In a published letter to the Editor of the Trinidad Guardian on Wednesday December 22nd 2010, one Gideon Mc Master penned a piece entitled 'Rowley not the answer' in which he spells out many reasons for his/this premise and goes on to boldly make alternative leadership suggestions.
While I normally try to avoid deconstructing letters to the Editor as they are usually written by lay folk who are entitled to a gross miscalculation or two, this one differs from most as the writer confers almost Godlike status on his (the PNM's) former leader, is admittedly written with conviction and, as the good gentleman does not appear to be one to let his facts interfere with reality, I thought I should follow him closely down this particular rabbit hole to see how he got to where he got and by what mental machinations did he so arrive.
Being seven paragraphs long, I thought I would alter from my usual line by line analysis as that would take an inordinate amount of time and column inches; I chose to focus instead on the sentiment and conveyed meaning behind each paragraph in the hope of still keeping up with him on his journey.
His opening paragraph sets the stage of a PNM at it's lowest ebb and himself as a devoted if budding supporter. Both circumstances collide at the Party's obvious need of guidance and his willingness to provide it, he promises to spare no quarter and expects none in return.
Fair enough.
In the second paragraph the gentleman refers to Dr. Rowley's lack of 'crossover appeal,' a term to which he gives no further clarification and leaves one to wonder as to which of the groups to which the Good Doctor does not belong that he fails to attract. In this same paragraph, the writer also establishes the former political leader Patrick Manning as a political deity and in his line "It is needless to assert that his appointment was a regressive step," Mr. McMaster shows his unfettered bias against his current leader and lays the blame for the Party's loss at the General Election squarely at Dr. Rowley's feet.
Knowing that it would require much suspension of disbelief to continue mining this particular work for anything like a nugget of wisdom or direction, I went bravely, trusting my instincts to guide me back home if the hole went too deep.
It did.
The third and fourth paragraphs were more of the same, deifying Manning and demonizing Rowley, but it was by his fifth paragraph that the gentleman both revealed and outdid himself simultaneously.
Claiming the mob that descended onto Balisier House on the evening of the defeat were less than kind or respectful to the former Prime Minister, Mr. McMaster says (and I quote):
"I recall the outrageous display of some hooligans at Balisier House. I remember the tremendous disappointment that I felt to see a leader, who has delivered the party from the verge of extinction, become the subject of vitriol, hatred and contrived, mob-like behaviour. The sarcastic smirks of some of those present have not yet left my mind. As though this was the dawn of a new paradigm of politics. One where we encourage further and promote such extremities of spite and disrespect whether actively or by acquiescence." (end quote)
Brushing past that on my first reading I missed the skillful turn of phrase that birthed the demi-god in the first place only to have him insulted by his successor 'actively or by acquiescence.'
The sixth paragraph (his words):
"A real leader would have immediately intervened to put this right. A dignified leader would have stood on principle and immediately reprimanded those responsible. A modern leader would have had the political maturity to denounce such indiscretions with impelling force. A dynamic leader would have took that opportunity to declare that, regardless of the divergence of political philosophies and indeed the former leader’s mistakes, he ought to leave with the accolades of which he is deserving. Rowley sat there quietly and failed to intercede. He missed that golden opportunity to distinguish and put himself a cut above the rest. I feel impelled to state that my support for the party is unwavering and non-negotiable. I will not falter for one moment in my belief that the PNM is the only political entity in our country with a history, tradition and foundation worth mentioning."
Obviously unfamiliar with the harsh reality of the Westminster system, the writer weighs too heavily for my taste on the successor to either praise or bury his leader. Dr. Rowley came there to do neither, as neither was his role. Mr. Manning's date with destiny was sown in the fields of his own arrogance and the requisite come-uppance was the settling of outstanding personal debts, a fever he alone was to sweat and one has to respect Dr. Rowley for not twisting the dagger further.
Had he done that (and I advised him to bury Manning every chance he got), his and the Party's fortunes at the Local Government Elections might have been more favorable.
As it was (and in my estimation), Dr. Rowley played the part of statesman and bore his losses as if they were his alone to bear. Such chivalry is lost on most of our people, and had Mr. Mc Master an ounce of the decency displayed by his new leader he would not have so quickly unsheathed his rapier pen.
Alas it is not so, and the closing paragraph, while most damning of all, brings this sordid piece of political necromancy to an end.
Seventh (and final) paragraph:
"By the same token, though, it is disturbing and unsettling to know that it has come to a place where the party’s most scrupulous minds are not brandished or utilised for its advancement. It is my view that Christine Kangaloo is the most apt and fitting for the role of leadership. She can easily bridge the gap between the diplomat and the working class and I need not say that she is well poised for a spirited battle against our current Prime Minister. Dr Amery Browne can also be nurtured, tweaked and moulded into our future leader as the raw materials are there and there are others. Rowley is not the answer. Of that I’m sure."
Not only does the writer fail to cover his base sensibilities, his political naiveté calls for like to battle like. As the current Prime Minister is a woman of East Indian descent, then the Party must scour the land to find a similar object to do battle.
Mr. Mc Master was obviously schooled politically in the children's card game pokemon, and all I can say in closing is this piece he contributed into the national discussion was seven paragraphs too long.
Ms Kangalloo and Dr. Browne would do well to publicly distance themselves from this sort of tripe, and Dr. Rowley would be well advised to continue on the task before him, to put his shoulder to the wheel and continue rebuilding the Party he leads, now free from megalomania and excess, back to a moral center and open for all citizens to contribute free from fear and free and fair.
Something to think about...
And it is with this belief and this knowledge that I say,
