Personality is an attribute crucial in leadership

Jan 19, 2009 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

It is difficult to feel hopeful and imagine progress given the commentaries of key political leaders and opinion leaders/shapers. Startling, this ad nauseaum ‘logic’/‘reasoning’ comes from the opposition or those who profess to desire change.

This tendency gives the PPP cover for its continued unjust and inequitable practices and mismanagement of our resources.

Personality politics, PNC 28 years of ‘rigged elections,’ and the two-party system are blamed for the country’s division and under-development.

It has encouraged an African-led PPP, and Indian PNC, for the parties to be non-racial. Barack Obama is admired, and there’s hope our political leaders emulate him.

There are arguments for shared governance (SG) so minorities can share power. Some say the current climate is unfavourable for talks, and talks cannot take place holding the government under duress.

These arguments are deceptive, lacking context, display ignorance for the role of government, and disregard for fundamental human rights.

Personality is not a handicap. It is an attribute, crucial in leadership. We admired the oratorical brilliance and mesmerizing effects of Forbes Burnham, the revolutionary fearlessness of Walter Rodney, the professorial and nuanced Desmond Hoyte, and the repetitive style and gesticulations of Cheddi Jagan.

We followed or despised these personalities, but these are the very traits that made them leaders. The problem is not personality. The problem is/are beliefs, management and/or programmes.

Barack Obama is the world’s new political star. Most of Obama’s admirers never met him; know little, or nothing, of his record and beliefs.

He earns admiration and support, in no small part, because of his personality. President Bharrat Jagdeo admires Obama. Yet Jagdeo disregards the principles of good governance, equity and justice Obama embraces. Obama believes and have invested in education, youth and inner cities.

Jagdeo takes away the subvention from the Critchlow Labour College, allows inner cities/depressed communities to degenerate, and provides no progressive opportunities for youths. Opposition leaders applaud Obama’s victory and urge emulation but none would dare stand up fearlessly and confront society’s inequality and injustices as done by Obama in his national Address on Race on March 18, 2008.

There are calls for an Indian to lead the PNC and African the PPP. We ignore racial identity must be honoured and a person should be elected/lead in spite of.

Likewise, the constitutional right to choice, freedom of association, and identity are ignored. The two-party system and the split between Forbes Burnham and Cheddi Jagan are blamed for the dysfunctional political system/governance.

The Burnham/Jagan spilt is no different from the USA Republican-Democratic Party spilt, but progress takes place in this society and none in ours.

Other Caribbean countries are two-party driven and are progressing. We fail to look beyond the surface. To the institutional guarantees that contribute to these progressive societies.

The 28 years of alleged ‘rigged elections’ becomes ‘scientific fact,’ and constant reminder of the PNC ‘sins,’ and why the PNC cannot or should not hold power. Ignored are the daily inflictions of PPP transgressions, Supreme Court ruling on the 1997 Elections malpractices, and the PPP refusal to return to the AFC the parliamentary seat won in Linden.

Given racial voting there are calls for shared governance. Problematic Zimbabwe becomes the reference point and successful models ignored. It is said the environment is not conducive, and talks with government cannot happen under duress.

When does a conducive environment become the qualifier for rights engagement and enforcement? Who defines/determines what is conducive?

The truth is ignored that all groups (minority and majority) are entitled to equality, freedom and prosperity, and these rights are not dependent on a leader, election, or political party, but enshrined in the Constitution and must be enforced, in spite of. Citizens are not holding the government under duress. Despite the odds

citizens are honouring their end of the social contract by working, paying taxes and obeying the law. It is the government who holds us under duress by failing to guarantee protection, equality, freedom and prosperity. And yes, to effect change protest becomes necessary.

USA democracy model becomes standard bearer, but Guyana refuses to emulate the USA institutional structures that protect rights, allow for due process, prosperity and dissent. Ignore too are public condemnations of George Bush’s management, disregard for the rule of law, and Hurricane Katrina; and frequent protests in this democracy.

Ethnic, gender, class and racial cleavages exist in the Republican and Democratic parties. In our mindset democracy is flawless, utopian, and things work by themselves; there are no oversights, cleavages, wrong doings and protests.

Recall Desmond Hoyte’s visit to Linden ‘Blackie’ London funeral at the Square of the Revolution. True to our politics, Hoyte was castigated.

Ignored was Hoyte’s belief that Blackie, whose alleged actions, though despicable, too had a right to benefit from a principled surrender, due process and hearing. Neither too is there concern the Coroner Act is never enforced.

Hoyte’s action clearly signalled he understood the foundation of a good society must be built on respecting rights and adhering to the rule of law, regardless of. Does anyone know the core beliefs of our opposition leaders or parties?

It is expected leaders will make mistakes and unpopular decisions. But it is expected on issues of good governance, equality and justice, which are not precondition driven/determined, a leader must be guided by doing what’s right. If opposition leaders and professed progressive change agents do not stand for anything, they will continue to fall for everything.  

M. A. Bacchus

---

---