Dear Editor,
There has been a lot of talk in the SN and KN, about who should lead a ‘big tent’ opposition in the 2011 elections and what we have is commentary on what each writer perceives – all without a consultation process involving the citizens of this country. Some say we must get a person outside of political circles; some, through calculations we can’t even fathom, conjure up ‘leaders,’ some of whom have not even shown an interest in the politicization of the youth vote, much less to motivate this vital pool of votes to vote for a big tent; some say that the PNC or the AFC must have the presidential and PM candidates respectively or vice versa.
Editor, there can never be any success for a big tent and its presidential candidate unless the selection process for the leadership is open and public. The most critical factor, like the strongest glue, is the principal grouping’s understanding and commitment to a common cause – the peaceful removal of this government and critical changes for the country’s future, as I outlined in a previous letter.
Politics is a profession which is clouded by decision-making, calculations based on small margins of error and more importantly, propaganda and self-promotion. Most successful politicians are in tune with the feelings of the citizens and have a ‘feel’ for the current travails facing the country – indeed a good political mind. Most importantly, in the Guyanese context and that of the next general elections in particular, the vote of our youth is critical and will be decisive. Therefore, in the selection of a candidate to head the big tent, the powers in the opposition should try to appreciate that a good political mind is important in such a candidate, with a strong attachment and commitment to our youths’ future.
But what about the actual selection process which has to be specifically adapted to our present situation of ethnic voting patterns, extremely strong nationwide government propaganda and a voter pool which tends to be apathetic? Editor, the only way to ‘spark’ the people’s interest is to have a selection process which is open for all our citizens to see, hear and feel, and to get involved. Such a process has to be conjured outside of the box and in such a way that all the parties involved will have formed a passion for the success of the venture. Look at the primary process in the United States and the wide involvement of the citizens in deciding who will lead the nation. We never had the political will nor resolve in this nation to go that way, but maybe this time we can start in that direction by having an adaptable template of that system. What is wrong if those who want to be the presidential candidate declare their intentions within the framework of a big tent and then have scheduled debates in the public eye from one end of the country to the other? What is wrong with the idea that after three or four months of such public debates, two credible pollsters (not Bisram) from outside the country conduct a poll of a wide cross-section of the citizenry to determine who among those who debated should be the candidate for a big tent?
Editor, the critical factor in selecting a leader for a big tent is that the public must know that it is not a one-man (woman) show, but a team effort with a broad consensus for change for this nation; also critically important is the agenda for economic, social and political changes which such a coalition offers. The initial formation of a big tent has to be followed quickly by the selection of a candidate with his/her chief criteria being the ability to capture the most votes in the general elections. The selection process itself must become a catalyst for the end of voter paralysis by invigorating the populace to become involved; that is why debates set in a town meeting atmosphere are essential for a democratic solution for such a selection process where regular folks can question all the potential leaders in an open public forum. Editor, at the end of such a process, I am sure that two independent credible pollsters can be found to gauge the preferences of the general population as to who should be the leader of this coalition.
Editor, the way forward for change is the concept of a big tent coalition which has to be transparent to all of our citizens, and should involve them at every level of the subjective and objective factors of the whole process. Public debates between politicians should be initiated because this was the very essence of democracy since the Greeks invented it centuries ago. Let the citizens be the only judge of whom it is that could present a credible, cohesive and transparent interface with them and take our dear country to new heights.
Yours faithfully,
Cheddi (Joey) Jagan (Jr)
