The cyclic switch between two dynasties seems to be on the cards once again. With MLP generating some momentum after Arvin Boolell’s victory in Belle-Rose/Quatre-Bornes, many feel that a win at the next general elections is more than probable. This has, not so surprisingly, been translated into a rekindled chutzpah among those that were defeated in 2014. But will our collective fate improve with an overhaul of personnel?

Those in office were eager for anything but a Labour success at the pre-Christmas polls. But the people have decided otherwise. There is now a greater sense of urgency in the government’s ranks. The clock is ticking. They are pinning their hopes on an economic upturn and visible signs of development. With many in the press quick to laud anything that benefits the rent seekers, the coverage around same would amplify these ‘realisations’.


But what is in for us? Do we continue to switch to and fro between two families and their associated yes-men and women? The MSM and the Labour party are not alike: the former’s regressive economic stance translates into the consolidation of the historic bourgeoisie while the latter’s version of democratisation supports the emerging bourgeoisie. Both when in power pursue their respective agendas…often at the cost of the better interests of the nation. For how could a fiscal gift of such proportions be given to promoters of smart cities or why would a flat tax rate with ruinous consequences be introduced? The damage caused by both parties cripple the country and will continue to do so.

A purple locomotive for leftist forces? No, thank you.

 The MMM, after yet another defeat, is on the look for that elusive winning formula. Of the ideas that have been thrown amidst the “seul contre tous” and “plus fort que jamais” inanities is that of a leftist force that would drive similar movements and factions. But is the MMM still on the left? Is a political party that eschews from communicating on smart cities, which stands for economic realism with an overt concern for the sugar barons and was one of the architects of the Illovo deal, of any contribution to progressive ideas? Not at the moment.

Enough space for a progressive movement

With the growing chasm between citizens and political parties, what would be ideal is a progressive movement that would renew faith in democracy. It would be truly transparent in the way it would operate; with open primaries citizens would get to elect their candidate for elections, it would ban any donation from corporate entities or business magnates and have clear limits on the amount that can be contributed, it would have a well defined programme and thus not indulge in the kind of impromptu measures such as the Metro Express.

A truly leftist force would not be a device at the hands of capitalists to thwart their competitors, would not have the undemocratic obsession with prolonging dynasties, would not contract alliances to gain power and would have no unhealthy obsession for one “homme providentiel”. We have enough people in this country that could make this project work. The challenge is getting them together.

Populist carrots are being thrown to the masses in an attempt to turn back the tide. All accompanied with excessive communication meant to curb the absence of leadership. Like the previous government, this one is not bothered with the weakening of the middle class and is saddled with scandals. But the economic doxa it follows is much more regressive. Progressives should unite. Now.

Chetan Ramchurn