Tag: history

My Morning Paper – December 06, 2024 – Bullying by the PLP’s Playbook

As one listens to the voice note by Fred Mitchell, Chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and Minister of Foreign Affairs, it is unmistakable that the PLP has dusted off its toxic playbook of bullying—a desperate attempt to silence dissent, control its base, and intimidate opponents into a submission of silence The characteristics of bullying—threats, insults, and exclusion—are all on full displayed here, stopping just short of outright threats.

Mitchell’s remarks are riddled with inflammatory language aimed at disparaging those who dare to challenge the PLP. Referring to individuals as “Uncle Toms” is not merely name-calling; it’s an insidious tactic designed to demean, isolate, and publicly shame. By weaponizing this historically loaded term, Mitchell not only insults individuals but also seeks to undermine their credibility and worth.

Then there’s his use of exclusionary language: “All PLPs and people of goodwill.” This phrasing creates a clear divide—you’re either aligned with the PLP, or you’re cast out as lacking “goodwill.” It’s the oldest trick in the bully’s handbook: force conformity by ostracizing those who don’t fall in line. This type of rhetoric stifles open dialogue and reinforces a culture of fear and submission.

A closer look at Mitchell’s tone reveals an unmistakable sense of insecurity. Like most bullies, his bravado masks a deep fear of losing power. By accusing opponents of being “violent, criminal, and unpatriotic,” Mitchell is engaging in classic projection—attributing his party’s divisive tactics to others. His claims that the opposition’s actions undermine the “rule of law” are ironic, given the PLP’s own history of suppressing dissent and fostering discord.

Mitchell’s voice note also attempts to co-opt the narrative of Bahamian history for political gain. He chastises the Free National Movement (FNM) for allegedly mocking a significant moment in the nation’s fight for freedom, yet fails to acknowledge the broader context: the PLP’s refusal to engage in democratic debate is what escalated tensions in the first place. To suggest that dissenting voices are “burning the house down” for power is disingenuous, especially when the PLP’s own actions—such as silencing the opposition—have contributed to this political discord.

Mitchell’s remarks are a textbook example of bullying behavior:

While he stops short of direct threats, his rhetoric is rife with implications that dissenters will face social and political ostracism; Threats and Intimidation.

The use of “Uncle Toms” is a deliberate attempt to insult and demean; Name-Calling.

By framing loyalty to the PLP as synonymous with “goodwill,” Mitchell excludes and isolates those who hold opposing views; The Threat of Exclusion.

Overall, the real tragedy here is the chilling effect such rhetoric has on democratic discourse. Instead of fostering an environment where ideas can be debated and challenged, the PLP’s leadership has chosen to weaponize language to silence critics. This is not the behavior of a party confident in its vision for the Bahamas; it is the behavior of a party desperate to cling to power at any cost.

Perhaps the most glaring irony is Mitchell’s call for “PLPs and people of goodwill” to reject the “violence” and “psychological warfare” of the opposition. This statement is rich coming from someone whose own rhetoric is steeped in psychological manipulation and divisive tactics. If the PLP truly wishes to uphold the values of unity and goodwill, it might start by reevaluating its own approach to political discourse.

The truth of the matter is this; if Mitchell’s voice note attempts to frame the FNM as the instigators of “violence, patriotism, criminality, and discord,” one cannot ignore the underlying truth: had the PLP allowed the opposition the chance to speak and address the matter at hand, this entire debacle could have been avoided. Instead, the PLP’s refusal to engage has only fueled the very discord it decries.

So that lead to me this conclusion; Fred Mitchell’s voice note is more than a partisan rant; it’s a reflection of a broader issue within the PLP’s leadership. Bullying tactics, whether through language or actions, have no place in a democratic society. It’s time for the PLP to step back, reflect, and prioritize dialogue over domination. Only then can they truly claim to act in the “goodwill” of the Bahamian people.

END

My Morning Paper – December 05, 2024 – The Speaker, the Mace and the Heroic Glass of Water

Yesterday, the Free National Movement (FNM) staged a protest that had been anticipated for weeks. The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), true to form, dismissed it as unnecessary noise. Yet, what unfolded in the House of Assembly was beyond anyone’s imagination—a spectacle where tensions boiled over, and chaos reigned supreme.

If not for a humble glass of water, we might have witnessed an unprecedented assault on the Speaker of the House, Patricia Deveaux. Let’s raise our glasses to this unsung hero—the object that “saved” the Speaker from harm.

This incident can be broken down into two separate incidences; one that highlights the questions surrounding the professional aptitude and perceived biased of the Speaker in managing the House’s proceedings and the other that addresses the issue Mace incidence.

The Speaker’s professional aptitude and perceived bias:

“Speaker: I feared for my life” – The Nassau Guardian

Excerpt from this article;

“Speaker of the House of Assembly Patricia Deveaux said yesterday she feared for her life and was “assaulted” and “almost hit” when Free National Movement (FNM) Deputy Leader Shanendon Cartwright grabbed the mace sitting in front of her and hurled it out of the House of Assembly’s window.

Deputy Speaker Sylvanus Petty received “a blow to the head” during the incident, prompting him to go to the hospital and a police officer was hurt in the leg, she said.

“This is a dark day in this political arena that we call politics,” said Deveaux when the House of Assembly resumed after a 15-minute recess following the chaotic event.

 “For the first time in my life, when I took the oath of office, I felt challenged and I was in fear for my life. I will review the tapes and I will apprise the country later of my findings, but during today’s event I was assaulted, I was almost hit. Thank God for a glass of water in the front of me.”

At this moment we will all stand and raise our glasses for the glass of water that “saved” the Speaker from being assaulted, let us move on.

First, as the Speaker speaks to feeling challenged, I would just like to suggest that The Speaker has been “challenged” from the very moment that she was named as Speaker of The House; whether this challenge is mentally or professionally, I leave this up to the reader.

It simply amazes me the manner in which the “facts” are coming together concerning this matter in the House of Assembly yesterday and the manner in which the Progressive Liberal Party Members of Parliament and it’s supporters wish now to paint them as a planned act of aggression of the Free National Movement (FNM) toward the Speaker of The House.

Let me just say, as it pertains to the accusation of the actions being planned, I would think that they were just as well planned as the formers Commissioners of Police (CoP) address to the nation the other night and it this is the case then the Free National Movement (FNM) may want to be better at pre-planning.

My opinion of yesterday’s events are formed from this report of events leading up to the moment.

The Hon. Michael Pintard sent a letter to the Speaker last week to speak.  She said she received it five (5) minutes too late.  He begged her to accommodate him and the House adjourned while he was on his feet.

Yesterday, Pintard said he sent a letter a day in advance along with his script but did not get an answer.

After the Prime Minister spoke, he requested to speak and the Speaker again ignored him. He kept asking if he would get an opportunity to speak.  She never gave him an answer.

The Hon. Michael Pintard found out they were going to adjourn the House after the Hon. Wayne Munroe spoke.

This is what I have been reliably informed led up to the events yesterday.

If these are the actual facts then it would appear that the Speaker is running the House of Assembly like it is her private space but is because of her “challenged” mental and/or professionally capacity or at “someone’s” instruction?

The Mace Incident:

 Cartwright’s removal of the mace has been painted by the PLP as an aggressive act, but its historical symbolism suggests otherwise. The mace represents the authority of the Speaker. By removing it, the Opposition effectively called for an end to the Speaker’s oversight—a procedural move rather than an attack.

The Speaker’s reaction—claiming fear for her life—rings hollow against the backdrop of events. If her actions in the House were fair and just, why would such an outburst even occur? Instead, her tenure has been marked by accusations of bias, overreach, and suppression of opposition voices. Yesterday’s dramatic events reflect deeper cracks in the PLP’s governance style.

To compare, imagine a referee in a football game who consistently favors one team. Eventually, the players on the other side will refuse to play along. Removing the “mace” is akin to walking off the field—not an act of aggression, but a rejection of perceived unfairness.

The PLP’s response to this incident reveals their inherent flaw: an inability to self-reflect. Instead of addressing grievances, they double down, painting the Opposition as aggressors. This tactic may rally their base, but it leaves the country divided and distrustful.

As for Speaker Deveaux, her claim of being “saved” by a glass of water has become a symbol—not of her victimhood, but of a moment when politics reached the height of absurdity. It’s a sobering reminder that theatrics cannot substitute for leadership.

Let us raise our metaphorical glasses—not to the glass of water, but to the hope that reason, fairness, and true democratic principles will one day prevail in the House of Assembly.

The speaker need not be in “fear for her life” if she knows that what she is doing is right and fair but it seems that this has not been her agenda from day one, she has been nothing but a ‘bully” especially to the Opposition Leader and why should he or anyone else tolerate such treatment any longer?

The Progressive Liberal Party fails for one reason, it is their nature.

END

 My Morning Paper – December 4, 2024 – The Fine Art of Playing Victim and Personal Responsibility

“Mitchell decries ‘false narrative’ on indictment” – The Nassau Guardian

Excerpt from this article;

“Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Chairman Fred Mitchell yesterday accused several former Cabinet ministers of creating a “false narrative” around the recent indictment in the United States of three Bahamian law enforcement officers and eight other Bahamians on drug trafficking and firearms related charges.

“Where the hell have Marvin Dames, Brent Symonette, Dionisio D’Aguilar come from?” Mitchell asked in a statement.

“They are joining the actors in the FNM drama written by [FNM Leader] Michael Pintard called the ‘Sky is Falling – Doom and Gloom’, also starring [former Democratic National Alliance Leader] Branville McCartney in a cameo role.

“If this weren’t so serious, you would have to laugh at these collective political clowns. They don’t want to do the work to convince the Bahamian people that they are the better alternative. They want to create a false narrative out of this indictment in the US to ride to victory.”

Mitchell insisted, “The Bahamian people are smarter than that.”

My first question is; what is the “false narrative” that Fred Mitchell is referring to? 

It is easy to slip into a mindset of being a victim, especially when life throws you curve balls or situations that are not planned for.

Let’s take a journey into this swirling vortex of political posturing, personal responsibility, and the ever-enticing allure of the victim narrative. Today, we tackle a question as relevant as it is vexing: Is the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) government, led by Fred Mitchell, setting up a narrative of victimhood to deflect from its own shortcomings?

And more importantly—what does this mean for governance in The Bahamas?

At this point in time it would appear that the Chairman of the New Day Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Fred Mitchell is setting up a narrative wherein the New Day Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) government is being victimized by The United States and by its very own citizens but there is a problem with constantly setting yourself as victim.

There seems to be a propensity for the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), when facing hardship to give into the temptation.  There is a temptation to shift blame onto external circumstances or other people; it just seems overwhelming for them. This overwhelming temptation then forces them to avoid personal responsibility in confronting their role in whatever adverse situation that they may find themselves in, usually of their own making.

But here is the thing; constantly portraying yourself as the victim only makes people lose respect for you; the reason being that because when you adopt this mandate/mindset, you are telling the country and the world that you have no control over your responsibilities and if you do not believe that you have control then why should others believe in you?

Playing the victim usually begins small because it is easy to off load your personal responsibility onto someone else but over time this mentality becomes as a “trap” and the more you use it the more powerless you appear.  As you appear more powerless then others believe that you are at the mercy of external forces, so they lose faith in you and walk away from you and your leadership; because your ability to run the country, as you have been elected to do, is then called into question.

People respect those that take responsibility for their acts and that can rise above the challenges and not be consumed by them. But by constantly blaming others for your misfortunes, simply says that you lack courage to face your challenges face on – which makes it difficult for persons to trust you.

The Progressive Liberal Party fails for one reason, it is within their nature.

END