THE PPP MAY WELL PROVIDE THE CATALYST FOR THE BIG TENT

Aug 15, 2010 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

It is one thing for an opposition party to decide that the image, leadership, past history, ideology etc of another party precludes the entering into an alliance with that party. It is quite another thing for elements of that opposition party to suggest that no alliance would be possible unless there is a change in the leadership of another party.
The latter suggestion places an immovable stonewall against coalition-building. No political party, serious about alliance building should dictate to any other party the makeup of its leadership.
Political alliances are usually of two kinds but mainly of one type. Coalitions are easier formed when they are constituted of like-minded individuals. Thus sections of the middle class, or the middle class and the bourgeoisie class, may come together in a coalition due to their like-minded class interests.
The other type of alliance which is the one that is mainly attempted by opposition parties in trying to win elections is a coalition of disparate parties and groupings, that is, a broad-based alliance. Building a broad-based alliance requires an ability to work together despite the differences in leadership, ideology and history. This is not always very easy, but like-minded coalitions hardly ever unseat a government, but to their favour they do enjoy greater stability than broad-based coalitions.
Applied to the local situation, we have the Alliance For Change making a choice that it is interested in forming alliances with like-minded individuals and groups. It is also interested in defectors from the ruling party. This obviously rules out the possibility of a broad-based coalition.
This is a position that is not without its merits. For one, it allows the AFC to cement itself deeper into the middle class. For another, in any broad-based coalition, the AFC will not be able to extract the leadership concessions and greater role that it may feel it either deserves or should command. Instead of therefore entering into a relationship in which there is bound to be some fractures, the AFC may have opted for a more secure and pragmatic option: to enter the elections and hope that it can attract a slate comprising like-minded individuals and groups that may be sufficient enough to allow it to become the next main opposition party, and perhaps allow it to build on this success in time for the 2016 elections.
However disappointing this may be towards the construction of a Big Tent alliance for 2006, there is some realism here, even if it falls short of the sort of ambitions that many in the opposition camp had hoped for.
It is yet too early for anything to be cast in stone. Elections are still months away, and the results of the 2006 elections and the decision as to whether the nature of any opposition is going to be based on a number of factors which are not yet certain, such as just who the ruling party will choose as its presidential candidate.
The ruling party may well end up, as it did in 1997, identifying a candidate who can create a backdraft of resentment, whether rightly or wrong. It can well end up in its own internal battles wearing itself out and selecting a candidate that is divisive, weak, unknown politically, or simply someone that the opposition feels it can defeat. So there is a great deal still be to be decided and while the prospects for a broad-based alliance do not look promising, it is not totally ruled out since the AFC has indicated that it can still revisit its decision not to enter into a pre-election alliance with the PNCR.
The PNCR also must be concerned that it may be hedging its fortunes too much on such an alliance. If the PNCR gets into the mode where it begins to believe that its only chance of political success is by teaming up with the AFC, then the failure to achieve such a goal can be devastating to the party. The PNCR therefore has to also keep its options open and operate on the presumption that while it is open to alliances, it is prepared to on its own, contest the elections and win those elections outright, more so if the PPP puts up a candidate who does not have popular appeal.
Such a possibility is not at all remote and therefore it is the PPP through its choice of a presidential candidate who can provide the impetus and catalyst for a Big Tent coalition involving the PNCR and the AFC.

Latest News

THE PPP MAY WELL PROVIDE THE CATALYST FOR THE BIG TENT

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| April, 7th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Moo sponsored National Junior’s Squash C/ship eying exciting...

BK Group remains supportive of Bartica Easter...

GFF-Blue Water Shipping National U15 Secondary...

Elite League action returns to NTC this weekend

Two more young cricketers benefit from Project...

NSC receives sports uniforms from D8Door &...

Features/Columnists

Protest against Commissioner of Information continues today

The U.S. “Joining” the Commonwealth: an unreasonable expectation

The not invisible US hand

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

THE PPP MAY WELL PROVIDE THE CATALYST FOR THE BIG TENT

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| April, 7th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]