|
In a
national broadcast on “Law and Order in
Grenada” on March 6, 2008, Prime
Minister and party leader of the New
National Party (NNP), Dr. Keith
Mitchell, devoted one-and-a-half pages
of an 11 page text, to the historical
context of the ill-fated Grenada
Revolution of 1983.
One-and-a –half pages out
of 11 pages!
This act of
intelligence was enough to stir great
anxiety in the leadership of the
opposition NDC party, which prompted it
to rush into print and to distribute a
most vulgar political flyer demeaning
(yet again) the Office of the Prime
Minister and, for good measure,
wrongfully accuse Prime Minister
Mitchell of reliving the past and
“hurting the conscience of all
Grenadians”.
The
pettiness and small mindedness of the
accusation is borne out by the fact that
the Prime Minister’s intervention on
March 6, 2008, on the state of law and
order in Grenada today, was not only a
defining moment in his long and
illustrious career as servant leader of
this country. More importantly, it
received widespread support from
Grenadians of all walks of life at home
and abroad, who were not afraid to
express their views and support on the
numerous radio talk and call-in
programmes for the stance taken by the
Prime Minister.
The
absorbed listener and reader of the
Prime Minister’s speech will readily
admit that it was never about the
revolution of 1983, per se. What
references there were to the revolution
in the speech were merely contextual,
designed to intelligently set the stage
for a thesis on the relationship between
leadership, economic prosperity and law
and order against the background of some
disturbing developments in the country,
not least of which was the kidnapping,
robbery and beating of an officer of the
law by members of the executive of the
NDC.
But
if the NDC leadership finds to be
“sickening” the Prime Minister’s
assertion on page 3 of the printed text
of his National Broadcast that
“Suppression, anti-Christian sentiments,
tyranny and repressive laws, signaled
the death of the “revo” ” by the extreme
elements within it, then what does it
have to say about similar and more
extreme sentiments expressed about the
“revo” by Joan Purcell, two-time acting
Prime Minister of Grenada under the NDC
government of 1990-1995 and author of
the recently launched book “Memoirs
of a Woman in Politics-The Grenada
Revolution Recalled”?
Where are
the political flyers by the NDC
denouncing Madam Purcell who does not
mince words in her varying scathing
descriptions of the Grenada Revolution
while calling for healing of the
psychological and emotional “scars” from
the period?
Joan
Purcell in depressing and sorrowful tone
speaks about the “forces of evil” that
consumed the heart of the revolution.
She points to the “intolerance”,
“paranoia”, the “end of privacy” and
attacks on the media as some of the most
troubling aspects of the period of the
revolution to her. Mindful that there
are those in the leadership of the NDC
today who played their part in the ill-
fated revolution, Purcell interprets the
revolution as “wasting human potential”
(p.92) where “real substance was never
fully attained among the populace”.
Even more
revealing, though not surprising, she
observed that the revolution’s
“political kingdom had no key role for
religion” (p.69). That is to say, it was
anti-Christian. And finally, she speaks
of “death, deprivation, suffering and
dark days” during the revolution
(p.103).
We ask the
question: is Joan Purcell’s historical
reflections on the same revolution Dr.
Mitchell spoke briefly about deserving
of equal condemnation by the current
leaders of the NDC? Coming from the
first female leader of the party, are
Grenadians permitted to label Purcell
“sickening” for her account of the
revolution? Should we describe the tone
of her reflections as “frightening” and
“depressing”, “dividing the nation” and
“frightening investors”? Given concerns
about “hurting the conscience of all
Grenadians”, we have heard nothing from
the NDC on Joan Purcell’s brutal
condemnation of the revolution of 1983
and its aftermath. Why the hypocritical
morality by the party of Tillman Thomas?
It is said
that if you want to hide certain things
from some Anglo-Saxon blacks, put it in
a book. No political party practicing
hypocritical morality can claim, as the
NDC is doing, to being a party of
“believers” (whatever this means), of
“hope”, “peace” and “reconciliation and
unity”. These words, as Purcell noted of
the revolution, are modern-day
“ideological labels” designed to trick
the electorate into believing in
“symbols of change”.
The
National Democratic Congress (NDC)
should be re-named the National Dance
Company, for its best
performances are dancing from pillar to
post in intellectual confusion,
historical illusion and political
backwardness.
Let the
Progress Continue with Positive Change
under the NNP! |
