Freakonomics, Crime and Trinidad and Tobago
Because I'm still waiting to get a bunch of mail due to this year's strike, I ended up in local bookstores looking for something to read. As it happened, I came across Freakonomics [Revised and Expanded]: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything, which I picked up at Ishmael M. Khan in Gulf City while looking for a stapler that I still need. I'd glimpsed it here and there on the web, and thought the premise was interesting. It seemed to fit the recent subgenre along the lines of Gladwell's Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make A Big Difference, by Malcolm Gladwell, which I found to be an outstanding book that bordered on simplification of chaos theory on 'open' systems. There seem to be a lot of books these days based on the 'butterfly on the other side of the world' phenomenon, which stands to reason since 10 years ago the butterflies were all the rage in mathematics. So it is with exciting new theories. The acid test, though, is in the reality.
In reading Freakonomics so far - and this I have done between bouts of sweat on the land - I've been full of smiles. My own philosophy on looking at issues seems to be similar to that of Levitt, where the easiest answer with the data available isn't always the right answer. Digging deeper brings up all manner of gems, be it in looking at a software problem or when dealing with tenants on land. There are so many ways to look at the same thing, so many issues that are related and yet are ignored because of the blinders associated with unique perspectives. As Chief Seattle once wrote:
Man does not weave this web of life. He is merely a strand of it. Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself.
With that in mind, I found it intriguing that early in the book that the authors brought up crime in the 1990s in the United States. It was, as I recall, pretty bad - I was there for some snapshots of it in the late 80s and during the 90s. Suddenly, crime fell in the United States and many things were seen as contributing factors to all of this. However, the authors point out something interesting and thought provoking about the fall of crime in the 1990s within the introduction of the book:
...Like the proverbial butterfly that flaps its wings on one continent and eventually causes a hurricane on another, Norma McCorvey dramatically altered the course of events without intending to. All she had wanted was an abortion. She was a poor, uneducated, unskilled, alcoholic, drug-using twenty year old woman who had already given up two children for adoption and now, in 1970, found herself pregnant again. But in Texas, as in all but a few states at the time, abortion was illegal. McCorvey's cause came to be adopted by people far more powerful than she. They made her the lead plaintiff in a class-action seeking to legalize abortion...
Levitt's premise is that this had a lot to do with the shrinking of the pool of potential criminals - the link theory being that people who grow up in adversity are more likely to go into a life of crime. The latter theory is plausible when one considers that the number of crime related options versus non-crime related options for people in adversity are implicitly skewed toward crime. It doesn't mean that all people in adversity are going to turn toward crime. I've always believed that people are as good as their options, and I believe in better options - so this is a pretty easy sell. It still doesn't mean that all of this is 100% right, but it does have a good back beat.
What does this have to do with crime in Trinidad and Tobago? Would an increase in abortions help? While based on the behavior of some people I might agree abortions should be practiced more often, I do not fall into the camp that thinks that crime itself will be solved in the same manner in Trinidad and Tobago. But the thought of digging deeper toward the root persists. And the root of my perspective remains that people are as good as their options, and that broken windows should be fixed not just by government but by communities and - most importantly - individuals. Be it picking up a piece of garbage or moving a large stone off of the road. For a community to be cared for, it has to care. And sometimes, such as in the case of abortion, care sometimes means going against some beliefs to assist the greater good. Conventional wisdom must sometimes be swept aside to allow a community to grow in a positive way, especially when options are girded too tight around individuals, communities and yes - government.
So why is there such an issue with Crime in Trinidad and Tobago? I'm sure I don't know, but what I do know is that all the government's efforts have deteriorated like the road in front of the Technical Institute on the way into San Fernando. The road, as it is, is a study in topography more than anything else simply because of a lack of drainage under it. The answer to this, for decades, has been to simply add more pitch to the surface. I believe the road is about 6 feet deep by now, but it still isn't fixed because water flows under it. The level of thinking that cannot fix that road demonstrates why crime persists.
When rubbish trucks (garbage trucks, my American friends) are seen picking up garbage during heavy traffic hours in the midday sun instead of the early morning, we see why people start driving aggressively. When we see people blocked by dueling trucks on the highway, we can see why the shoulder is being used to overtake. When we see the coastline of Trinidad and Tobago more permeable than the membrane of a newborn's lungs, we can understand where illegal guns and drugs come from. When we realize that Trinidad and Tobago are islands and yet the National Defence Force, a ground based unit, has more resources than the Trinidad and Tobago Coast Guard, we see the folly of government attempts to curb smuggling. The fighting of symptoms persists, but the cure of the disease is seen as largely irrelevant by the powers that be and the politicians that they pay.
I've read about bad police, corrupt police, and so forth - but I've never seen it, and I've had the good fortune to have a great discussion with a South Oropouche Constable about using satellite imagery, such as Google Earth, to establish routes and keep an eye on recent developments in an area. There are smart people in the police force. Why are they tethered? And why, if they years ago had GPS, do they smirk when asked about the GPS that they are supposed to have?
No, crime remains a problem in Trinidad and Tobago. The priests will say that it is a lack of family values and spirituality. Police will say that they need more resources, victims will say that they need more or better police, and politicians will blame each other. Yet at the end of the day, crime in Trinidad and Tobago seems only to demonstrate how the larger community tries to solve problems, looking for the silver bullet to destroy the soucoyant of society. There is no silver bullet. There are broken windows to be fixed - attention to the small things which affect the larger things. There is an issue of approaching problems in a comprehensive way without uttering the word 'comprehensive' in a mind numbing fashion.
And this, you see, is why crime persists in Trinidad and Tobago: The problem is not being seen for what it is, and those with opinions argue instead of finding the common ground between their ideas.

Nice post!
Nice post. Not many can write so nicely. To write is an art. Many writers have this talent as an inborn quality. For some of them, having great writing accessories can help. For eg, take a look at http://www.apassionforpens.co.uk/
Why crime?
I like to look back into the past for answers to the present. I find some events significant. The massacre at Sangre Grande, the Cedula de Poblacion, the capitulation by Don Jose Maria Chacon, the agreement between Churchill and Roosevelt during the Second World War over some destroyers, the Concordat document of 25th December 1960 between John Donaldson and Count Finbar Ryan. Agreements that happened out of reach and without the knowledge of the ordinary people, between the rich and powerful.
The massacre at Sangre Grande and the subsequent herding up of the indigenous natives into what was basically a concentration camp in Arima, laid the foundation for a relationship between church and state based on murder. If the church not only did not defend the native population but actually abused them and cried out for vengance for the murders at San Raphael, who in the society would stand for the lowest members of the society? That they tied themselves together with the state in complicity over the massacre and subsequent displacement of the natives, meant that going forward neither church nor state could ever be free of one another. An unholy partnership was born. Its effects are still felt today.
The Cedula introduced foreign settlers into the equation. But in order to tempt the French, large concessions were made to them. Basically, the French landowners were given rights to their own feudal plantations, where their word was law and they had the power over life and death. Not good news for the slaves. Again, a relationship was set up that has consequences today. Massa day is still not done. It just looks different now.
The capitulation cemented the church and state together against the new overlords, the British. The Brits brought not only their culture and language but also their religion. To survive, the Roman Catholic Church dug in their heels and circled their wagons against this threat. English as a language never really took hold until the later parts of the 19th century. We still talk English using French constructs like 'it have', 'it making hot'.
Churchill sold us to Roosevelt for some leaky destroyers. Yet another transfer of power that defined the local populace as serfs. We became more and more powerless with each transfer.
The Concordat set up education as a political bowling ball, allowing Dr Eric Williams to promise education for all without the Church's interference. What we have is seats in schools, but not actual places of education.
What does all this have to do with crime? We do not really have crime. What we actually have, is a state controlled by an upper class who engage in any number of activities, criminal and otherwise, without any regard for the rights of those governed. This relationship has been there since the discovery of these islands.
The Coast Guard is not brought up to strength because it is not in the interest of those who control the drug trade to do so.
You are mistaken if you subscribe to the idea that government is somehow "for the people". The purpose of government in Trinidad, is and has always been to exploit the people to the maximum possible for the benefit of those in power. Those in power are not necessarily elected officials. Often elected officials are simply pawns in the game.
I can't understand why people think the US is a benevolent state. They have raped every continent they control. Why should Trinidad be any different? Trinidad is run by a puppet government controlled by US interests in the same way that Cuba was, that Santo Domingo was, that Panama was, etc. etc. etc. The story is the same. The pattern is the same. How is it that you do not see this?
Crime is a symptom of a society that has no rules. Why do the police seem incapable of taking control? It is deliberate. Disorder allows the rape of the country to continue mostly unnoticed. There is no mystery here.
If any country steps out of line by actually trying to straighten things up, the World Bank and the IMF are there to pull them back into line.
If you want to see order, all you have to do, is to blow up an oil refinery. Overnight, you will see Marines appear. Hell, you don't have to go far. They are already here. Go to Trincity Mall Saturday or Sunday. You will see American troops in uniform eating lunch in the mall. What are they doing here? No-one seems to know.
As long as US interests aren't threatened, the local boys can get away with murder. You should know this. Everybody knows this. Come on, Taran. Don't let your military past blind to the reality of these islands.
History is a poor excuse.
Seth - if you look in any bit of history, it will be as you describe, where those who were 'governed' in a loose sense of the term were not given voice. I could quote examples anywhere in the world that state the same things that you so graciously offered, but I must decline them because the basis of your argument seems to be a lack of empowerment to those governed.
That is not as much the case now as it was then. Certainly, the instruments of power have not changed much in the last 50 years but they have changed. Further, society as a whole tends to be at a higher education level than in the case of examples you have demonstrated - whereas the education level of those in power probably would show a decline in comparison to education of the general population. If you don't believe me, turn on the local parliament channel here in Trinidad and Tobago - I suffered it in amusement today for a few hours as I watched 'repeats'.
If there is to be a message of hopelessness then we are surely doomed. Can the system change? Of course it can. Should it change? Of course it should. Will it change immediately? Of course it won't. Such things do not happen overnight.
Your comment that I somehow stated that the United States was 'benevolent' is certainly out of place. Had the authors of Freakonomics cited examples in Timbuktu - concrete examples - then there most certainly would have been differences in my post. The United States, as an entity, is as self-interested as other entities should be - though not to the detriment of the planet's population.
As far as bringing up my military background, here's the volley: Don't let my military past blind you to my perspectives. You do us both a grave disservice when you get to criticizing my own past instead of discussing the topic at hand - also a national pastime.
Crime
I was walking down the street recently in Woodbrook, and I was theatened with a cricket bat by a group of hooligans. I ran and got away, but a friend of mine, later that same day, was smashed in the head, and was robbed. Get out while you can. The lunatics are running the asylum!
Security and Freedom
The crimes in Trinidad and Tobago and everywhere in the world I believed has the same root.As you say" And the root of my perspective remains that people are as good as their options, and that broken windows should be fixed not just by government but by communities and - most importantly - individuals". If all of us care for the security of our own lives and of the security of others then crime will stop. Crime is a threat to one's security and freedom.
I would like more info
As a student researching this topic i find the information very helpful and would like to know if there's anyone who can help me find out more about the rising issue of crime in our country, if they can, email me at d_s_l_3@hotmail.com
Thank You!
Post new comment