. This is why many of them have engaged in street protests which have resulted in at least one statue of a British "Hero" being tossed into a river. The Windrush issue was a huge scandal that flew in the faces of British hypocrites who love to pretend that all is well and that people should "get on with it".

I suggest to you that the role of the British in slavery and colonialism and attempts by many to stop such discussions is a topic very relevant to the fact that British kids are NOT taught about the massive role of the UK in the Trans Atlantic Slave trade. Are not taught about the massive profits that this brought to commercial entities in the UK and how it partially funded the Industrial Revolution, and that most of what they learn about slavery focuses more on slaves in the USA (which is also connected to British involvement in slavery).

Furthermore British kids are NOT taught that payments of reparations to wealthy British West Indian sugar barons was funded by loans and that it was only around WWII that such loans were fully repaid. Meaning that many ordinary UK tax payers had to service loans borrowed to compensate wealthy landed aristocracy.

I suggest that folks like you stop thinking that this is a topic which interests most Caribbean people, whether we live in the USA or remain in the Caribbean. No "hissy fit". No "BLM inspired racial reckoning". Just pulling the cord on a sordid history of British exploitation of its colonies, and the fact that such abuse still continues as we see with the ongoing saga of the Windrush generations.

Maybe instead of worrying about people in Jamaica you ought to be asking Priti Patel for her refusal to FULLY compensate a segment of UK citizens (some even born in the UK) for all the stress that they endured. Some even DYING because of this.

FYI Caribbean migrants to the USA are way MORE important to people in the Caribbean than those in the UK. There are more of us. We left more recently so are more integrated into the lives of those who live in the Caribbean. In addition our remittances sustain life in the Caribbean.

So go and argue this topic in the Guardian Race section and leave people in Jamaica out of it!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sitting_i ... (2020_film)

This movie deals with a more contemporary discussion about how the UK government treats Jamaicans and other Caribbean people. Sssh. The monarchist apologists here do not want any discussion about the Windrush scandal and the fact that in 2022 it has NOT been fully resolved. Thet UK racism resulted in the deaths of many and others driven to financial rule. And that the UK government does NOT care!

They would rather rant about a hissy fit and how Jamaicans hate the Queen.

caribny wrote:

I can tell that you do not know nuance. I state FACTS. You may be angry at this. I simply state FACTS.

Not angry, I don’t really care…it’s up to Jamaica. Just trying to understand what it is you’re arguing for? I agree with you that the notion of Jamaicans having needed the American BLM movement to suddenly be aware of their own history is trite and US centric. It’s ultimately their government, they chose to make Elizabeth their head of state…it’s fully within Jamaica’s prerogative to remove her. I don’t see anyone arguing otherwise.

Rather than having discussions about the monarchy, the lack of debate in the Caribbean about the colonial system of governance is telling, most former colonies never threw out the colonial system of governance, never put constitutions in place that elevated the people, as a result corruption is rampant as the system protects the rulers, and the people for the most part try to get on without the government. When one considers the billions generated in tourism dollars in the region as an example, you have to wonder why so many countries are economic basket cases.
I am all for going republic, but not the way Barbados did, a new constitution should be drafted and voted on by the people, versus what took place at independence where draft constitutions were provided by the colonial master who did not even have a constitution, what they knew about was putting in place government institutions which controlled the people for mother England with local resources.

The only effect that the monarchy still has on some Caribbean governments is the Privy Council, which is the equivalent of the US Supreme Court, it is the court of final legal jurisdiction. In a lot of rulings they are an Activist Judiciary which has been good, bad and indifferent.

I read somewhere that ultimately the leadership of the commonwealth should evolve, without the queen/king as its head. Here it is : https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/prin ... -nd2wx2wn5

caribny wrote:

France tells the French Caribbean people what to do and command them to be silent if they complain, even when white gendarmes arrive from France to "manners" them when they get too boisterous.

France is a centralized country. French Caribbean people are full French citizens, with exactly the same rights as me, born in the Paris' suburbs. Even some more rights, in fact. They vote for the national assembly and the president of the republic. They have free healthcare, free education. They can live and work anywhere in France and the EU.

Policing is a national matter, we have the national police and national gendarmerie. Plenty of blacks and north africans are police or gendarmerie, and like any other they get sent anywhere in France, usually not where they want to go. Conversely there is no "Caribbean" peloton of gendarmes, and no "white" peloton either, just gendarmes.

Thanks to facebook, Russian trolls, and fallacious reasons, victim complex, the French Caribbean have gone "antivaxx", with many more deaths per capita from COVID than in metropolitan France as a result.

Incidentally I'm taking a long vacation in the region, for the first time, and I had planned to visit Martinique, Guadeloupe, Saint-Martin and Saint-Barthélemy. When I saw all this nonsensical violence I changed my plan and am visiting Cuba instead. Here is a place that should consider violence against its government...

I don't understand much of why it is an issue either way. I don't know what privileges Jamaica receives. Do their diplomats lose visiting Buckingham palace or something? I do think with Autarky becoming a fad again, there is long term benefit to keeping in the UK's good graces; but that is just a hunch of mine.

The idea they need a good constitution is a valid point. Time to get writing.

lightsaber wrote:

I don't understand much of why it is an issue either way. I don't know what privileges Jamaica receives. Do their diplomats lose visiting Buckingham palace or something? I do think with Autarky becoming a fad again, there is long term benefit to keeping in the UK's good graces; but that is just a hunch of mine.

The idea they need a good constitution is a valid point. Time to get writing.

If you take a more global view, the relationship with the UK went south when the UK fully joined the EU, the Commonwealth at that time was basically a very large trading group, its political influence was minimal.
Since Brexit, the UK has been attempting to "rekindle" its relationships with the Commonwealth nations to enhance / increase trade links, everyone's eyes are focused on the Royals and whatever political statements they and the locals choose to make, little attention is being paid to the trade representatives who are also on the trip, other than the "free press" coverage of the islands, trade is the primary potential benefit of these Royal visits.

Aesma wrote:

France is a centralized country. French Caribbean people are full French citizens, with exactly the same rights as me, born in the Paris' suburbs. Even some more rights, in fact. They vote for the national assembly and the president of the republic. They have free healthcare, free education. They can live and work anywhere in France and the EU.

Policing is a national matter, we have the national police and national gendarmerie. Plenty of blacks and north africans are police or gendarmerie, and like any other they get sent anywhere in France, usually not where they want to go. Conversely there is no "Caribbean" peloton of gendarmes, and no "white" peloton either, just gendarmes.

Thanks to facebook, Russian trolls, and fallacious reasons, victim complex, the French Caribbean have gone "antivaxx", with many more deaths per capita from COVID than in metropolitan France as a result.

Incidentally I'm taking a long vacation in the region, for the first time, and I had planned to visit Martinique, Guadeloupe, Saint-Martin and Saint-Barthélemy. When I saw all this nonsensical violence I changed my plan and am visiting Cuba instead. Here is a place that should consider violence against its government...

France is not a centralized country for its overseas territories. Some territories such as New Caledonia, French Polynesia or even Saint Pierre and Miquelon have more autonomy than French mainland departments. Even the French overseas departments have the possibility to adapt some laws to their local context, things that French mainland departments don't have. It does not mean that they have more rights, but the legal framework in which they exist is different from mainland departments. The French constitution have specific sections for its French overseas territories and departments - they are the only ones that can become fully independent if they wish - but France is keeping a firm grip on them as it fears losing its global influence on world affairs. For how long? FWI citizens feel much closer culturally to other Caribbean nations, South America and even to the US than to France or Europe. More and more young French Caribbeans prefer to study in either Martinique or Guadeloupe or other Caribbean universities, US or Canadian universities than European universities.

And Caribny is correct. The Gendarmes sent to the overseas territories are overwhelmingly Whites. But most police officers from the Police Nationale are locals. They are only in few cities The French government had always sent "CRS" and additional gendarmes, mostly Whites to "calm them down" when they rebel. The relationships between the Gendarmes and the local population are strained, as there have been several cases of racism, discrimination, brutality by Gendarmes against locals.

Yes. There have been violent protests in the FWI over the vaccine mandates. Many of the investigators have been arrested and tried with the support of the local population, who were tired of seeing roads being blocked and shops being burned. I think that the generalization you are making on French Caribbeans being anti-vax is based on the French mainland media narrative, not the reality, which is more complex. The same issue also exists in other Caribbean nations.

Did you leave France when the Gilet Jaunes were destroying shops and blocking roads in many French cities? Or was this nonsensical violence OK? I found odd that you prefer to go to Cuba, an autocratic country that uses nonsensical violence against its own citizens who dare to speak up against the government or the communist party. Who knows how many end up in jail, tortured or killed. Leaving the island a dream for many Cubans who cannot escape.

On Jamaica and the republican movement, Jamaica expressed its desire to become a republic well before the existence of BLM. Same for Barbados. I think many in the Caribbean don't feel close to the British Royal family anymore as it was the case decades ago. The royal family is being seen as celebrities who are detached from the realities of daily life. Many Caribbeans have just moved on. And this also the case for most Australians and Canadians. After the death of the Queen, I think that many countries will abandon the monarchy.

I'm surprised they don't visit these places more often. If I was William or Kate I wouldn't mind staying in the caribbean every winter.

The UK's monarchy is a last vestige of colonialism with the British Commonwealth countries like Jamaica. Jamaica has been an independent nation for almost 60 years. Much like Canada, it is still part of the Commonwealth which means technically but not practically citizens there are 'subjects' of the Monarchy which many don't like. It is much like how in the USA the BLM targeted with vandalism, tore down, forced local governments to remove statues, monuments and place names of slaveholders, political and military leaders of the Confederacy, leaders of racist groups like the KKK, politicians that supported repression of Black persons under 'Jim Crow' laws. They want those symbols that are very offensive to them gone. Even in the UK, the BLM did the same to those involved in the slave trade, colonialism, racism. Jamaica's citizens still have some economic, investment, certain judiciary ties to the UK they may not want to end but they want an end to having the UK Royalty still hanging around as offends them.

Jamaica was a lot more serious things to worry about other than the Queen.

I’d love to visit but Jamaica was recently ranked as one of the most dangerous places for LGBTQ.

CitizenJustin wrote:

I’d love to visit but Jamaica was recently ranked as one of the most dangerous places for LGBTQ.

It's dangerous for everyone. The only place worse in the Caribbean that I can think of is Haiti.

johns624 wrote:

CitizenJustin wrote:

I’d love to visit but Jamaica was recently ranked as one of the most dangerous places for LGBTQ.

It's dangerous for everyone. The only place worse in the Caribbean that I can think of is Haiti.

I’ve had family go there so I assume it’s safe within the resorts. Gay men are often brutally beaten and even murdered. It may be unsafe in general but let’s not pretend that a heterosexual man faces the same level of violence that gay people do in the Caribbean. I can’t even imagine what the trans community goes through.

I also think the Queen's passing will change things, but to be honest I can't understand how one can be a supporter of a monarchy...

yoni wrote:

France is not a centralized country for its overseas territories. Some territories such as New Caledonia, French Polynesia or even Saint Pierre and Miquelon have more autonomy than French mainland departments. Even the French overseas departments have the possibility to adapt some laws to their local context, things that French mainland departments don't have. It does not mean that they have more rights, but the legal framework in which they exist is different from mainland departments. The French constitution have specific sections for its French overseas territories and departments - they are the only ones that can become fully independent if they wish - but France is keeping a firm grip on them as it fears losing its global influence on world affairs. For how long? FWI citizens feel much closer culturally to other Caribbean nations, South America and even to the US than to France or Europe. More and more young French Caribbeans prefer to study in either Martinique or Guadeloupe or other Caribbean universities, US or Canadian universities than European universities.

And Caribny is correct. The Gendarmes sent to the overseas territories are overwhelmingly Whites. But most police officers from the Police Nationale are locals. They are only in few cities The French government had always sent "CRS" and additional gendarmes, mostly Whites to "calm them down" when they rebel. The relationships between the Gendarmes and the local population are strained, as there have been several cases of racism, discrimination, brutality by Gendarmes against locals.

Yes. There have been violent protests in the FWI over the vaccine mandates. Many of the investigators have been arrested and tried with the support of the local population, who were tired of seeing roads being blocked and shops being burned. I think that the generalization you are making on French Caribbeans being anti-vax is based on the French mainland media narrative, not the reality, which is more complex. The same issue also exists in other Caribbean nations.

I won't comment on what people think there as I don't know, but it doesn't seem to me that there is a strong independence movement. And yes I know there are some decisions taken locally, not always the best, like how control of water distribution was handed over and it got worse instead of better.

yoni wrote:

Did you leave France when the Gilet Jaunes were destroying shops and blocking roads in many French cities? Or was this nonsensical violence OK? I found odd that you prefer to go to Cuba, an autocratic country that uses nonsensical violence against its own citizens who dare to speak up against the government or the communist party. Who knows how many end up in jail, tortured or killed. Leaving the island a dream for many Cubans who cannot escape.

I was only talking about vacationing, although I'm considering leaving France, if an opportunity presents itself. Or not leaving exactly, but going to these territories, or Réunion, or the Pacific islands... The gilets jaunes started with 70% of support, I wasn't one of these supporters... I visit Cuba for its people not its government. I haven't met anyone supportive of the government...

ltbewr wrote:

The UK's monarchy is a last vestige of colonialism with the British Commonwealth countries like Jamaica. Jamaica has been an independent nation for almost 60 years. Much like Canada, it is still part of the Commonwealth which means technically but not practically citizens there are 'subjects' of the Monarchy which many don't like.

Small clarification: membership in the Commonwealth does not necessarily mean citizens are subjects of the monarchy. Many member nations do not have the Queen as Head of State.

flyguy89 wrote:

caribny wrote:

I can tell that you do not know nuance. I state FACTS. You may be angry at this. I simply state FACTS.

Not angry, I don’t really care…it’s up to Jamaica. Just trying to understand what it is you’re arguing for? I agree with you that the notion of Jamaicans having needed the American BLM movement to suddenly be aware of their own history is trite and US centric. It’s ultimately their government, they chose to make Elizabeth their head of state…it’s fully within Jamaica’s prerogative to remove her. I don’t see anyone arguing otherwise.

I am stating FACTS. YOU seem angry that Jamaica is moving on. This is something that Jamaicans knew that they should have done long ago, and did not change because it is not seen as being a matter of importance. Its Barbados, long derided as "Little England," that reminded Jamaicans that this is something that they should have fixed.

This is not a "thing" except for the royal family which was trying to use the Commonwealth to bolster an anachronism, and now some want to make this into some indication that Jamaicans are engaging in a hissy fit. Tell you what. Jamaicans are more interested in US presidential elections than about the goings on of the royal family, as that actually impacts there lives. This is a FACT. Now you can see this as anger or a hissy fit if you wish.

par13del wrote:

Rather than having discussions about the monarchy, the lack of debate in the Caribbean about the colonial system of governance is telling, most former colonies never threw out the colonial system of governance, never put constitutions in place that elevated the people, as a result corruption is rampant as the system protects the rulers, and the people for the most part try to get on without the government. When one considers the billions generated in tourism dollars in the region as an example, you have to wonder why so many countries are economic basket cases.
I am all for going republic, but not the way Barbados did, a new constitution should be drafted and voted on by the people, versus what took place at independence where draft constitutions were provided by the colonial master who did not even have a constitution, what they knew about was putting in place government institutions which controlled the people for mother England with local resources.

The only effect that the monarchy still has on some Caribbean governments is the Privy Council, which is the equivalent of the US Supreme Court, it is the court of final legal jurisdiction. In a lot of rulings they are an Activist Judiciary which has been good, bad and indifferent.

THIS is what concerns people in the Caribbean. Not a 95 year old woman and her dysfunction kids and grand kids. In fact it is my belief that Barbados' move to becoming a republic is more about avoiding these discussions by engaging in a distraction. What changed in Barbados?

Aesma wrote:

I read somewhere that ultimately the leadership of the commonwealth should evolve, without the queen/king as its head. Here it is : https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/prin ... -nd2wx2wn5

caribny wrote:

France tells the French Caribbean people what to do and command them to be silent if they complain, even when white gendarmes arrive from France to "manners" them when they get too boisterous.

France is a centralized country. French Caribbean people are full French citizens, with exactly the same rights as me, born in the Paris' suburbs. Even some more rights, in fact. They vote for the national assembly and the president of the republic. They have free healthcare, free education. They can live and work anywhere in France and the EU.

Policing is a national matter, we have the national police and national gendarmerie. Plenty of blacks and north africans are police or gendarmerie, and like any other they get sent anywhere in France, usually not where they want to go. Conversely there is no "Caribbean" peloton of gendarmes, and no "white" peloton either, just gendarmes.

Thanks to facebook, Russian trolls, and fallacious reasons, victim complex, the French Caribbean have gone "antivaxx", with many more deaths per capita from COVID than in metropolitan France as a result.


Incidentally I'm taking a long vacation in the region, for the first time, and I had planned to visit Martinique, Guadeloupe, Saint-Martin and Saint-Barthélemy. When I saw all this nonsensical violence I changed my plan and am visiting Cuba instead. Here is a place that should consider violence against its government...

Here is why French Caribbean people are told what to do. Decisions are made in Paris. The decision makers are predominantly people on the mainland. How many representatives does the French Antilles have? Are the issues in the Antilles the same as on the mainland? Antilleans have to accept what central gov't decides. France isnt a decentralized federation like the USA and Canada.


Have you done surveys to establish that French citizens of Caribbean and African (North and West) think that they receive the same treatment from the police as do white French citizens? Based on what I see on French24 I suspect not. And yes the whole world sees what is happening in France, France has the same issues of diversity that the UK, Canada and the USA, including all the feelings of exclusion linked to this.

I suggest that you understand that Cuba is "peaceful" only because that regime will shoot down those who protest. We saw the protests last year and we saw what happened. Maybe you might want to reconsider and understand that French Antilleans have the democratic rights that Cubans lack. I also suggest that we also saw violence at various times in Paris.

Aesma wrote:

I... I visit Cuba for its people not its government. I haven't met anyone supportive of the government...

You were planning to go to the French Caribbean and then decided to plan Cuba because of the violence that you perceive. I suggest that you go to St Maarten/Martin and see the difference between the Dutch and the French sides. You will discover that the engine for economic activity on that island is on the Dutch side. You might notice that the locals on the Dutch side are more involved in managing that side of the island than on the French side.

You might even hear the primarily English speaking locals on the French side complaining about language discrimination against them because English and not French is their native language. Of course you will argue that this is correct because St Martin is part of France and so French should be privileged over English, even if it isnt the first language of the locals. And then you make my point about how centralized France is.

You will not hear that from the locals on the Dutch side. Here is the difference. When Irma destroyed that island in 2017 the Dutch gov't asked the locals on that side if they needed help, and what sort of help they needed. On the French side Macron stated that he will build a "better" St Martin, most likely with minimal if any input from the locals.

I tell you the Dutch Caribbean islands have the best deal. The benefits of being linked to a powerful nation that can assist when they need it and usually leaves them alone to do as they wish, only exercising controls against waste and corruption. The US and French Caribbean islands do not have it like that. The UK ignores their territories, who also ignore them in kind, using their own currencies (Cayman/Bermuda) US$ (Turks and BVI) or the Eastern Caribbean $ (Anguilla and Montserrat). While a UK passport holder who is not a local has automatic entry into these territories they do NOT have automatic rights to employment.

caribny
Very interesting perspectives.
Thanks from someone from another former British colony that is being robustly challenged by reconciling the conflicting interests, and more importantly, the now very much increasingly intertwined history and perspectives of both our colonist and indigenous cultures.
Thank you.

yoni wrote:

[q


And Caribny is correct. The Gendarmes sent to the overseas territories are overwhelmingly Whites. But most police officers from the Police Nationale are locals. y.

Yes I was shocked in St Martin, a majority black island, to see the majority white gendarmes haughtily strutting around the streets of Marigot. There are real tensions between the local islanders and the central authorities in Paris on the French side. On the Dutch side they barely know that The Hague exists, directing their ire against the local politicians in Phillipsburg.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axXDZOlMI34

Not sure that the locals feel that they are equitably treated.