#4254: On the failure of a democratic success: reply to Pierre from Poincy

[Robert Corbett <bcorbett@netcom.com>]

From: Jean Poincy <caineve@idt.net>

Pierre wishes to know from me, if what he calls the opposition party has
an agenda for Ayiti. His inquiry makes me look like a defender of the
opposition party. Therefore he's challenging me to lay out what I know
of their agenda, knowing for sure himself that it does not have any in
comparison to Arisitide's party. I have not indicated this anywhere. I
don't comment on Ayitian politics neither as a politician nor as a
political activist. I do so as an abstract objective observer. This is
why I always took a philosophical approach in stating my views on
Ayitian issues.

When I am looking at politics in Ayiti any political setting for that
matter, I don't take a partisan approach. If I do, my analysis will fail
to be objective and I won't be able to see the practicality of public
policies. What governs always my observations is the collective end of
methods used by politicians to fulfill their duties. If such an end is
not achieved or partially achieved, I allow myself to look at all sides
to understand where things did not work in the process.

Pierre's line of question deprives one the flexibility to reason within
the abstract field which gives room to consider all aspects of the
issue. At any rate I'll do my best to answer his question while
remaining in the abstract as much as possible. Allow me to state my view
this way: all parties have a wish to change the face of Ayiti, but none
has an agenda showing how they will do it. Keeping their individual
interests constant, the wish is what gets them into politics and the
agenda is what they conceive to make it expedient.

Giving Ayiti a face lift is the end and everyone sees it in huge bold
characters. Aristide, Evans Paul, Gerad Pierre-Charles, Serge Gilles and
the like see it but neither one has been able to unthread it and this is
why there is so much bickering; otherwise, they would all lay out their
agenda on what to tackle as a priority. The fact that Aristide
articulates his wish better than the others while he is relatively
acting on it does not make his sayings and actions an agenda. 

The opposing group could do the same thing, if they were acting
strategically. Aristide's position toward the people is more altruistic
than anything else and anyone willing to could engage in such without
taking part into politics. That is to say an agenda is the heart of
politics. Politics is the manipulation of multiple distinct interests to
conciliate them in reaching a common goal, which is the wish shared by
all politicians. 

In the process some will prevail and others will be subdued. But it does
not mean that the latter will not find satisfaction. It may not be at
the full extent of the prevailing one is, but enough to enjoy some
degree of satisfaction as a component of the whole. That being said:

1: priorities coming from party are to be set in agenda 
2: programs encompassing the priorities are to be delineated
3: means to achieve them are to be laid out in light of its expediency
4: strategies of implementation are to be articulated
5: the timeframe such an agenda is to be executed
6: the stage at each an evaluation is to be conducted

Not having all the above clearly conceived, any wish that a candidate
has in changing the face of Ayiti has some serious shortcomings as s/he
will swim in big ideas, engage in "EXTRA ORDINARY" projects to never
avail and keep pointing fingers.  Rich countries or international
financial institutions are the prime target of blames. I am returning
the question to Pierre, if he feels objectively that a political party
in Ayiti has such, please share it with objectivity. From abstraction we
understand better what is to be done and realize the concrete. Not the
other way around.

Ayiti has lived, lives and will live
Mozeb