A Petition

Above, a clipping from Libération (Feb 18) with pictures taken of barricades in Pointe-à-Pitre.

If I haven't written about politics since the first days of the strike, it is not because things have settled down. Indeed, the strike eventually lasted a total of 44 days, bringing the entire island to a complete standstill, and its economic and political leaders to its knees. It also resulted in one unfortunate death: a strike leader shot dead by armed youths in a dangerous housing project. The agreement, signed by Elie Domota and the Prefect Nicolas Desforges at the end of the strike, would be named after the strike leader, Jacques Bino. Officially, with the signing of this agreement, the strike was over. But the movement continues. LKP continues to put pressure on MEDEF, the business union, and other large companies who have yet to sign the agreement. LKP also moves to ensure that the conditions of agreement are applied. And so, it goes on.

I have not written about this mainly because I do not feel qualified. There are so many details, so many circumstances which make the politics here difficult to understand. More importantly, though, I admit that I am rather sick of it all. I could barely put up with one week of strike; I was lucky enough to have been away for the majority of it. Guadeloupe is far from being my country, and these are not my people. This is not my fight. I'd rather write about things that interest me, things that are closer to my heart.

Left, Elie Domota and the LKP take over the General Council chamber (FranceAntilles).

However, yesterday a petition was published in France-Antilles which drew my interest. The petition was entitled, Soutenons les luttes sociales mais défendons les principes démocratiques, We support social battles but defend democratic principles. It was written in response to LKP having taken over the opening meeting of the General Council last Thursday. I felt compelled to write about it because I share the opinions expressed in the petition. The tactics used by this movement have far too much in common with those used by common thugs. It is reassuring to know that Guadeloupeans are not ready to sacrifice principles for what is, essentially, monetary gain.

Below, a quick translation of the petition:

We support social battles but defend democratic principles
Something very serious happened on Thursday May 7th in Basse-Terre, something that we, Guadeloupean citizens, cannot tolerate and which must be brought to light.

The President of the General Council, Jacques Gillot, had decided to assemble the elected officials of Guadeloupe and numerous players of civil society, including Elie Domota and LKP. As stated in the invitation sent to all parties, Mr. Gillot was hoping “to give the floor to the citizens,” inviting them to “build a Guadeloupean societal project together” – words which seemed to take into account criticisms often made against elected officials. The President of the General Council stated that a method would be drawn up together. He added that he was seeking a more ‘participatory’ democracy.

We, the signatories of this declaration, do not all agree with the political alternatives of Presidents Gillot and Lurel. However, whatever one might think of the appropriateness of such an assembly – of its political, even politician, aims – we are fervent in our solemn affirmation that the democratically elected political representatives of the Guadeloupean people have every right to draw up, as they intend, their political strategy. To refuse them this right is to undermine the democratic liberties of the Guadeloupean people. And yet, this is exactly what has happened in Basse-Terre: an act whose fundamental nature consisted of refusing elected officials the right to exercise their mandate. But this was subtle. It was subtle because this act disguised itself to avoid being correctly identified. It was an attack on democracy which resembled an insurrection. The disguise? A particular use of time and order: acting before the opening of the assembly and pretending to put the chamber in order (a supposed symbolic occupation) to escape suspicion of undemocratic actions. This tumultuous occupation, with intimidation of administrative personnel and the moving of chairs and equipment necessary for the organization of the meeting constituted a de facto exclusion of the participants. A normal debate being all but impossible under such conditions, the cancellation of the Assembly by the President of the General Council was unavoidable.

LKP is playing with fire on a powder keg. Invading the General Council, the emblematic place for the exercise of democracy since the abolition of slavery, and declaring a "notice" to elected officials, definitely constitutes a reconsideration of the electoral legitimacy. We can only bring attention to the ambiguity of the term notice: a warning or a threat?

The leaders of LKP justify themselves by declaring that they are the people, that it is the streets that govern and admit that they want to replace representative democracy by direct democracy under the pretext that the former is “out of order.” Even if suffrage alone does not constitute a democracy –certainly insufficient - it is a prerequisite and necessary. The leading question that we pose to LKP: What right? The defense of workers should in no case be detrimental to democracy. When LKP decides to invade the General Council under the pretext that democracy is “out of order,” LKP grant themselves a right with which the sovereign people have not entrusted them. This is a use of might. Believing that the representative democracy is “out of order” is an opinion. We can share that opinion or not. Invading the General Council is an act that calls for qualification. Committing the act in authorizing oneself his opinion only is dangerous to democracy. Carelessly confusing the mob with the people, pretending to represent the people without mediation or any collectively drawn and approved process, this is what seems to us very serious. LKP's notebook of demands is not the Constitution of Guadeloupe.

Many of us supported the social demands expressed by LKP, and today still, the main demands of workers are legitimate. However, with this unfortunate event in Basse-Terre, a social and societal demand supported by the majority of Guadeloupeans has become a political posture of the LKP. This posturing plays with the fundamental principles of democracy and we, Guadeloupean citizens concerned about the positive evolution of our country, whatever our individual political choices, are united in declaring that this game is dangerous. It constitutes a veiled reconsideration of these democratic principles.

Therefore, a firm clarification is necessary. It is all the more necessary because this reconsideration, disguised, was put forward in the chamber of the General Council. We declare ourselves to be profoundly attached to the democratic principles that must structure public life, the exercise of citizenship, all things for which our ancestors fought. Not only do these principles alone allow for a constructive and peaceful debate at the heart of Guadeloupean society, but more importantly, the very survival of that society.

For us, democracy is as much the freedom to express all opinions – including minority opinions –, public debate, political representation expressed by the vote (what is called representative democracy), as the right to demonstrate our dissatisfaction in the street. But social power legitimately demonstrated in the street – however successful – that can positively reinforce the political choice of elected officials, cannot take the place of political power, unless, of course, the conditions of a democratic political life are not fulfilled, which is not the case in Guadeloupe today. Otherwise, we enter into a rationale where the charismatic authority of the leader or the group overcomes that of common law.

In conclusion, even if we recognize the right of LKP to further its demands, without a doubt legitimate, we firmly condemn his double pretentions:

1. his pretension to portray himself and only himself as the people, all people, and thus to speak in its name;
2. his pretension in holding power coming directly from the street, thus disqualifying political representation and consequently denying the legitimacy of the vote.

These two pretensions are heavy with all the excesses, including those that would turn us towards the deadly cycle of violence and civil war or serious confrontations between Guadeloupeans. Is this in the interest of Guadeloupe? Most certainly no!

Because we support the social battles while being firm on the fundamental principles of democracy in our country, we are want urgently to shed light on the gravity of the events of Basse-Terre.