ST GEORGE’S, Grenada -- Grenadian university lecturer, Dr Wayne Sandiford, has dismissed arguments of ideological differences contributing to divisions in the ruling NDC party, and that one group of members has been power hungry.
Today’s world is “unipolar” and, to the extent that there are “ideological” differences, it seems to be differences within the same “ideology”, Sandiford said at a recent public discussion at St George’s University (SGU).
His comments come against the backdrop of the labeling by some of former NDC members and government ministers, such as Peter David, as being communists.
Sandiford, a professor of economics at SGU, noted that the ruling National Democratic Congress includes members, activists and advisors who were affiliated with the now-defunct New Jewel Movement.
He referred to one of the persons using an e-mail address with the name, “Suslov”. Sources say it is believed to be the name used in an address belonging to Nazim Burke, Finance Minister and NDC deputy leader.
The real Suslov, Sandiford said, “was the ideological Pope of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union”, and he “engineered the ouster of Nikita Khrushchev as president of the Soviet Union”.
Now, Suslov is “idealized by an NDC inner circle member through the adaptation of his name as part of an e-mail address,” Sandiford said. “Could this not be sufficient to label such a person a communist?”
The SGU lecturer said if there is an NDC struggle for power, it must involve two sides.
“One faction cannot struggle with itself for something it has or does not have. That’s impossible,” he asserted.
“So, both factions are struggling for power; both factions are power hungry. And, there is nothing wrong with being hungry for power.”
Sandiford described general elections, at which political parties campaign with the hope of forming the government, as the “institutionalization of power struggle”.
Therefore, “if power struggle and being power hungry are negative things then NDC, as a party of ‘core values,’ should not take part in general elections,” the professor suggested.
“General elections institutionalize power struggle. Participants in the general elections are struggling for one thing, power. And a necessary – but not sufficient condition for winning an election – is participants’ hunger to win power.”