Some parallels just can’t be drawn.
To compare PNC’s 2025 trouncing to its loss of 1961, when the Party had NEVER EVER won, is not only a bad statistical comparison but is brazenly and deliberately misleading.
And here’s why.
Though Leader Burnham won only 11 of the 35 seats, in 1961, it was 31.43% of the Assembly…almost one third with 40.99% of the popular vote.
By numerical comparison, the 2025 Norton ticket got the dregs of the election barrel –77, 998 of the 438,467 votes counted which is a damning 17.9% of votes for APNU and a speaking testament to its management’s unfavourability amongst the electorate, during its unremarkable five-year tenure.
He netted a paltry twelve seats by losing a whopping ten…which is a win/loss ratio that puts a Party out of business, if it doesn’t revert to a candidacy process that scrutinizes and eliminates prospects for Leader based upon a core set of attributes.
The formula inherited from the Founders did not arbitrarily ascribe voter appeal and communicative ability to its range of candidate qualifications…nor was its evaluation panel some sixth finger appendage.
Fielding a qualified candidate, in all of its aspects, is the bottom line to victory.
More hollow rhetoric in reemerging “bigger and better”-the theater of the vague, unscientific and non quantifiable- is not where the Party should begin its 13th Parliamentary chapter, if it’s seeking to reestablish itself as a credible and respected agency.
“He was elected”– the umbrella refrain from many in the Party- misunderstands the purpose of its Constitution as much as it underscores how much of it is not taught to those who abide and and want to hide under it.
It’s section 2 ‘OBJECTS’ (1) To create an environment which is favourable to the Party’s winning and maintaining governmental office by electoral means…has been irrevocably failed by current management and is one of the many grounds for immediate removal.
‘Objects’ is for another discussion.
Leveraging the Constitution, its constructed intent, is what is vital in this moment of respite, right before going to Parliament as a third string entrant, a demotion and defamation that will be hard to overcome when its stature will be prime target by its superior members.
It will also stipulate that the Party will not be squatting ground for those sheltering under the flaws of the Constitution which makes a leader overseer of his own failures, to the peril of its purpose.
All this political evangelism and abstract prophesying about the Party coming back “stronger and better” sounds like an ambitious coping mechanism to justify the current excursion under imaginary ‘success’ silver linings…otherwise known as squatting.
What’s implicitly dangerous is that this trouncing is being sold as some divine sign, some biblical test, some chosen, spiritual adventure akin to the rising phoenix and every other strain of political con-artistry that preys upon emotional vulnerabilities.
Rhapsodizing the political failure is now some contrived haven, where twelve – as in the seats of of reduction – is now being ascribed biblical numeracy…except the very bible tells us we have the mind of Christ and are, therefore, not fools.
Some twelves are less divine than some…like the 12 plus accusations of rape by the world’s most famous, felonious President.
This 12 is equally as carnal, fleshly, luring to misdirection… in the name of biblical interpretation.
And we’ll say again, being equipped with the mind of Christ, we know when to to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. We know the parable of Talents and the chastisement meted out to poor work and misuse of gifts – chastised as wicked and slothful. We know the servants who doubled their money, using their god-given talents were deemed “good and faithful servants” and were given greater responsibility.
So this whole thing about Christ and his 12 in the face of shameful loss sounds like some Christ flag waving…which we’ll file under Mathew 23 …the Scribes and the Pharisees and the warning therein, about those who use the name of Jesus for personal gain.
We support the building back of the Party but to think that it’s wrecker can be its builder is not a divine oxymoron. It’s not a paradox at all.
This is all earthly stupidity. Bad seed yields bad crop.
All the Homilies and Jeremiads with some flavoring of numeracy – the biblical twelve- needs to be called what it is…blasphemy which, only because we’re on this platform, will be preferable to profanity.
And the drawing on the biblical “Will you not watch with me for one hour?” as a quotation of Burnham’s having, despite the odds, secured the improbable percentage -almost one third of the seats – is just sacrilege.
It is stomping on holy ground, furrowed and fallowed by Burnham, whose toil has been desecrated by all that his work was intended to prevent.
If Elders still exist, this is their moment to show what the Party Constitution is for.
We say this from the depths of our core to appeal for help to right this Ship of State that has run aground under the Captaincy of the current Party Leader.
And this couldn’t be more pertinent when headlines like this –NORTON REFUSES TO STEP DOWN AS PARTY FRACTURES WIDEN WITH MORE RESIGNATIONS – continue to mar the Party’s image and the political bandwidth of its senior members, when recycling the Party’s most prolific failure in the history of its existence, is seen as a strategic do-over.
Even less heartening is the assessment of a Party senior, soon to be MP, quoted “That’s why Aubrey Norton needs to be there to steer the ship. A captain doesn’t just jump off his ship. That will prove wrong of him,” …
Running aground, seemingly, is now stripes earned. Failure now has bragging rights. Calling it experience and not incompetence is a recipe for continued decimation.
It’s as ignorant as allowing the term ‘Middle Class’ to be used as a pejorative, weaponized against those who move up the social ladder because of ambition; the population upon which the Founders built the PNC.
The Party Constitution is not a legal document. Its a guideline of principles, rules regulations, none of which are legally actionable.
When crises occur, such as this massive blow to its structure that threatens, most of all, its history in Guyana’s political landscape, it is the job of Elders, or those willing to override all the normal checkpoints, to save its existence.
Congress and Elections, though vital, are are not critical to the Party’s existence, when disaster strikes. They are not the points at which critical evaluations are made and do not dictate when common sense should be asserted.
Implementing an immediate rescue plan to stem the bleeding, to stabilize the trauma until the full operation can be performed, is what must be done.
It is one of the unspoken imperatives of operating an agency, not detailed in the specificity of a Constitution.
The Party’s Constitution is a foundational document made to serve its members, not for its members to serve it.
