The Chairman of the Opposition Party - the PNM - is quoted in the newspaper as saying in essence that the recent appointments to State boards are racist in nature in that only Indians have been appointed. That this is patently not true, it is also a very careless and potentially dangerous mistake.
It is careless because it is simply not true. Any check on the names of the appointees will show this, not to mention the photographs, one of which was published in the very pro-PNM newspaper,, Newsday.
But it is also dangerous because this country is almost equally divided between the blacks and the Indians (45% to 55%) with the Indians very slightly in the majority, The statement tends to lend itself to stirring up racial feelings. Is the erstwhile chairman saying that the recent State board appointments do not reflect the real numbers and divisions in the society? Or is he saying that while the PNM did so, only the PNM is allowed to do this? Or is he saying that now that the shoe is on the other foot that only PNM supporters and Africans can be appointed without any adverse comments? Or is he saying or implying that the firing and replacement of the old boards is racial in nature? Or is he saying or implying all of these things?
One would expect that the State board appointees would be dominated by supporters of the particular Party that won (or wins) an election. To pretend that this is just wrong and should be otherwise - is just that: a pretense! Even in countries where there is no obvious ethnic division the winning Party's supporters are "rewarded" with State appointments. We can discuss whether this act is right or wrong. But how are we going to prevent this - especially when it can be argued that the PNM was guilty of this when it was their turn?
No comments:
Post a Comment