|
|
Volume No. 1 Issue No. 69 - Tuesday May 10, 2005 |
Clarification of the Diaspora Voting Situation
by Gabriel Christian Esq.
I did not want to write this, but now I must.
I was called by two Dominican patriots yesterday May 7, 2005, who said my name, among others in the Diaspora, was being bandied about on radio with regard to paying the tickets of Dominicans so they could go home to vote. Such fairy tales of my involvement in airline tickets for DLP voters unfairly exaggerate the scope of my limited budget.
I did no such thing, but I did encourage all Dominicans who could go home to exercise their birthright to do so and I am proud of that. In 2000 the RDF/DAAS symposium unanimously adopted the Brooklyn Declaration to further the principle of a Borderless Nation within which all those Dominicans in the Diaspora could vote.
Not a peep of protest was heard. The UWP had representation at that symposium and the 2002 symposium in Dominica where the principle of voting rights for overseas Dominicans was reiterated.
Not a word of protest was heard then. The Brooklyn Declaration was printed in the 2nd Edition of In Search of Eden by Andre and Christian amplifying the voting principle for posterity in print, not a word of protest was heard then.
US citizens are allowed to send in absentee ballots, from wherever they may be, no one pillories that right. Are US citizens superior in civic virtue to born Dominicans? Who would deny an overseas Dominican the right to vote, yet the Chinese who were sold passports by the UWP regime-among others-can vote?
Many of us have fought all of our lives to develop our country. Our dutiful effort ensures that our departure did not mean an end to our birthright and our responsibility to build Dominica.
Therefore, I find it an insult worthy of rebuke to somehow castigate those who went home to vote as unworthy of their birthright or paid political mercenaries.
Indeed, it is rank hypocrisy where the practice of appealing to the Diaspora for assistance has been common practice by ALL Dominican governments, even prior to independence.
Our contributions benefit all Dominicans and the medicines, books and infusions of cash into the local economy are not coded in party colors. Our assistance is welcomed, yet we must not be allowed a seat at the table of political dispensation?
This is a ludicrous position which should find no comfort in the minds of the wise. Why then should we be denied our birthright, which is our right to vote? To continue to deny or frustrate our birthright is what is criminal and unfair.
Our balloting in Dominica is secret anyway, and paying for votes carries risks. Bribery has never worked in Dominican politics, from my observation. People have generally voted their conscience or for those who they believe best able to serve their interest.
Ours is a small but politically astute electorate. Our voters are superior to US voters in conscience and better informed than most, is my humble view.
A note on efforts at persuasion via material means: In 1980, DemLab was seen as having dished out relief supplies aplenty, yet our people took it and still voted for the DFP. In 2000 the UWP did billboards, gave out T-shirts and much largesse and yet they lost.
I actually cautioned some senior Labour Party campaigners about all the knickknacks given to supporters, concerned that people would take them and still reject Labour due to the tradition noted above.
I stressed the need for reasoned debate and the like. I guess I come from a different generation when philosophical discourse, not musical accompaniment at rallies, was the order of the day during election time. Perhaps my age betrays me.
It would seem to me people voted Labour because it was seen as the better side. One must not forget that the mishandling of PM Charles by talk radio turned off many people to the UWP.
Who can forget the braying donkey laced to PM Charles' voice on a local radio? One cannot forget the magnetism of a Rosie Douglas and his tragic death along with the still latent sympathies for the two departed Prime Ministers who passed in such a short space of time. These losses were unprecedented in our history.
In fact that PM Skerrit showed much promise in his one year at the helm and he made some major foreign policy moves: China, Venezuela etc. The concrete achievements in project finance and the government's ability to pay civil servants after the IMF austerity measures seemed a mark of success.
Skerrit exuded confidence, the vibrancy of youth and a "can do" spirit. The man is not perfect, but such were the perceptions which it seems to me drove the DLP victory. In addition, with his opener "God is Good" and the crowd's refrain, "All the time" he seemed to have tapped into the deeply religious ethos of our Christian population.
Some may consider that window dressing, but enough people believed him sincere. The issues of integrity and foreign bribery will be ferreted out in time if true, but did not seem to sway the voters at the last minute.
On the other hand the UWP's blockade of the Labour motorcade seemed lawless, was perceived to be in poor taste and may have cost the party votes in the Carib Territory and elsewhere. The message here is that the voters, or prospective voters, must be allowed to go about their business unhindered.
A post mortem of the UWP's loss will be done in time by historians and others, but it would seem their loss may well lie at the door of those who engaged in five years of self destructive criticism via radio instead of building bridges born of civility or engaging wholesome community projects.
We need good alternatives to bad government, and the UWP or any other force, must be able to use the next five years building such alliances, not turning on those in the Diaspora whose only crime is unselfish service to country.
When those of us in the Diaspora-including myself-worked with the UWP in meeting local needs between 1995-2000, where was the outcry then?
In fact some of my comrades castigated me and condemned me of being supportive of UWP then when we sent home computers to the schools. My retort was I serve my country's best interests, no matter who is in power.
We should not divide the Diaspora by such vile partisanship. Indeed, when a request was made for the DAAS to side with one party or another, I disagreed as did the executive.
That did not, however, rob any member of his or her right to go home and vote or express an opinion.
That Dr. Fontaine did go home to vote was his right. In Dr. Fontaine, I see a selfless patriot who has practiced great love of country.
So let us stop this senseless castigation of the Diaspora. Our votes and support though it might have helped was not, I believe, why the UWP lost. And if I am proved wrong, so what?
We are Dominicans. We have never engaged in a political litmus test and welcome all Dominicans and friends of Dominica to this cause.
Our resources have staved off the collapse of our country many a time. We, not China or anyone else, are the biggest investors in Dominica. We are here to do our best for our country and we will struggle for our country's victory till the end.
|
|
|