Ian Boyne
THE HIGHLY engaging columnist Claude Robinson has taken me to task for suggesting that the media usually frame issues surrounding Mr. Seaga in a negative light, and that there is, indeed, a media bias against the Opposition Leader.
Let me reiterate that Mr. Seaga has been his own worst enemy. His intemperate, irascible nature and his tendency to 'shoot off' his mouth first and think later has not endeared many persons to him. His closeness to the Jamaican grass roots has made him adept at 'tracing'. Emotional control is not among his strengths. Eddie Seaga has offended so many people and carries so much baggage that it is my contention that even media persons who are supposed to be trained in dispassionate, 'objective' analysis don't escape the prejudice against him.
'EYES AND EARS'
Seaga is rarely given the benefit of the doubt in any situation, and media people are not at all reluctant to dogmatically ascribe motives to him which cannot be empirically proven. Take Mr. Seaga's recent appointment of former deputy leaders Pearnel Charles and Mike Henry as his 'eyes and ears' to roam all over Jamaica and to inform him about what is taking place on the ground among Labourites. These men have been some of Mr. Seaga's harshest, most bitter and trenchant opponents; one of whom has openly challenged him for the leadership of the party and the other is as desirous of prime ministerial office as the monk is to see the face of God.
Seaga, astoundingly, appointed these former sworn and fierce opponents as his point men at this crucial time.
Rather than the media seeing this as a major strategic coup for Seaga, a man who is said not to have any skills in mending fences; rather than seeing this as an indication that Seaga can work with men who are not known to be lackeys and sycophants, it is seen as a cynical, desperate move by Seaga to hold on to power and to sideline newly-appointed deputy leaders whom he does not trust.
BUILDING BRIDGES
There is no doubt that the 'reformists' are not Seaga's favourites, and that Seaga realises that the feeling is mutual. Seaga wants to set his own timetable for departure and not to be pushed. So, yes, any keen political analyst would know that Seaga wants countervailing power, but how does any journalist know authoritatively and definitively that the appointments are purely for Machiavellian purposes, and that Seaga does not want genuinely to have a better view of what Labourites are thinking and saying? Suppose he now realises that he needs what we have scolded him for not getting all these years authentic feedback, from
non-sycophants?
None of us knows for sure. We have only to speculate and make a judgment. But should journalists just say that you can't teach an old dog new tricks, or that a leopard does not really change his spots? Is this the basis of our empiricism?
On Nationwide, Cliff Hughes and Carol Narcisse poured scorn on the appointments. These men were appointed, said Narcisse bluntly and coldly, "to carry news. A man (or woman) convinced against his (or her) will is of the same opinion still."
Nothing in the JLP constitution indicates that what Seaga did was irregular. Nothing indicates that these appointments necessarily conflict with the duties of the General Secretary, chairman or deputy leaders of the party. It could be that Seaga merely wants to manipulate these men in his alleged desperation a drowning man clutching at a straw and that he wants to show his 'legendary contempt' for those who dare turn down the role of lackey and wimp like Karl Samuda, James Robertson, Horace Chang. But I ask Claude Robinson and other media watchers to ask themselves this: In a case where two plausible options are before us and in which, epistemologically, we have no certain way of knowing what is inside another individual's head (if we are not mind-reading psychics), how does one decide which theory to hold? We should at least be humble in refraining from adopting any position as unassailable fact.
AMBITIOUS
Charles and Henry are ambitious men with large egos but they are no fools. They know Seaga's days are numbered politically and that his stocks are not inexhaustible in the party. They are reading the signs in the party, too. We do a tremendous disservice to these two politically astute men if we put forward the view that they would allow themselves to be used for Seaga's purposes. Why hitch your wagon to a falling star? These men are too astute not to know that the reformists are unstoppable. Golding will be the next leader of the JLP.
I cannot believe that these two political stalwarts are such dunces as to believe that they could gain anything by selling out to Seaga. Any other two persons in the JLP, but not Charles and Henry. They may be self-seeking men, but not idiots.
The 'leadership crisis' in the JLP at this time is media-manufactured. I heard Anthony Abrahams, co-host of the Breakfast Club, coming back in between breaks of the one and a half hour 'special' on happenings in the JLP saying, "We are talking about the leadership crisis in the JLP." What leadership crisis? Because Seaga has refused to obey the dicta of certain people in the media that he should leave now? It does not matter to these people that Seaga was democratically and uncontroversially re-elected leader unopposed at the last party conference, or that just a few months ago he had two ringing endorsements from the party expressing confidence in his
leadership.
THE GOLDING FACTOR
Recently, the media blew up the issue of the contention over who should chair the Selection Committee of the JLP. The chairman normally chairs it and the reformist journalists in the media were lecturing party chairman Bruce Golding about not backing down and putting up a fight to Mr. Seaga over this issue. Seaga was meanwhile chided for being the irrepressible, indefatigable dictator and authoritarian who just wants absolute power over everything. Why the hell won't he just go off into the sunset?
The reformist journalists have been getting extremely agitated and frustrated over this man and his "antics". Well, the party lawyers advised that it would be okay for the party leader to chair the Selection Committee and the JLP's Standing Committee agreed with the lawyers with no obstruction from the party chairman. It is this, plus the fact that Seaga has appointed two former detractors to be his eyes and ears, which is deemed a major "leadership crisis" in the JLP.
Columnists like Earl Bartley have joined Mark Wignall and other reformists in the electronic media in lashing Bruce Golding for not 'having the stomach for a fight'. My colleagues are glorifying strife, tension and fighting over conciliation, compromise and the peaceful resolution of conflict. It's good that PALS has broadened its mandate to include not just school children but adults. I could suggest some adults who would do well with some
PALS help!
If Seaga is such a toothless tiger, why is there all the fuss and concern about his strategies and ploys? Why not just ignore him, knowing that he is merely living out his fantasies? Why be frightened by his every move? The paranoia over Seaga serves, ironically, to inflate his power.
I guess if he could get Charles and Henry on his side he is really not a spent force, after all. But the Seaga detractors can't acknowledge that.
Bruce Golding has shown enormous emotional control in all of this. Like a true leader who knows how to give and take and to effect compromises, he told the Young Turks last week to show respect for their elders and long-time party workers. He made it clear to them that one does not have to be rude and cantankerous when holding honest disagreements with other persons. He then said he himself did not agree with the legal opinion on the chairmanship of the Selection Committee, but he went along with it for party unity. It was a very important, balanced and nuanced speech which shows that Golding is, indeed, preparing seriously for national leadership.
I say to my colleagues in the media who think it is an awful thing not to be too eager for a fight: We have had too many fights, to much bloodletting, too much divisiveness, and too many my-way-or-the-highway in this country.
As a country we are suffering because of the lack of cohesion. Bruce Golding needs to show he can hold the various factions of the party together; that he can build win-win coalitions and broker compromises. The JLP is today far wiser, more disciplined and restrained than it ever was.
The reformists themselves are in no way behaving publicly like their supporters in the media. James Robertson and Horace Chang are models of public decency, restraint, statesmanship and emotional control. Despite the provocation from traditionalists and Seaga loyalists in the party, they have bitten their tongues and refused to be sucked in by a carnivorous Press addicted to blood sport.
Bruce Golding is playing his cards right and he can afford to ignore the Press-baiting to "sick" Seaga. He is, according to the authoritative Don Anderson polls, enjoying a very robust 52 per cent lead as the most capable man to lead the JLP after Seaga. His nearest rival, Audley Shaw, is at meagre 14.9 per cent and Pearnel Charles is at a tiny 7.9 per cent. The leadership is his. There is no need for a fight. A lot of this baiting for Golding to fight Seaga to step aside now is based on the view that the PNP is about to collapse and that social unrest is around the corner.
People underestimate the PNP politically, which is a tragic thing to do. Patterson will not be calling elections anytime soon. And I don't accept Seaga's view that his departure would necessarily be exploited by Patterson. Seaga's departure would strengthen, not weaken, the JLP. A clear indication of Seaga's intention not to lead the JLP into the next election would give a significant boost to the JLP's stocks. Seaga would be right if Golding, Charles, Shaw and the others are foolish enough to follow the Press and have a knock-out fight. That could be exploited-and should be- exploited by a politically astute PNP.
But if the reformists, Golding, Charles, Henry, Shaw and Seaga all behave as restrained and responsible as they have been behaving publicly, the transition should be smooth. Seaga does not have to leave within the next year or so, for the PNP's stocks are not running out and with the prospects for the economy, the gloom and doom experts will have another guess coming.
Ian Boyne is a veteran journalist. You can send your comments to ianboyne1@yahoo.com
