The diminishing idealism of the PPP - Peeping Tomasina
in this photo we see two men admiring flood waters. they just happen to be two of the brightest and best of the PPP elite - Minister of Agriculture Robert Persaud in red, Bharrat Jagdeo, president of all the land, and some man holding an umbrella. this is what leadership stands for in Guyana. two clowns who’ve made micromanaging a high art form that every time it rains it floods and like GOD they’re here there and everywhere fixing this and fixing that and fixing nothing in the end. oh Guyana! your cup runneth overeth with intellectual midgets.
thess wo/men occasionally get the hammer on the nail of the head
Peeping Tom - Kaieteur News 25th March 2008
THE DIMINISHING IDEALISM OF THE PPP
Frederick Kissoon’s free ability to rail against the policies of the government stands as an important example of the failure of the People’s Progressive Party to nurture intellectual talent. In its twenty-eight years in opposition and fifteen years in power, the PPP has developed very shallow reserves of intellectual talent capable of responding to the challenges posed by critics of the party.
During the long vigil of the party while in opposition it failed to produce anyone of the mettle of Uncle Freddie to challenge, through the exchange of ideas, the dictatorial rule of the PNC.
And ever since Uncle Freddie took his right turn against the PPP, the party has failed to produce anyone from within its ranks capable of debating with the professor.
I recall that during the early nineties there were debates between the PPP and the PNC over the state of the economy. In one such debate the PNC put up Haslyn Parris and the PPP Cheddi Jagan for a televised debate.
One would have presumed that the PPP would have saved its leader for the later debate that took place between a very grumpy Desmond Hoyte and Cheddi. The fact that Cheddi himself had to appear to debate with Parris was an indicator of the intellectual shallowness of the PPP, something that does not seem to have changed in the fifteen years that it has been in power and more especially judging from the party’s and government’s total inability to respond in a convincing manner to the almost daily outpouring of criticisms by Uncle Freddie.
Uncle Freddie has called the PPP an elected dictatorship, has described the present PPP term as being marked by authoritarianism, and of recent has been making the outlandish claim that the PPP is now worse than Burnham.
Yet, from within its ranks the PPP has failed to offer any serious disputing of these views. The supporters of the PPP have had to rely on outclassed “Parrot” and “Blame the Government” columns to deflect the daily barrage of criticisms that come its way. Yet within the ranks of the ruling party are highly paid and pampered individuals who at the least should be able to come to the party’s rescue.
Sadly, this is not happening. This says a great deal about the motivation/alienation that exists within the party and government, as much as it does about the intellectual bankruptcy of the PPP.
This fact is all the more disappointing considering that the former General Secretary of the PPP could hold his own in any fora. Cheddi was a studious man who did a great deal of research as he followed closely developments throughout the world. While primarily trained as a dentist, he was an authority on issues, politics and economics.
Sadly, today the PPP is not producing in sufficient numbers persons that are capable of defending the policies of the party and the government. Why is this so? Why has the PPP failed over the years to develop the intellectual talent to go with a disciplined and united party?
Uncle Freddie would probably argue that Cheddi was an insecure individual who did not wish to be challenged internally within his party and so did not cultivate thinkers. Such a viewpoint cannot stand up to scrutiny because Cheddi was not the type of man to shy away from a debate. He reveled in such matters and could, as he did throughout his life, take on the best.
In searching for an answer as to why the PPP does not have sufficient reserves of intellectual depth we must avoid faulting Cheddi. The PPP has also always had some bright persons on board but never enough. Part of the problem has to do with the history of the PPP.
The split in the early PPP and later splits cost the PPP dearly because many of the persons who broke with the PPP were considered as the ideologues and thinkers of the party and their departure left a great vacuum. Cheddi was however such a profound and brilliant man that he alone could fill the void. However, we are now seeing the problems with not having sufficient reserves of intellectual talent within the party.
Secondly, the professional class did not align itself with the PPP but went more with the PNC and later with the Working People’s Alliance. In fact, Cheddi was abandoned by and large by those from the middle and professional classes.
The third factor I think responsible for the dearth of intellectual talent was the nature of the PPP’s politics. The PPP of Cheddi Jagan has always been a working class party. Being out of power, being a leftist party, and with little chance of Burnham conceding free and fair elections, Cheddi had great difficulty in courting the intellectual class.
Many of those who today are cozy with the PPP wanted nothing to do with the PPP and
Cheddi Jagan when he was out of office. And this explains the fourth factor: there are a great many political gold diggers and opportunists that have become attracted to the PPP ever since it took power in 1992. Many of these persons are only interested in their own self elevation rather than with the cause of the party.
Fifthly, the PPP now in power and increasingly being co-opted by the bourgeoisie class has lost the sort of idealism that characterized the party’s struggle for free and fair elections.
The party is drifting further apart from the working class through the policies being pursued by the government and in the process is losing that idealism for which it has long been associated. Without that idealism, the politics of the PPP has become sterile and rancid.
Finally, the migration of skilled personnel as it has done with all parties, has affected the PPP. It has never 
been easy to have continuity and to invest and provide the intellectual training within the party when today someone is here and tomorrow they are gone to greener pastures.
Instead of responding authoritatively to the criticisms of the government and the party, the PPP today seeks refuge in the fact that the barrage of criticism it faces is a manifestation of the freedoms enjoyed. That may well be so but it still does not explain the shortcomings of the party in not being able to respond intellectually to its many critics.
