One of the most hotly contested parliamentary elections in Trinidad and Tobago’s fairly recent political history was held on December 10, 2001. Voter turnout back in 2001 was two-thirds (66.13% to be precise). At that point, that was the second highest turnout ever recorded, albeit a far cry from the record of 88% set in 1961.
In an article (see image at bottom of page) published in the Guardian Newspaper a week before the election, legal luminary Data Seetahal expressed the view that neither the People’s National Movement (PNM) nor the United National Congress (UNC) were verifiably delivering in terms of multi-racial inclusiveness.
The main point raised was the racial composition and geographical distribution of candidates selected by both parties. The article asserted that despite nice sounding rhetoric, when it really came down to it, the parties chose candidates from their core ethnic base in the safe or relatively safe constituencies, while they put forward a more varied set of candidates in the marginals were they were not sure to win. The result of this was held to be that both parties were most likely to end up with Members of Parliament predominantly from their perceived core ethnic base.
The following extract from the article stands out:
It is the marginals that seem to me to embody what T&T politics should be about. In these constituencies, there is no catering to any inherent tribalism in the selection of candidates.
Beyond the 2 political parties, how much closer are we as a society at large to ridding ourselves of inherent tribalism in all aspects of our shared lives?
As borne out by the vitriol being poured out in the public space in the wake of the 2020 parliamentary election – which I won’t deign to reproduce or summarise here – I’m not sure much has changed in 19 years…..
Politics868 