Skip to main content

FM
Former Member

WHY NOT A YOUNG PRESIDENT?

 

January 31, 2015 | By | Filed Under Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom , Source - Kaieteur News

 

A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) has indicated that a youth candidate for the position of Prime Minister is under consideration. This may seem as a politically correct and astute announcement but it is one that is worth giving a second and deeper thought to.


This announcement has come at a time when the Alliance for Change (AFC) is engaged in talks with APNU over a possible grand opposition and civil society coalition. The AFC is proposing that it leads this coalition and it has asked for the discussions with APNU to be guarded by a non-disclosure agreement.


In the context of these ongoing talks, the AFC may find APNU’s announcement as prejudicial to its ongoing negotiations with the partnership.


It is not likely that the AFC will however extricate itself from the talks or issue any public denouncement of APNU’s announcement.


The comment by APNU that identifying a young person for the position of Prime Minister for the partnership is under consideration is a strange announcement. It is strange because there is no requirement to name a Prime Ministerial candidate. All that is required is for the naming of a Presidential candidate.


At one previous election, the PNC did not name a Prime Ministerial candidate. But on the campaign trail, the name Winston Murray was smartly thrown into the fray by Desmond Hoyte. But there was no formal naming of a Prime Ministerial candidate since Hoyte was attempting to gobble up all the attention as part of a campaign strategy to project himself as the object of popular support. He knew that his party’s record was sordid and therefore the strategy was to project him as representing change and the new PNC. His supporters were screaming, “Desmond!”  No one was however screaming, “Winston!”


Offering the position of Prime Minister to a young person is only of symbolic importance. The Prime Minister holds no executive authority. All executive authority is vested in one person and one person alone, the President. The Prime Minister is only his principal assistant. The promotion of a young person as the Prime Ministerial candidate therefore is not a move of any political significance.


It would be groundbreaking if the old geezers who have dominated the political leadership of this country stand aside and allow the young people a chance. It would be a meteoric move if APNU were to take the sort of gamble that the PPP did in 2001 and name a young person as its presidential candidate.


Now that would show that APNU means business. Such a decision would be far from symbolic. That would be placing real power in the hands of young people. That would be an exciting political development.


But one has to be circumspect about APNU hinting about the possibility of a Prime Ministerial candidate being given to a young person. One has to ask why is APNU even considering anything of the sort seeing that it is engaged in negotiations with the AFC on a coalition to contest the May 11, 2015 general and regional elections.


After all, the AFC has laid its cards on the table. It has said that it wants to lead the coalition. And the negotiations taking place would have to consider this issue. It therefore seems premature and prejudicial for APNU to be even mentioning that it may consider a young person for the position of Prime Minister.


This may seem an overture to the youth vote which comprises the largest bloc of voters. But it is not. There is an internal dynamic involved.


The PNCR is attempting to mend divisions in its camp. There is fallout in Linden and recently there was fence-mending exercise. This announcement of the consideration of a young person to be the party’s prime ministerial candidate is political overture to the disgruntled in Linden. It is an attempt to offer something to these persons so that they can return to the fold and not widen the division in the PNCR camp.


In this regard it is a skillful political move but one that has serious implications for the ongoing negotiations with the AFC.


The AFC cannot however say anything. It has signed on the dotted line and committed to silence during the negotiations.

Replies sorted oldest to newest

we already had a young idiot. That didn't work out so well. And we're still paying for that error.

 

I don't think anyone ought to be chosen on account of age for anything. I know a lot of stupid young people and a lot of stupid old people (like you).

 

We just need someone of marginal intellectual ability, with good judgment, and some people skills.

 

The British used to send us the duncest white they could find as Governor. Surely, we could find some coolie to negro to equal a Battenburgh or a Savage or even a Rose.

FM
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:

we already had a young idiot. That didn't work out so well. And we're still paying for that error.

 

I don't think anyone ought to be chosen on account of age for anything. I know a lot of stupid young people and a lot of stupid old people (like you).

 

We just need someone of marginal intellectual ability, with good judgment, and some people skills.

 

The British used to send us the duncest white they could find as Governor. Surely, we could find some coolie to negro to equal a Battenburgh or a Savage or even a Rose.

Then I think Guyana needs Uncle Nehru.

Nehru
Originally Posted by Nehru:
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:

we already had a young idiot. That didn't work out so well. And we're still paying for that error.

 

I don't think anyone ought to be chosen on account of age for anything. I know a lot of stupid young people and a lot of stupid old people (like you).

 

We just need someone of marginal intellectual ability, with good judgment, and some people skills.

 

The British used to send us the duncest white they could find as Governor. Surely, we could find some coolie to negro to equal a Battenburgh or a Savage or even a Rose.

Then I think Guyana needs Uncle Nehru.

 

I said dunce by white standards not coolie/negro dunce

FM
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
Originally Posted by Nehru:
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:

we already had a young idiot. That didn't work out so well. And we're still paying for that error.

 

I don't think anyone ought to be chosen on account of age for anything. I know a lot of stupid young people and a lot of stupid old people (like you).

 

We just need someone of marginal intellectual ability, with good judgment, and some people skills.

 

The British used to send us the duncest white they could find as Governor. Surely, we could find some coolie to negro to equal a Battenburgh or a Savage or even a Rose.

Then I think Guyana needs Uncle Nehru.

 

I said dunce by white standards not coolie/negro dunce

Suh Coolie cant Rule Guyana. Are you related to Caribj???

Nehru
Originally Posted by Nehru:

We just need someone of marginal intellectual ability, with good judgment, and some people skills.

 

 

Dat is Uncle Nehru Bhai.

 

ah doan know if you have judgment and people skills bai

FM

Gy has a leadership vacuum, no current political leader in Gy has the integrity to lead the country or anyone. What Gy needs is a Walter Rodney type, surly there must be one somewhere.  

FM
Originally Posted by politikalamity:

Gy has a leadership vacuum, no current political leader in Gy has the integrity to lead the country or anyone. What Gy needs is a Walter Rodney type, surly there must be one somewhere.  

Rodney was an avowed Marxist so he would be a misfit for today. He was of another era like many of the cold war detritus in the PPP. We need better. I dont see it. I just hope for it.

FM
Originally Posted by Stormborn:
 

Rodney was an avowed Marxist so he would be a misfit for today. He was of another era like many of the cold war detritus in the PPP. We need better. I dont see it. I just hope for it.

not sure about his political leanings but from everything I hear he appealed to and was accepted by the masses in Gy and this was across all races. 

 

However, having said that, if someone was Marxist/Socialist/Capitalist but the majority of the country democratically elected him/her to be their leader, then I believe that is their right. 

FM

Rodney was never a Marxist.

He believed in Pan African ideology.

Rodney's popularity was due to his bravery in publicly humiliating LFSB.  He coined the title King Kong.  The WPA was as far apart from the PPP as it was from the PNC. 

TI

We need to grow up as a society and stop looking for Messiahs and Saviours. That hasn't worked out well for us in the past. The Coolie Messiah and the Negro Messiah model of government failed.

 

Why don't we try what worked in Guyana until 1964? Mediocre honest men and women under a somewhat decent Constitution with the rule of law actually enforced?

FM

Sorry sir,

That don't happen in third world countries.

You see, when millionaires run for prez, and mayors, it's not for monetary gain....its for other perks.

So far Peter  Daguiar was the only politician that had money and motivated by a fear of communism.

Any average income Guyanese that gets into power...and see dollar signs, will change into a corrupt politician.

 

if you ever have the good fortune to drive a Ferrari, no way you going back to a little Honda. Law of nature and economics.

 

TI
Originally Posted by TI:

Rodney was never a Marxist.

He believed in Pan African ideology.

Rodney's popularity was due to his bravery in publicly humiliating LFSB.  He coined the title King Kong.  The WPA was as far apart from the PPP as it was from the PNC. 

 

Rodney was a Marxist. His entire historical methodology was Marxist. I've read some of his works including "History of Guyanese Working People" and his analyses are Marxist and he never allowed his concerns for people of African origin to ever demand fairness for others. Actually he always took pain to put himself in the shoes of others, surprisingly in even the shoes of some of the planters. The latter is often forgotten by most if not all.

FM

Pan African is predominantly anti colonialist philosophy. If Che Guevara and Castro are Pan African heroes, it's merely part of the game. It is a Socialist philosophy after all.

TI
Originally Posted by TI:

Rodney was never a Marxist.

He believed in Pan African ideology.

Rodney's popularity was due to his bravery in publicly humiliating LFSB.  He coined the title King Kong.  The WPA was as far apart from the PPP as it was from the PNC. 

I listened to him three times in person ( two times more than I have listened to obamba) and he was a marxist.

FM
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
Originally Posted by Nehru:

We just need someone of marginal intellectual ability, with good judgment, and some people skills.

 

 

Dat is Uncle Nehru Bhai.

 

ah doan know if you have judgment and people skills bai

I see de man pushin hard hard for that position, hehehehe. Shaitaan, go for it nuh, you got our backing, even Uncle Nehuski's.

cain
Originally Posted by TI:

Pan African is predominantly anti colonialist philosophy. If Che Guevara and Castro are Pan African heroes, it's merely part of the game. It is a Socialist philosophy after all.

 

I don't know why anti-colonialism is treated as some kind of Gospel by everyone. We inherited many good things from our colonial heritage.

 

This kind of West Indian and Third World tradition of lefty mutual masturbation where we all condemn colonialism is completely blind to many the many things we have to appreciate and indeed be grateful for to our British heritage.

FM
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
Originally Posted by TI:

Pan African is predominantly anti colonialist philosophy. If Che Guevara and Castro are Pan African heroes, it's merely part of the game. It is a Socialist philosophy after all.

 

I don't know why anti-colonialism is treated as some kind of Gospel by everyone. We inherited many good things from our colonial heritage.

 

This kind of West Indian and Third World tradition of lefty mutual masturbation where we all condemn colonialism is completely blind to many the many things we have to appreciate and indeed be grateful for to our British heritage.

 

The funny thing is they never even fought for independence. The British found Guyana of little economic value. They held on for a few more years because they were hoping to leverage against the communist tide sweeping British Guiana. Sir Eric Williams noted in 1945 that British Guiana was of no economic value to Britain. It is just a myth by the independence generation that they fought for some grand independence.

FM

Granger soon will be 70 years old.

 

Nagamootoo soon will be 65 years old.

 

Both of these men cannot influence the citizens of Guyana.

 

Granger has the Afro support down pat.

Nagamootoo is hoping to swing the Indo- that is not a sure thing for him to do.

 

Both of these fellas have had their days. 

 

This alliance thing is not going to fly in a majority government for them. As I said in a previous post, they need to find a Presidential Candidate that is unknown-but articulate. And knows the entire country's history. That individual could generate new interests in the electorate.

 

Moses and Granger have said enough for years and din make one bit of difference in the polarization.

 

Personally, I doan think those gentlemen want change-they want only to govern.

 

In Canada, there was a guy named Joey Smallwood-he said, if intelligent leaders want a change of direction in a country. Those wise, must be willing to read an awful lot. Just to get the fell of citizens.

 

Guyanese politicians full of themselves. Perhaps, dey doan even know who GHK Lall is. 

 

S
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
Originally Posted by TI:

Pan African is predominantly anti colonialist philosophy. If Che Guevara and Castro are Pan African heroes, it's merely part of the game. It is a Socialist philosophy after all.

 

I don't know why anti-colonialism is treated as some kind of Gospel by everyone. We inherited many good things from our colonial heritage.

 

This kind of West Indian and Third World tradition of lefty mutual masturbation where we all condemn colonialism is completely blind to many the many things we have to appreciate and indeed be grateful for to our British heritage.

 

The funny thing is they never even fought for independence. The British found Guyana of little economic value. They held on for a few more years because they were hoping to leverage against the communist tide sweeping British Guiana. Sir Eric Williams noted in 1945 that British Guiana was of no economic value to Britain. It is just a myth by the independence generation that they fought for some grand independence.

For the PPP. The struggle was to have GIWU recognized. Have the MPCA nullified. The campaign was more about the sugar industry paying slave labour wages. For the Jagans, it was more of struggle against the American preventing them for taking Guyana into the Soviet sphere.

 

www.timehritoday.blogspot.com

S

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×