Episode Transcript
[00:00:01] Speaker A: The best insight, instant feedback, accountability. The all new talk radio Freedom 106.5.
[00:00:08] Speaker B: We have another interview starting at this point in time. He's been with us before. Let's welcome back to our program.
Our guest, Doctor David Mohamed. Good morning to you, and welcome to our program.
[00:00:23] Speaker A: Good morning. Good morning, Satish. Good morning to all the listeners.
[00:00:26] Speaker B: Nice to have you here this morning. I know we're here to speak about something in, in particular, mental genocide, the psychological traps of mental imprisonment and mental slavery. That's quite a discussion, but it'd be remiss of me not to get your opinion on the most interesting discussion that we've been having since yesterday. All of this morning on the front page of the Guardian newspaper, the prime minister steel banter replaced on coat of arms. Columbus ships out. Let's get your opinion on that development.
[00:01:01] Speaker A: Right. Well, to be honest with you, this is something that I have been openly criticizing ever since I started doing public lectures back in 1992.
I have always made the analogy, for example, that you would not see on the american dollar an image of Osama bin Laden.
You will not see on the british pound an image of Hitler, and you will not see on any national emblem or coat of arms or government seal or national currency an image that represents those who committed either genocide, enslavement, or any other form of atrocities against the people.
So from 32 years ago, I would have asked the question, why do we still have the three ships CHristopher Columbus on our coat of arms?
Any social studies course, caribbean studies course, any university degree or basic educational program on the history and heritage of Trinidad and Tobago, teaches us of the crimes against humanity that were committed by Christopher Columbus and his people on the indigenous population of the Caribbean.
I mean, Christopher Columbus himself, after his third voyage, which is the one where he stumbled across Trinidad, was considered not, I mean, we would have considered, or I should say we should have considered him a criminal based on the amount of indigenous Amerindians, peoples that he killed. But even his own country, Spain, considered him a criminal after his third voyage, where he was imprisoned again for atrocities that he committed and crimes of mass murder and torture that he committed on the third voyage. And then the authorities in Spain permitted him to come out of prison for the fourth voyage, which was in 1503 to 1504. So it's not just the atrocities that we ourselves on this side of the world have identified, but even they over there have acknowledged, I mean, the traveling priest, the catholic priest who was the record keeper in Christopher Columbus's crew, Bartholomew de las Casas. In his diary, he wrote of the Amerindians testing the sharpness of their swords by cutting off the head of amerindian children. This is Columbus and his people, that they would play a sport where they would try to throw a spear straight through the body of an Amerindian. There was excessive rape in the Hispaniola region known as Dominican Republic. They would cut off the hands of those who did not collect enough gold dust as laborer. All of this is documented, so why would we have representation of that on our national coat of arms? And to be honest, what bugs me more when I first hear the news is I just knew, based on the nature of our entire, you know, political arrangement, that there will be those who would oppose this. And that's frightening to me. I know. I mean, I just literally saw the article in the newspapers.
But I know, based on how our society is, that it will become an argument. And that's frightening because I don't think any of the Jews will argue as to whether or not Hitler should be on their national emblem after he oversaw the Holocaust. And let me just top that off to say so. I'm currently in Jamaica once again, as I have been since 2016.
For the Marcus Garvey celebrations.
On Saturday, which was my birthday and also the birthday of Marcus Garvey, I was honored to be a part of renaming ceremony at the mayor's office, the headquarters of the regional corporation of Kingston and St. Andrew Municipality.
And the entire council chamber was packed to capacity and they took a vote to rename the main hall where the Kingston and St. Andrew council meet. All the councillors, the aldermen, the mayor, the CEO of the regional corporation, everyone gathered and they took a vote, a bipartisan vote, interestingly, because the last time I was actually in that chamber was ten years ago, when Minister Louis Farrakhan was visiting Jamaica and they gave him the keys to the city and so on.
Ten years later, here you have all these councillors on both sides of an even, well, I shouldn't say even more hostile political divide, but a very hostile political divide. You have the PNP and the JLP, and all councillors unanimously agreed in the vote to change the name of the chamber to the Marcus Garvey hall.
And I was so honored to be a part of that on Saturday.
And I have to confess that in that I'm thinking, if this was Trinidad, would there have been a unanimous agreement for something like that?
Cause Marcus Garvey, of course, is the first national hero of Jamaica. I don't think in intranetat, is it that half of the politicians will say yay, and the other half would say nay, simply because of, you know, the divisive political culture that we have. So, again, I haven't heard much reactions as yet on the steel pan to replace the three chips, but I mean, my reaction to it, just like with African Emancipation Day. Why have we taken so long?
[00:08:42] Speaker B: An interesting perspective, and going back to history, of course, it gives us a clearer view of some of what people think on a matter like this. You're here this morning to speak to us about the psychological traps of mental imprisonment and mental slavery.
Explain this discussion to our listeners and what it entails.
[00:09:12] Speaker A: Right. Well, basically, this was a theme that we had established during the emancipation period, because I am of the view, in particular, that when it comes to emancipation, and I spoke about the same thing at the main event yesterday, here in Jamaica, there tends to be a kind of cosmetic consciousness where we, in particular, as people of african descent, celebrate our heritage partially by wearing african clothes.
There are a lot of festivals and ceremonies, a lot of cutting of ribbons and unveiling of plaques.
And it's also en vogue in late July, early August, to make statements of empowerment for the african community and maybe throw out a donation here or there.
But after that period is over, it's very rare. As a matter of fact, it's completely avoided, almost taboo, to hear that same kind of representation for the same ideas that were discussed during the emancipation period.
It's very rare to see a continuation of that frame of mind. So it's like it's just a calendar event for us to think that way, and then for the rest of the eleven and a half months for the year, we just return to, again, this state of mental imprisonment. Now, regarding that, mental imprisonment is a condition that describes one being completely convinced of their own inability, inadequacy, incompetence, and a lack of capability to achieve and accomplish any outlined aims, objectives or goals.
Many of us are living in a state of mental imprisonment because we're simply going through the motions of life for basic survival. Now, the next step of it, though, is that when someone is a victim of mental imprisonment, and then another person takes advantage of the mental imprisonment of another person and capitalizes on their mental imprisonment state and actually profits from another person's mental imprisonment state, then that mental imprisonment becomes mental genocide.
Mental genocide, sorry, that becomes mental slavery.
Okay, so if one person is in a state of complete conviction on their own inability, it's mental imprisonment. But if someone takes advantage of that person, than is mental slavery.
The combination of mental imprisonment and mental slavery, where there is a complete inactivity, lack of movement, failure to grow and develop and improve, then that becomes mental death.
That can happen to one person.
But when a condition of mental death sweeps and plagues through an entire community, then it becomes mental genocide.
So it goes from mental imprisonment. One individual who has absolutely no kind of individual self confidence or self esteem, or what's called in psychology, self efficacy to elevate their social status, that is taken advantage of. The mental imprisonment becomes mental slavery. That condition pervades to a state of total social stagnation, which is mental death. But when it happens to an entire population, it's mental genocide. Now, when we examine that on the backdrop of many of these conversations about emancipation, and then we come out of August and go into September and we, again, don't own land, don't own our own homes, don't own our own businesses, and don't support the businesses that we do own, the few, that's mental genocide. And then we wait for eleven and a half months again to put on african clothes, cut ribbons, unveil plaques, rename items, and engage in the drumming, the dancing and the festivities.
[00:14:52] Speaker B: What, what would promote or foster this mental imprisonment that you speak of?
[00:15:02] Speaker A: It's a continuation of the same hierarchy of enslavement which remained dominant during colonialism, which remained also through independence and republican status, where once more, just like for emancipation, we substituted emblems and symbols for real substance and economic reality. It's economic bondage.
So after 1962, we had our own national flag, our national colors, our watchwords, we sang a national anthem. We have coat of arms and we recite a national pledge.
And then on various occasions, we don ourselves in red, white and black and express national pride.
Unfortunately, not so much for the Olympics, for this last session, which is a whole other discussion on its own.
And then for us in particular, the african population, this ceremonial identification of ourselves as nationals or citizens of this newly created entity of Trinidad and Tobago, which is now 62 years old, that has been a substitute for land ownership and business entrepreneurship. Okay, so we would be the most patriotic on a cosmetic level.
But you can't be a. You cannot be a country unless you have territory.
You. There are many countries in the world that don't have a president.
They don't have a prime minister, they don't have a congress or a parliament, they don't have a national council. They have all different kinds of variations of structure of administrations within societies. But the one thing that every country must have is territory.
Land.
If and if you cannot be a country without land, or territory, then that would imply that our status as citizenship is also varied by privilege depending on whether we are land owners or not.
So how could we. How could we be equal citizens if I have to pay you to live in Trinidad?
That's not equality.
[00:18:02] Speaker B: Let's take the discussion, okay.
[00:18:05] Speaker A: There's complacency in it. Yes.
[00:18:07] Speaker B: Okay. Let's take the discussion to a local perspective.
We're talking about mental imprisonment and we're talking about a structure that has worked against a group of people and all those things.
And the discussion here is about the black community, that the lecture is focused on the black community and some of the problems that they have and that they've been confronted with and some of the reasons as to why things are the way they are. And of course, we're talking about the psychological traps and the mental imprisonment and the mental slavery in Trinidad and Tobago.
And this is probably to get your opinion on how politics influences this thing or can or cannot influence it. We have a situation where since our independence we have been majority governed by a party that claims to represent the black interest.
And that's the PNM.
[00:19:10] Speaker A: Which party is that?
[00:19:12] Speaker B: That's the PNM. Because the PNM has. Has said, well, maybe I'm putting it across as wrong.
[00:19:18] Speaker A: Can you.
I beg to differ there.
[00:19:22] Speaker B: Let me rephrase.
[00:19:23] Speaker A: Even though. No, but once again, even though there might be this perception in the minds of some that the P and M represents black interests, I don't think you can show me hardly any statements made, hardly any statements made in the last 62 years by that party, okay.
Claims that they are seeking african peace of Lee. My perception of it is definitely not that at all. As a matter of fact, if we were to single out an ethnic group that has benefited from that party's policies, we can say either all groups have benefited. Yes, there have been one or two moments, particularly under Doctor Eric Williams and maybe Patrick Manning, that would have benefited the african community. But I think more than anything else, the policy positions of that party have benefited the syrian community.
[00:20:37] Speaker B: Okay.
[00:20:39] Speaker A: I think anyone who takes a look at that would see that clearly. Yes, they look black. I mean, it's african person as far as the ethnic identity of the individuals. But I don't. I think it's highly inaccurate to suggest that the party seeks the best interests of the black community.
[00:21:02] Speaker B: Well, that's, that's.
[00:21:03] Speaker A: I mean, to the contrary is the black communities that have suffered the most, been the most underfunded, disenfranchised, politically neglected, rejected and abandoned, used as a political football, very few occasional visits in between. No, that's, that's a completely wrong statement.
The black community doesn't have the power to summon the leadership of that party into their community for a meeting. But we know that the syrian community does.
Members of the syrian community simply have to make a phone call and say, come here now, and the government would respond, you know that. I know that. I think the whole country knows that.
So it's, that's a completely flawed perception.
[00:21:58] Speaker B: Okay?
[00:21:58] Speaker A: Unless one is assuming that because they are africana, that they will seek the best interest of african people. And that has not historically been a consistent experience at all.
[00:22:11] Speaker B: Well, let me, let me take it from a different angle.
[00:22:14] Speaker A: No, but please give me examples. I'm asking you to please give me examples of what you're saying. And if not, then you should withdraw this statement because it would remain out there as a misnomer, as false or misleading information.
[00:22:31] Speaker B: Let me accept your position. Mine was wrong that the PNM has not made any sort of statement to suggest that they are seeking the interests of black people, of the african community.
Is it correct to say that the african community supports the PNM or is seen by and large as supportive of the P and Mtainde?
[00:22:55] Speaker A: Yeah, but all, all of our quantitative and qualitative research that is extracted out of our every five year election experiences shows that, right? In the same way that the indian community has always supported the UNC or the BLP, right? That's just a social fact.
[00:23:22] Speaker B: If we are to accept that social fact, and you're talking about mental imprisonment, you're talking about systems being in place that do not allow the community to prosper the same way others do. And you're speaking about the party being beholden to one group or the other who is supposed to look after the african interest.
[00:23:47] Speaker A: African people are supposed to look after african interests in the same way that indian people are supposed to look after indian interests in the same way that chinese people are supposed to look after chinese interests. And a government, regardless of what their racial background or ethnicity is, need to take the national responsibility to seek the best interests of the collective all peoples combined.
This, however, has not been the case because part of our political culture has involved the convincing of the african population that somehow there's some liberation within politics. And it is as if we have a renewed yet unrealistic anticipation that the next five years is going to be different to the last five years.
So we have been the only ones who have consistently been disillusioned in cycles into believing that the problems that we have now will be eliminated by voting.
And this is why I use the term.
You know, for the most part, I think that politicians, when they have people under them who support them, who think that way, they don't dispel the myth and say, wait a minute, hold on.
We want you to stand on your own 2ft, do for self support, your own businesses, you know, aspire to become landowners and entrepreneurs. No, that kind of dependency is encouraged.
Because do you realize, in order for electoral politics to work for, and I'll use a strong term here, the perpetrators of oppression, it's mandatory that you have a significant proportion of the population illiterate, because unless they're illiterate, they will not support you.
A significant segment of the population must be kept in a state of perpetual hopelessness and learned helplessness in order for that system to function, you have to keep it that way, because if you begin to liberate the minds of the masses and take us out of that state of mental imprisonment, mental slavery, mental death and mental genocide, then your system would collapse.
So this is encouraged. It's perpetuated.
I was in an occasion about five weeks ago in Trinidad, and I was listening to a government minister who was there, and he was giving examples of people who come to his office, right?
And he was saying, imagine people come to my office and they ask me to fix their roof, and people come to my office and they ask me for school books, and people come to my office and they ask me for money to send the children to school. And people come to my office and ask me to help them with this and help them with that.
And while listening to that discourse, I thought to myself, but wait a minute, you all promote a narrative to somehow indoctrinate the voter to think that those expectations will be fulfilled if you do get in office.
And then when you do get in office, you turn around and betray the trust of those who were hopeful of the change that your authority will bring.
And that is done deliberately, because if that sentiment were expressed before an election, then the results wouldn't be as we see them.
And it's also mandatory that the general population has short memories on a lot of things, because it's as if, again, remember, there are heavy, very heavy financial investments every five years for these election campaigns and so on.
And it's almost like we have a collective amnesia that we forget about the betrayal and the disloyalty and the rejection and the abandonment of marginalized communities, and then even worse than that, blaming the communities for their own problems when there's this. I mean, listen, politicians should stop campaigning on crime.
They should stop because everyone has this crime plan. Crime solution. Again, we were making this point right here in Jamaica over the weekend. It's an illusion to think that the solution to the crime problem is more police, more soldiers, more joint patrols, more boots on the ground, more guns in hand, more equipment, more technology, more police vehicles and bigger prisons. No, that's like putting a plaster on a gunshot wound or spraying perfume on a garbage bag.
The way to solve the crime problem is through social justice, the education system, youth development initiatives, promotion of the culture, the proper development of the infrastructure in many of these broken down and dilapidated communities. You fix all of those things and ensure that there's equal distribution of the wealth and resources of the state. The crime problem will nose dive.
But again, let's get more police, let's have more patrols, let's give more traffic tickets, please.
Yeah, so again, it's an illusion of visibility. That's not helping the situation.
[00:30:41] Speaker B: Yeah, doctor Mommy. We're gonna have to leave our conversation. We're out of time. A couple messages to take us up to the top, but I'd like to have some more conversations on this mental slavery, how we treat with it, what it entails, and some of the other things that we're talking about, wider societal problems and everything else. My pleasure speaking with you this morning. Nice to have you, as always.
[00:31:00] Speaker A: Yes, it was a pleasure and thank you so very much. And I really appreciate very much your tone and style of conducting these discussions.
Very refreshing.
[00:31:11] Speaker B: We'll speak again. Thank you.
[00:31:12] Speaker A: Once again, the best insight, instant feedback, accountability. The all new talk radio Freedom 106.5.
