By ALICIA WALLACE

Year after year, the Progressive Liberal Party sours national holidays that commemorate major achievements of the Bahamian people by claiming ownership, taking up an ordinate amount of space, and attempting to make them partisan.

Moments in Bahamian history are reduced, again and again, to a political party that relies heavily on its history—a far cry from its current state and demonstrated values—to maintain its fanbase and try to attract others. Majority Rule Day, Labour Day, and Independence Day all suffer the consequences of a political party—and a government administration—that prioritises being credited for historic milestones over national celebration, as one people, and creating opportunities for young people to learn more contemporary history of The Bahamas and for residents to advocate for the realisation of the benefits those achievements should have brought.

It is a loss for everyone when any political party seeks to dominate important days in the calendar year or tries to downplay the national significance of these holidays—days of observance—which is the repeated loss of opportunities to build a collective spirit, respect for our history and the people who made their mark on it, names known and unknown, and foster a culture of action by the people to create the change we need.

On Labour Day, it would be appropriate to acknowledge the wins of the labour movement and raise awareness of and garner support for actions as prioritised by workers.

What issues still exist in the workplace? What are the issues that are emerging now as society significantly changes, often outpacing the systems in place in the workplace? What needs of workers remain unmet? Which conversations have been “tabled” and never considered again? What are the relatively small demands that can be championed and actioned?

Labour Day is political. It ought to be political. The issue is that it is made into a partisan mockery, used to gain points and, near to general elections, to gain votes or excite party followers without doing an ounce of work.

In response to a question about social movements at a time of “American global hegemony, neoliberal economic relations, militarised counterinsurgency at home, and racial ‘colour blindness,’” speaking to both the US and global political climate in 2020, Angela Davis said, “I suggest that we need movements that pay as much attention to popular political education as they pay to the mobilisations that have succeeded in placing police violence and mass incarceration on the national political agenda. What this means, I think, is that we try to forge an analysis of the current conjuncture that draws important lessons from the relatively recent campaigns that have pushed our collective consciousness beyond previous limits. In other words, we need movements that are prepared to resist the inevitable seductions of assimilation.”

This is, of course, focused on the state of the US, yet we can take the recommendation that is at the root of the response. Popular political education is requisite to sustained organising.

People need to have an understanding of the conditions we live within, beyond the individual experience. Workers’ demands are not about the realities of one worker, the inequalities in one workplace, the violence of one employer, or the instability of one industry. It is about the ways that workers are regarded as a class and the understanding (and acceptance) of what is and is not considered work, what is and is not considered productive, what is and is not considered valuable, how value is assigned to tasks and the people who do them, who does and does not share in the profit, and what is and is not a safe environment.

A strong, sustainable labour movement spreads across industries, generations, and income levels, relying on political education to connect people. When systemic issues are identified and their characteristics known, the analysis of capitalism, racism, sexism, and xenophobia and their impact on labour is necessary, productive, instructive, and motivating.

The conversation is no longer about remote and hybrid in isolation, but about the commitment to systems that demand that employers or their agents lord over workers, controlling their tasks, the way they perform their tasks, and what they do beyond their tasks should they have the misfortune of appearing idle for five seconds.

This is not solely a drive toward greater productivity, but a breaking of will and conditioning of the worker to accept the dominance of another which is rooted in “isms” so many try desperately to ignore, pretending they are inconsequential in this place.

Collective consciousness does not just come about one day. It has to be built. It has to be nurtured. It comes from an understanding of history and the fact that the strides made in the 50s, 60s, and 70s were never meant to be the final steps. They were not the end of struggle, and they were not the last wins. They were always foundational, meant to be built upon by people who have information about what was done and how, now equipped with greater access to information and new technology to enable deeper analysis, more direct demands, and targeted actions to apply pressure to decision-makers.

On a podcast in 2022, Davis said: “I’m aware of the ways in which, especially in capitalist societies, there’s a tendency to focus on the individual at the expense of allowing people to understand that history unfolds, not as a consequence of the actions and the words of great individuals, but rather as a consequence of people coming together, joining hands, and uniting with their differences—not across their differences, but with their differences—in a quest to create more freedom and more happiness in the world.”

One of the stumbling blocks in any movement for change is the inability to work with differences. There is the refusal to acknowledge differences, there is the reluctant agreement to work together despite differences, and there is the alienation of people who are different in particular ways.

Working with differences is not easy. It requires, to an extent, solidarity. It demands that everyone face their own privilege and acknowledge the violence that others face as a result of the hatred of difference.

Standing together is a requirement. Across fields of work and across party lines, we must see the possibility of unity and the responsibility we have to build it. We must acknowledge it as a requirement for progress.

We have more common with one another than we do with the beneficiaries of capitalism and (low-)wage labour, and the differences among us are what show us all of the systems at play so we can develop tactics that target them all and benefit us all. We must submit ourselves to the learning process and be bold enough to engage in learning in public ways, enabling others to learn with us, grow with us, and join us in creating discomfort for those who are far too comfortable with the separation and the profit it drives to them every day.