“Dishonourable Blacks”? The 1983 “Rebel Tour” and Jamaican Nationhood and Identity

Abstract

The efforts at nation-building in the West Indies have had to (and still have to) confront obstacles that are legacies of centuries of European colonization and enslavement in the region. Postcolonial challenges have included overcoming structural racism and the negative impact on identity of limiting stereotypes and prejudices; the empowerment of marginalized populations; the provision of greater socioeconomic opportunities; and the creation of more just and equitable societies. These were challenges they had in common with many other colonial and postcolonial societies across the globe. Cricket played a significant role in many of these struggles, and in so doing became an important part of anti-imperial movements within the region. It was, therefore, unsurprising — and perhaps inevitable — that West Indian nations and the West Indian cricket world would become involved in the fight against apartheid in South Africa. Examining social attitudes towards the anti-apartheid campaign within West Indies cricket provides us with insight that can help us to evaluate the broader nation-building efforts. One particularly illuminating episode was the formation of a West Indian “rebel” cricket team that toured South Africa in 1983 and 1984 in contravention of an international sporting boycott. These tours were a shock to many in the West Indies, with one commentator referring to them as “a collective affront to West Indian society, nationhood and history”. However, attitudes in the West Indies to the tour were by no means uniform: in fact, there were many voices in support of the cricketers. This paper examines the reactions in Jamaica to the initial announcement of the “rebel” tour in 1983 to see what light they shed on perspectives of identity and nationhood in the Jamaican society, and what they reveal about the state of the postcolonial project. It poses the question: was the action of the “rebels” an affront to Jamaican society, or rather a reflection of it?