Stormborn posted:ronan posted:the rules of order and other procedural stuff are embroidery and tradition
the guts of the GY Constitution was taken out and replaced by Burnham
that's why there are so many dead and loose ends
but at the end of the day, you remain a very light thinker
prone to posting stupid, self-undermining crap like below:
"Like all Westminster models the prime minister is supreme."
Lots of things in government are ornamental. It still remains a distinct legacy of a system we inherited or rather was foisted on us by Burnham. He always has a ken for the authority and what best can be the cover than a system that grants him absolute power as long as he remains in office?
It also conserves the idea of democracy to give him cover in that respect. He knew full well as long as we are divided this system affords him power. His legacy lives on. Each succeeding regime gravitated to the lure of authoritarianism in a majoritarian system that leaves no space between the executive presidency and the legislature and in essence create an elected dictator. That our society is vertically bifurcated by race and our population demographics closely matched the eternal ying and yang of the struggle is to win the state as an ethnic prize.
You being the perennial ass you are thinks repeating the a fact, a feature and a foundation element of Westminsterism denies its reality. Sorry, conveys nothing else than that you are a pompous ass. You do not think and that is an impediment to you ever making sense. Of course, the main ingredient that prohibits reason is that grandiose notion that you are the brightest bulb in the land.
your sophomoric topic mini-essay on a "Burnham" you only have cartoon knowledge about is noted
do you know that LFFSB was a Communist whose contempt for the inherited Westminster document was known by anyone who was anyone from practically the 1st day he stepped into office?
that he was constrained only by the correlation of forces in his overhaul of the legacy constitution? . . .
have you properly read the Declaration of Sophia?
"5.11 As we complete our tenth year in office, and proceed to the country's tenth anniversary of independence, we cannot do so with a Constitution out of step with modern trends, and our own ideas and ideologies; a Constitution which reflects for the most part the beliefs and ideology of our former imperialist masters; a Constitution which was taken out of the drawer, so to speak, as were several others for various ex-British colonies; with the minimum relevancy to the Guyanese peoples' needs, aspirations and thrusts. The Constitution must go and in its place a new and relevant Constitution must be substituted."
do you know anything of Burnham's tasking of Shahabudeen for his Socialist Constitution?
do you have any idea what was in store constitutionally for Guyana if kabaka hadn't died in 1985 and the merger agreement with CBJ was consummated?
your first two paragraphs are a pitiful mishmash of contradiction, confusion, IGNORANCE and bluster guided by a baffle-'em-with-bullsh!t con man scheme in turn dependent for success on the short attention spans of the mostly dumb PPP plantation dwellers you used to overseer on GNI
fortunately, i am here to lift up your dress
the third para . . . well, it's simply more ritual scratching of the itch of your insecurity, and the continuing, boring effort to staunch your diminishment; so i struck it out