Bahamian Politics - Setting a New National Agenda

By Larry Smith

Tribune columnist Andrew Allen recently lamented the fact that the opposition Free National Movement presents no intellectual alternative to the Progressive Liberal party, which he described as our default political setting.

"That bodes ill for the party's chances of ever challenging the philosophical dominance of the PLP in Bahamian politics," he said. "PLPism continues to set the tone of political debate with the FNM simply reacting."

As in most of the Commonwealth Caribbean, the overwhelming success of the ethnically-based nationalist movement led by the PLP, actually retarded our political development. The hard-won credentials of those who helped end white colonial rule gave them virtually unchallenged authority.

Leaders like Lynden Pindling, Eric Williams and Forbes Burnham maintained a generational hold on their people, for both good and ill. Perhaps the most extreme remaining example is the liberation leader of Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia), Robert Mugabe, who is busily exploiting his personal legacy to destroy the country.

Forbes Burnham did much the same to Guyana, another rich land with enormous wasted potential. So did Eric Gairy in Grenada. And had we been located further away from the United States and the glare of Western publicity, no doubt Lynden Pindling would have been able to extend his corrupt and incompetent regime even longer.

Of course, these men were all inspired by equally corrupt and unjust colonial regimes that were also based on race. The predictable result was that the ideology of the party which achieved majority rule and independence became the political norm for each country.

In the Bahamas (as well as other Caribbean countries) this default setting led to authoritarianism and corruption, squandering much goodwill and producing waves of emigration in the process. But eventually - as Mr Allen said - the emphasis shifted "away from political philosophy and toward issues of competence and trustworthiness." In Grenada, it even produced a popular revolution.

This shift created conditions for the first Free National Movement victory of 1992 led by the ex-PLP Hubert Ingraham. In fact, the FNM was essentially a reformation movement of former PLPs, combined with remnants of the old regime, and supported by a growing middle class with less interest in the animosities of their parents.

The defeat of Mr Ingraham in 2002 - being closer in time - is harder to dissect. Some have put it down to political maturity - turfing out the incumbents after two terms in favour of a fresh wind. Others have assigned it to the arrogance of the prime minister himself, capped by an ill-advised multi-referendum held just before the election. But perhaps we simply switched to our default political setting.

This theory argues that the FNM's failure to develop an ideology means that it has been unable to differentiate itself in any substantive way from the ideas that the PLP hypothetically espouses. In fact, for the last three years FNM politicians seem to have been on an extended vacation. Ironically, the only way forward for some is to call for the return of Mr Ingraham, whose break with the past in 1992 ushered in years of much-needed reform and liberalisation.

By all accounts, Perry Christie is of a similar mould to Mr Ingraham. But it is difficult to gauge his influence on the current PLP administration or its prospects, because he is rarely seen to act and has been almost invisible lately for health reasons. And there are unpleasant signs that the PLP is slipping back into the bad habits it once professed to have renounced.

With this in mind, there can be no doubt that the procedural break made by Ingraham's FNM with the politics of the past must be followed by a conceptual break to move the political centre of gravity. The decrepit 'mixed economy' statism of the mid-20th century must be exchanged for a radical new vision that looks to the future - not the past - and deals with clear and present dangers.

That means a national strategic plan to balance economic development with environmental safeguards, an energy policy that takes account of conservation and alternative fuels, fundamental reform of both education and the public sector, genuine privatisation, real support for e-commerce, greater accountability and freedom of information, a radical overhaul of the justice system, and strong measures to improve productivity and create more flexible labour markets.

We desperately need some new thinking to determine where we want to be in 20 years time. Just going with the flow won't cut it for much longer. We wonder which party, and which leaders, will have the drive, creativity and guts to break out of our self-imposed inertia.

Comments

[Joan Thompson]

This is an insightful appreciation of the philosophical underpinnings of politics of the PLP and the FNM - essentially two parties out of the same mold; two tribes.

Whilst I am impressed with your insight into the political petrie dish of festering collectivism, we are going to have to pull it apart piece by piece and replace it with a radically different philosophy - libertarianism.

[The Nationalist]

You should visit the Bahamian National Party website to see why the BNP will replace the FNM and challenge the PLP as the political party of the Bahamas. The BNP has a philosophy of Bahamian Nationalism which will connect and is the best chance to galvanize this nation into the necessary productivity to move forward meaningfully.

[The Nationalist]

You should visit the Bahamian National Party website to see why the BNP will replace the FNM and challenge the PLP as the political party of the Bahamas. The BNP has a philosophy of Bahamian Nationalism which will connect and is the best chance to galvanize this nation into the necessary productivity to move forward meaningfully.

[AntiFa]

Well, nationalist, can you please explain how your fascist right-wing tactics will bring the Bahamas to anything except separatism and poverty.