In a previous article, I explored the electoral performance of the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) for the 21st century to offer some insight into future elections. Based on the electoral swing required and historical performances, there is a possibility that the DLP may not return to office until the 2037 period. The article also highlighted reasons behind the DLP’s weakening performance evidenced by the fact that on average the party received only 4 of every 10 votes cast since 2003. This has partially been the case since the DLP has not been sufficiently agile to meet the political realities of a modern Barbados to capture the coalition of the winning.
After independence, Barbados emerged out of the ravishes of colonialism and it was this period where the DLP became a victim of its successes by laying the socio-economic foundations in the 1960s and 70s. During this period, the DLP was credited for being socially progressive with people-centred policy interventions, notably in public education and social welfare which provided wide scale benefits for the working poor. It was at this time where the first phase of post-independence politics emerged. These early investments into everyday Barbadians bore fruit which changed the socio-political and electoral realities in Barbados.
Despite some setbacks, these changes created the conditions for the second phase in politics with the rise of a sizable black middle class particularly in the early and mid 2000s. This second phase was supported by a stabilised economy, the expansion of industries such as tourism, financial services and real estate, and increased access to tertiary education and banking capital. With a growing middle class, additional political and electoral expectations were placed on the two major political parties. Despite the continued and longstanding bread and butter issues such as poverty, unemployment, and social welfare, issues emerging from Barbados’ electorate became more diverse.
This second phase has given way to the third phase with the rise and advancement of identity politics that has influenced Barbadian culture and politics. Socio-culturally and civic-politically, there is now greater sensibility and sensitivity around the politics of identity. Whether it be gender, nationality, sexuality, race, religion, ethnicity and others, the electorate has again placed additional expectations on the two major political parties based on identity.
This third phase is now being complemented by an emerging fourth phase fuelled by digital technology, social media and big data. These have turned the electorate into one large data set that can be studied, influenced and predicted. This has raised the important question of the “how” of elections, not simply the who or the what. Therefore, electorally, Barbados has become a balancing act of four phases that create the coalition of the winning.
Whether in fact or perception, the problem the DLP confronts is that by and large, the DLP has taken refuge in phase one, whereas, the BLP has taken up real estate in all four phases.
Although the DLP continues to be a mass based political party as it captured an average of 40 percent of all votes cast since 2003, it is evident that it must embrace the four phases while not losing sight of its founding appeal. Therefore, the question before the DLP remains, what is at the base of its inability to sufficiently balance these four phases. This is particularly important as additional phases in politics are likely to emerge with time. Until the DLP can resolve this question, we can expect that Barbados will continue to be BLP country.
Devaron Bruce is a political scientist.
