Guyana Observer News

Freddie Kissoon

Can we understand, will we ever understand, what power does to rulers? More importantly, can we ever comprehend the nature of the PPP? Freedom House turned out in full force to celebrate the election victory of Barack Obama.

The PPP leaders even hosted a symposium on his inauguration. This was confusion galore. Many persons are still in a mental daze about the PPP’s ecstasy over the presidency of Mr. Obama. Perplexing, mysterious, unfathomable, esoteric are words that come to mind.

It just does not seem right. How can the PPP rejoice in Mr. Obama’s victory? Why would the PPP like Mr. Obama? It was Mrs. Jagan who initiated the enigma. In several of her columns in her party propaganda organ, the Mirror, Mrs. Jagan welcomed the presence of Mr. Obama on the American political scene and wished for his victory.

But surely, a ruling politician in any part of the world that embraces Mr. Obama must know, even at the elementary level, that he stands for the taming of power, the use of power through consultation with and participation of the stakeholders who have been traditionally left out of a say in the direction of where the political administration has taken American society.

Most of all, the invention of a new political culture that at its heart has respect for people, even those whose votes we didn’t receive and who we do not normally agree with. If there is anything one can say about the character of this great human being is that he wants to change the course of history

What do Mrs. Jagan, Mr. Jagdeo and the PPP leadership in general see in Barack Obama? We can’t answer that question. They have to tell about their feelings towards Mr. Obama. But it is within the realm of logic to say that after being so enthusiastic about Barack Obama, a few things about his approach to power must interest Freedom House and the Office of the President.

Unfortunately and most tragically, we see not an ounce of change in the style of Mr. Jagdeo since he was photographed smiling broadly with the US Ambassador at an event by the US Embassy to commemorate the inauguration. The PPP remains the same organization it was before and after it sponsored its symposium on Mr. Obama.

The Obama effect has evaporated quickly from the memory of Mr. Jagdeo. He told us that had the striking air traffic controllers picketed him at the airport they would have been dismissed. Strange pronouncement from a President who admires Mr. Obama.

Mr. Jagdeo cannot be serious about his pro-Obama values. Would Mr. Obama be so crass as to appoint an out and out Democratic Party loyalist to the Integrity Commission? One can say with absolute definitiveness that Mr. Obama is not made of that kind of negative material.

And what about power? What is Mr. Jagdeo’s deportment since the swearing-in of Mr. Obama? We can turn to his press conference last Thursday.

If one analyses the speeches of Mr. Jagdeo carefully, one sees a deadly Freudian undercurrent at work. Mr. Jagdeo seldom uses; “we”, “our” “the” when he speaks about the Government of Guyana. It is always what he will do or would not do. It is always “I” At the discussion on the EPA at the Convention Centre, he would use the word “I” often in reference to what the Government of Guyana cannot do or would not do in relation to the EPA. At his Thursday press conference, he let it be known that “Mr. Benn works for me and not for Patrick Yarde.

“This was in connection with his dismissal of the importance of the GPSU chairman, Patrick Yarde. It was not that Mr. Benn works for the Government but he works for “me.” Those who study the psychological profiles of leaders look for these types of emanations and it gives one an indication of how the leader perceives of power.

What should not go unmentioned is the inexplicable display of chauvinism the President puts on at his press conferences. You do not see this type of deportment when he speaks in other forums. His press conferences are always characterized by flair of bravado and a descent into insulting language. Thursday was no exception. He asserted. “I am not interested in anything Patrick Yarde has to say.”

What is the psychological significance of these chauvinistic pyrotechnics? We can turn to Freud. Deep inside, Mr. Jagdeo wants to debate but is unsure of his intellectual prowess. He vicariously achieves his goal by drawing guns at his press conferences. He wins in that forum. He has no opponents.