PNCR leadership must improve on its language to achieve reconciliation and victory

Aug 09, 2010 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
The evolving recognition for coalition building within and among the political opposition in Guyana is welcoming. I hold firm to the view that this goal is realisable; yet I hasten to add that the current modus operandi of the main opposition PNCR together with the recent pronouncement by the AFC of their unwillingness to enter a pre-election political arrangement that include the PNCR and/or the PPP/C are unhelpful. I view the actions of both, as an agenda which conversely energizes the leadership and base support of the PPP/C. I will subsequently return to the AFC’s pronouncement in another correspondence.
Electioneering involves debate on the performance of those in government and those of the opposition who are attempting to wrest the seat of government; it involves discussing and formulating policies, strategies and programming; it involves the mobilization and participation of people, but essentially in Guyana, it is the latter that ultimately determines which group wins’.
Percentile analysis of 2006 General Elections results demonstrate significant shifts in the support commanded by the PNCR, while the PPP/C was able to maintain its base. Just ponder the source of the AFC votes and reflect on the conflicting sentiments shared by the young ‘African’ proletariats and the coloured middle class during the 2006 campaign.
Statistical evidence also suggests the level of voters’ participation was low; hence deductive reasoning would imply that ‘apathy levels’ were high, given that voters turnout was aapproximately60%, perhaps the lowest in our election history.
The PPP/C was able to retain power with a rage of 40-42% of the popular votes. It is also reasonable to conclude that given the excesses and failures of the PPP/C government and the continued disorganisation of the combined opposition that the prevailing apathy levels have either been sustained or increased.
But by acknowledging and meaningfully addressing its circumstances, the PNCR could be found ready and capable to lead a coalition of political parties and civil society groups to defeat the PPP/C. Otherwise the latter will remain distained to the throne of power.
The question is how ready is the PNCR? Accomplished conflict expert, Raymond  Cohen  in  his  essay,  Negotiating  across  Cultures, 2001,  wrote “one suggestive   approach  to intercultural dissonance,  rest  on  the perception  of  culture  as  a  store  of  shared  meanings.
The  body  of  implicit, received  truth  held  by  the   group  is  reflected  most revealingly  in  language.  Every  society  [or  group]  can  be observed  to posses a specialised negotiating vocabulary loaded  with  affective  metaphorical  connotations. When  negotiation  takes  place across  cultures  [or  groups], the  ostensible  point   at  issue  may  be   complicated  by  semantic  and procedural  discontinuities.
Culturally grounded assumptions about negotiation and the subject in contention…can be uncovered…by lexical analysis.” Note is taken of the PNCR chairman’s call for unity during remarks made at the launch of the Party commemorative observances for its Founder Leader, Forbes Burnham, (SN, 08/07/2010).
During his presentation, he admonished his audience, particularly, the dissidents of Robert Corbin to draw their inspiration from the lessons of the 1763 slave rebellion and the necessity of having one leader. I agree with him that those lessons provide fine examples of the value of one leader but what he failed to recognise was the single leader founded in his examples were all possessed of the ability ‘meiosised’ and not  ‘mitosised’.
Nevertheless, I credit him for his recognition of the present disunity within the PNCR which continues to derail his party’s effort at leading a grand coalition against the incumbent PPP/C.
Undoubtedly, when one examines the approach of the current PNCR’s leadership to internal unity-building, it is found, that the strategy of continued demonization and chastise of those who challenged Robert Corbin for electable office is self defeating. I also take issue with Ms. Nestor’s comments on unity, much of which, were either ill-conceived or lacking of prudence.
The notable pattern, suggest that every opportunity is sought to paint those who challenged Corbin  as the single ‘wrong doers’ but careful analysis would prove that all sides including the Pro-Corbins  committed ‘wrongs’.  Therefore, better must be done to encourage genuine internal reconciliation to engender mass mobilization and participation.
The PNCR must be aware that an important factor for participation is sentiment, and be prepared to act positively on this awareness since the sentiments they presently provoke will further weaken the Party and its support base.
The PPP/C is well aware of this, hence their presence for the first time at the commemorative activity held at the Place of the Seven Ponds whereat the PPP/C Government Representative, Dr Luncheon laid a floral tribute, while there was acknowledgment by the PNCR that the State has for the first time contributed to the restoration of the mausoleum through the National Trust of Guyana under the leadership of Dr. James Rose. The cameras were there.
I guess that on a later occasion the opposition will say ‘the people of this country cannot be fooled’ but the footage will serve the PPP/C well. At minimum, they are in a position to advance to their supporters that despite, failure of effort; they have consistently sought newer and different approaches/opportunity for co-operation with the main opposition.
They will rightfully use this to augment their national appeal to the below age 35 years, voters in particular – a category which is projected as representing approximately 33% of the 2011 list of electors.
Note should also be taken that of this group, an average of 60% are projected as electors below age 25; many of whom will be first time voters who have no experience of another political party outside of the PPP/C in government.
Therefore, if the PNCR and the others of the opposition continue to fail in arresting their decline amid increasing apathy, the non-PPP/C electors in this group will either gravitate to the PPP/C for survival or stay away from the ballot. In either scenario the PPP/C will benefit.
The PNCR must appreciate that sentiments impact on a party numerical performance in an election. As group, its leadership must accept that a prime driver of sentiments is language, hence they must endeavour speak, responsibly.
Language is a key variable for mobilizing mass support but the impact of this variable differs across ethno-political groups.
Anecdotal evidence would suggest that when the PPP/C shouts the chorus “After 28 years of the PNC…” among their supporters, the impact is vastly different when compared to the shouts of PNCR to its supporters saying “After 17 years of the PPP/C…” Also internally, the PNCR corbinites need to find a workable chorus for reconciliation.
The corbinites are also guilty of telling Team Alexander, “if you all want to bruk it up, let’s bruk it up” (referring to the PNCR). Heaven knows what they would have said to or of, Team Van West Charles/Murray.
Therefore the accusation of disunity cut across all contenders of the past and present. I encourage this group to pay greater attention to what can be accomplished and how. I suggest that rather than remaining in the accusatory mode that they pursue a new regime of lexical by speaking to the achievements of their efforts at reconciliation.
To do otherwise, is to court another defeat by the PPP/C. I caution that the current language employed by the present leadership will only redound to further hemorrhage the Party.
Each time you, loose one member/supporter, you risk loosing between 4-5 votes. Each time you loose a member/activist you risk, 20-25 votes. Space does not provide me the opportunity for further statistical rationalization but I leave this for the attention of the leadership. To win the 2011 election your most important resource is people; apathy levels are already low.
Andrew Hicks

---

---