Dear Editor,
In an article in SN dated July 4, 2010 captioned `Search for PPP candidate still in initial phase –Ramotar’ PPP General Secretary Donald Ramotar said “…We have not pushed the process any further,” .
Mr. Ralph Ramkarran said that the selection process is in line with how the party makes all other important decisions.
Mr. Moses Nagamootoo has also made public, his willingness to be the party’s candidate but through a democratic process.
I feel this is simply great. At last the beginnings of transparency- the voicing of the opinions of these leaders of the PPP in the public arena. This is indeed welcome.
I guess that this paves the way for members to enter the discussions, thanks to these enlightened leaders.
The importance of this particular debate is the different positions taken by Moses and others in the CC as compared with the other two gentlemen.
Ramotar pointed out that “traditionally discussions are held at the level of the Executive Committee, with the results being referred to the party’s Central Committee for a final decision that would then be communicated to the party membership”, (SN).
Mr. Ramkarran’s position is, “the issue is first raised at the Executive Committee and… a decision is taken” by consensus or a vote. This decision is a recommendation to the 40 member CC for final decision making (SN).
On the other hand Moses “emphasised the need for the selection process to be democratic” and that it should involve all of the party members. For Moses, “the question is not who, the question is by what process,” and made it pellucid that he would “withdraw from any process that is not fair and in which the membership of the party… [is] not included in the broadest possible consultation,”. However he stated that once the process is democratic he would support any other member that is the will of the party’s membership. (SN)
The Party functions on the basis of “Democratic Centralism”
I guess it is obvious that within the position taken by these three gentlemen one can readily see the democratic and the centralised. The question is how to merge these two. What situation demands how much of one and how much of the other?
Why we must stick with the traditional way, meaning the centralized way. We are not at war and we are not illegal or operating in very adverse situation that would prevent the operation of the democracy within the operating system on “Democratic Centralism”.
According to Mick Armstrong “On Democratic Centralism” published in Revolutionary Organisation Today, Socialist Alternative, Melbourne, 2000, pp. 25-35 “Democratic centralism is one of the most abused and misunderstood terms in the Marxist vocabulary.” And went on to say, “For Lenin the specific way socialists organised was a concrete question. It depended on what advanced the class struggle at any particular point of time. Because of this, it comes as no great surprise that the statement that is usually quoted as summarising Lenin’s views on democratic centralism is extremely general: “unity in action, freedom of discussion and criticism”. (Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 11, p. 320).
Having said that I would like to point out that during the Cheddi Jagan years there were always occasions when the party organs would discuss major issues and this included the time the party was discussing “talks or no talks with the PNC”. On numerous occasions Jagan would have almost monthly meetings with leading cadres to educate and to listen to their views but these became a thing of the past after his death.
And so I do not think that Mr. Ralph Ramkarran was correct when he said on Demerarawaves.com that the selection process is in line with how the party makes all other important decisions. He also said it was felt that there was no need to depart from the methodology, which was used to select its last two presidential candidates, following Cheddi Jagan’s death.
First I would like to explain that the last Presidential Candidate was a faith accompli after the 1997 elections. Note however prior to the 1997 elections the PPP held Region conferences to discuss the issue of the PPP slate which would have included Bharrat Jagdeo. There was a lot of opposition to the selection of Bharrat who was never really active in the PPP or the PYO and was a relative unknown before he was made Junior Minister of Finance.
At the conference held in Georgetown, I recall that among others my self, O Lall, Ramjattan, and Fazel Khan spoke against this. There was so much opposition to this that the Chairman Collymore jumped up and asked what could we do as Janet had given an ultimatum that she would not contest if Bharrat was not made the part of the team.
Actually my position was to have Luncheon as the Presidential candidate. Moses, Navin, Indra, Gail and others were of the same view.
We do not want the same kind of imposition from the top as this defies democracy and imposes the worst kind of centralism. This approach causes the “suck up” mentality, the news carrying mentality, this prevents members from speaking out, from criticizing as they would be punished by someone at the top like what happened to me and many others including Moses and eventually Navin.
There is nothing in the constitution of the PPP that said that this important decision has to be centralized in the hands of the CC or that the recommendation has to come from the Executive. The CC is the power house, the decision maker between congresses. The Executive is supposed to carry out the decisions of congress and the CC as that is what executives do.
Issues in the Bolshevik Party of Russia, were debated openly and in its paper. In this very tradition I am appealing to the members of the PPP to demand greater democracy, to demand greater say in deciding who the Presidential candidate would be.
Mr. Ramkarran has said his chances are very good, based on a competitive examination of what all of the candidates have to offer. I do not doubt him and so he should have no problem in wooing the members for their support. The same goes for Donald, Robert, Rohee and any other whom “Goat did not bite”.
I have no problem accepting him, Navin, Donald or any other if the decision is democratic.
I guess based on what the competition looks like and considering how some were pushed to the top and considering my years of service to the PPP, my sacrifices and qualifications and especially considering that I was never bitten by a goat and have no green card I should throw in my hat also, Bisessar for President! LOL. I will make sure that I do not go near to a goat.
Yours faithfully,
Rajendra Bisessar
