It now seems as if that era was a time when political giants roamed throughout Bahama land. Our reference here is to those times in those far off days when politics in The Bahamas was seemingly all about race; all about the empowerment of the so-called ‘small man’.
In that era, men like Randol Francis Fawkes and Lynden O. Pindling vied for the affection of the crowd. That era was dominated –as the history books illuminate- by the towering figure of the late Sir Lynden who has –and most rightly so- been designated Father of the Nation. And as rightly so, Sir Randol is widely known and respected as the Father of Labor in The Bahamas.
We note also that there was another towering figure who beckons –so to speak- from that era when giants walked this land. This person would be none other than Cecil Vincent Wallace-Whitfield, founding father of the Free National Movement.
This great Bahamian is widely respected for the role he played in institutionalizing that party that came to be seen as a bulwark of democracy in The Bahamas.
The history books would also show that this Bahamian legend, icon and hero did not live long enough to relish the sweetness in the moment when his party was successful on August 19th. 1992 as it swept away a quarter of a century of Pindling rule in The Bahamas.
Highest on that list of matters that are changing would be what some observers are describing as some new species of ideological convergence on the part of this nation’s two major political parties.
In this regard, it must be pointed that this idea of political identity or congruence between the two major parties has always been a staple of so-called radical political analysis in The Bahamas. A similar point of view is expressed concerning other party systems in the Commonwealth of The Bahamas.
Some people go so far as to suggest that the party structures and systems may only exist for the often implicit purpose of sharing up the spoils once Election Day is over. They also argue that political parties are little more than instrumentalities for mobilizing the vote and rewarding the ‘generals’ who are charged with keeping the vote in line.
In times past, the political focus was put on charismatic heroes, men who were able, whether by way of word or dramatic action to win and woo the support of the crowd.
In a sense, then, this neatly explains the rise of that prototypical figure in the Caribbean and elsewhere in the world, that leader who could mesmerize the masses. The Bahamas had its Pindling. Jamaica had its Manleys and its Bustamante. Ghana had its Nkrumah.
Cuba –to this day- still has its Fidel.
That time of heroes is gone.
Today a new generation of leaders is emerging. It is less charismatic, more technocratic and less prone to sweeping visions about national development.
One very interesting exception to this gross generalization happens to be the Rt. Hon. Perry Gladstone Christie who openly suggests that his administration is all about the business of bringing far-reaching transformation to the way his party functions in its dual responsibility as party and government.
Only time and circumstances will determine the extent to which he has succeeded or fallen short of his expressed goal. But suffice it to say that by the day, the differences that once seemed to differentiate the Progressive Liberal Party from the Free National Movement are dissolving.
We are told that this might have been a deliberate ploy on the part of those PLP insiders who took seriously the idea that –in the absence of a clear break with its past- the Progressive Liberal Party was fated to remain in the political wilderness for at least a quarter of a century.
Then –as the record shows- the Free National Movement imploded.
Whether reference was to Clifton, the near meltdown of the banking sector, the ill-conceived and ill-fated Referendum, the leadership struggle in the FNM – or public reaction to the death of Sir Lynden, the result was the same insofar as that party’s political prospects were concerned.
On May 2nd. 2002, the New Progressive Liberal Party won.
On May 2nd. 2002, the Free National Movement lost.
With around twenty five weeks to go before the next general elections, the attentive public is watching and waiting to see who blunders and who lies. That same public is also quite aware of the fact that both major political parties are being led by men and women who are –in a sense- the same people.
All of this, notwithstanding, the people must and will make a choice.
- Austin DWI - New York DWI