Paul Andrew Bourne, B.Sc. (Hons); Dip. Edu.
Many developing countries continue to grapple with deficient economic resources, reprehensible government policies and a robust hegemonic class that maintain the exploitation of the laboured class. These societies have a social welfare system that does not ameliorate the wellbeing of the poor. With time, it is revealed that the demagogues are primarily concerned with self, associates and the perpetuation of the status quo that oftentimes excludes the plebs. Such societies refrain from ‘real’ programmes that coalesces support for the elderly and other disadvantaged groups. Annals in respect to the functioning of contemporary societies from the workings of the state is clear; the constitution is to maintain the orthodox principles that subsist in the structures, instead of formulating a system that addresses the interest and concerns of masses.
In Third World countries, the elderly’s survivability relies mostly on the state’s social programmes and the kindness of community members. The state’s welfare package is such that the message seems to be ‘let us annihilate those beings’ (Bourne, 2005). Many communities are unable to offer any financial assistance to the aged as the costs of living are exorbitantly towering, while the wages from the productive sector and the welfare package are relatively low.
It appears that numerous socio-economic measures of poverty alleviation, if were evaluated, are not meeting their core objectives. Many aged rely on state assistance but the valuations are so minimal compared with viable employment opportunities and living costs. Therefore, developing countries produce people who are far removed from being hospitable to the concerns of the poor, as their own existence is paramount within the construct of high cost society, while the elderly are usually placed on the outskirts of resource allocations and distribution.
Rahman (1999) summarizes the dilemma of Third World elderly in a carefully crafted monograph that highlights the socio-political biases of the hegemony. He forwards the perspective that:
Bangladesh, like most of the developing world, has not paid much attention to its elderly largely because there has been and continue to be a tacit assumption that they will be taken care of by the family (Rahman, 1999, p.227).
The epistemology of Rahman’s thesis befits the Jamaican’s social reality like that of many other developing states. The economic status of those societies justifies the position that many officials take in regard assistance to particular groups. The community and the state are equally unable to afford a comprehensive welfare programme for the citizenry in particular the poor; hence, the unfortunate and the disadvantaged among us, owing to the opportunity cost principle, some groups are force to compete for the limited economic resources in this highly competitive environment. The environment is profit driven and is not social welfare led, as some would hope for a particular well-being of people. As a social scientist, I am flabbergasted with covert actions of many of our demagogue on matters relating to adequate provision for the poor and the elderly. There exists dialectic in the world as profits replace the value of people, even though people contribute to the acquisitioned proceeds.
In anticipation of future survivability, many people labour with an expectation that they can bequest for tomorrow. One group that relies on future bequest is the aged. The elderly expend their human and social resources in the edifice of contemporary societies, for this, they are offered inadequate ‘institutional sources of support’. They are offered pensions, insurance and a political system that covertly prefers the economic class. This seems to be on a societal consensus basis that the older age cohorts ought to be belittled. The superb capacity that exists in this group is oftentimes overlooked, and the young serenely anticipate their departure from this physical existence. The social setting is the elderly are a liability to society so much so that if they decide to vocalize objections to particular issues, the trajectory is difficult.
Firstly, in the proletariat class, they are ostracized, ridiculed and isolated from the normal course of life by either not listened to (idea less) or informed to ‘shut up’. On the other hand, they are viewed as hurdles to financial gains. If they have property or other material possessions, this fuel dislikes and hate. In respect to the bourgeoisie, sometimes they opt to have their aged kin be placed in paid private residences and if they are at the family’s residents, they have a miniscule input in the decision-making process concerning their own survivability. Irrespective of the social status of many people, the aged are obstacle to freedom of mobility, and for some their contributions are old fashioned and irrelevant.
The society has been distant in offering social graces to the aged. This is seen in instances where the elderly, in public transport, are tossed from one place to another and squashed by younger people, this happens without remorse. Sometimes no one recognizes that the aged exist. People find the aged offensive. When they seek to cross main roads, there are brutal monologues that are forwarded by motorists and non-motorists. If a motorist decides to allow an aged to cross the streets, he/she is hurried, jived and ridiculed in the process. The process becomes even more difficult within the context of tooting horns and/or gradually accelerating toward the aged in an attempt to have him/her quicken his/her movement.
In order for this to change, political agencies should not legislate measures that will have other members within society offer sympathy or empathy to the elderly but the socialization process must be fashioned in a manner that will accept the contributions of the aged within a social understand that they are valuable statesmen.