Is collective responsibility alien to the UNC? It appears that the culture of the mythological characters with extraordinary powers is always there to rescue the party from crisis. With such an interpretation, faith in the individual and collective strength of the membership are never harnessed. From one mythological leader to another, the members are in disarray and disorientation after the defeat of the leader.
Why would individuals who have been part and parcel of the UNC’s Executive and its Parliamentary arms now be calling for the Political Leader’s head? Is it that their faith in the invincibility of their leader has been shattered after her failure to defeat the demon?
But even if the Political Leader was this mythological character with the powers to defeat the enemies, she was always supposed to have a teacher or guru to guide her. All along his life Rama sought the advice of the saints and sages. In the case of King Arthur, he had Merlin to guide and advise him. Who were the advisers to Kamla? If those individuals were not part of the decision process or the planning of strategies to defeat the PNM, they should have protested then and not after the party is defeated.
If the Political Leader ignored and marginalized the views of former parliamentarians and the executive of the party, they should have expressed strongly their dissatisfaction with her leadership style. Unfortunately, there has developed a culture of sycophancy in the UNC that allows a Leviathan or maximum leader to ride rough shod; however, if the leader is successful she is praised, but if defeated, she is cursed!
The individuals who support this Leviathan political leader are spineless. They are there in the politics to enjoy the plums of office and when victory doesn’t come forth they are ready to revolt, not against a system or structure but a personality. Their aim is to replace the present jenny ass with a donkey whom they can ride; not to build institutions to serve the welfare of the people.
How can a political leader win an election with such friends? A strategy in war is to form alliances with others who share your mission and policies. In the epic Ramayana, Rama formed an alliance with the Kingdom of Kiskindha to defeat the evil Ravana. The question remains: What political capital did those individuals who want Kamla to go have brought to the party?
And why the call for the Political Leader to resign? The UNC has a constitution with clear rules governing the selection of a leader. Why don’t these men and women who are calling for Kamla’s head revisit the constitution? Asking that Westminster’s convention be followed when a political leader is defeated is being hypocritical. If that yard stick has to be applied, why confine it to the political leader?
And may I ask? Did those individuals who are calling for Kamla’s head followed the dictates of the constitution when they were selected as candidates for the party or appointed senators? How many party groups recommended them as a candidate? How convenient some people can be!
Kamla had defeated Dr. Roodal Moonilal and Vassan Bharath in the last internal election for the leadership of the party; not even their combined votes could have defeated hers. Clearly, these politicians have no support base and had entered the political arena not on their own strength but at the behest of the Leviathan.
Those individuals who want Kamla to go should reach out to the party faithful where the votes are located; not by engaging in interviews with editors, reporters and posting videos on social media. This ground work is not being done because it entails working the trenches. Given their desperation to get Kamla’s head on a platter, I would not be surprised they invite Rowley to invade and defeat Kamla to put them at the helm!
The reality is that there is no structure in the UNC. It is a dysfunctional political family that has abandon all rules. Each member is fighting for his political survival.
I believe that Kamla must go but only after she is defeated by a strong leader with the support of the base of the party; not the whimsical connivance with anti-UNC media executives, editors and reporters and a few talk show hosts. These are sworn enemies of the interest and welfare of the people that the UNC was born to represent.