IN 1968, the PNC rigged the general elections to rid itself of its partner in government, the United Force, which it formed a coalition with to oust the Jagan premiership in 1964. One should use more complex analysis in describing the PNC’s 1968 putsch as a lust for power. Politically, it was a power grab but the situation was more complex than that.

Before we proceed, important to note is the acceptance by humans that it is morally reprehensible and legally criminal to rig election for one infallible reason – you deny citizens their right to vote and their right to choose their leaders. After four years of coalition power from 1964, the situation became untenable. The PNC and the UF after 1964, had absolutely nothing in common.
The 1964 regime was a fragile coalition characterised by daily bickering. These were two different parties with diametrically opposite views on everything. The PPP, at the time, was viewed with more political and cultural hostility by the UF than the PNC.

The PNC felt it could no longer accept the UF as a coalition partner. It rigged the election to get rid of the UF rather than allowing the electorate to decide if it wanted to vote for the UF or give a majority to the PPP.

The 1964 coalition had to become humpty dumpty because coalition governments are little mini governments wrapped up in one envelope. Coalition government is a genetically fragile creature. Constitutionally and legally, the country has one government but, politically, each party for all practical purposes, is a government within a government.

The reason why Netanyahu is back in power is because the coalition that removed him simply could not accommodate each other’s requests. Below is the reason why coalition administrations quickly fall apart.

John’s party from Xanadu joins with Martin’s party from Mannadu to form the government. They agree on a consensus prime minister. John’s wants a statue to be built of its founding leader who passed away and is considered a hero after the government is won.

The consensus prime minister after government is won, got up and ridiculed the hero of John’s party. There and then the coalition breaks up. It broke up because the prime minister had no political authority to ridicule the hero of his coalition partner.

From the time AFC and WPA got in power in 2015, they both began to betray their supporters by telling them they cannot go against the policies of the PNC because Cabinet requirement is that you defend the Cabinet as a matter of collective responsibility.

The AFC leaders, with every passing day from May 2015, justified their subordination to the PNC by citing the principle of Cabinet oneness.

People in the AFC began to complain to me about the excuse of Cabinet solidarity that AFC leaders were using to justify their power intoxication. So, in defence of these patriotic souls, I published a column in the Kaieteur News of Tuesday, August 30, 2016, titled “Cabinet solidarity in coalition regimes is pathetic nonsense.”

I went at length to argue theoretically with practical examples from around the world that in coalition regimes there cannot be such a thing as acceptance of Cabinet unity. It is an oxymoron. A seven-foot man cannot be referred to as too short to play basketball.

You cannot find a mango being incredibly sweet and want more of it despite its sourness. Likewise, a coalition cannot have Cabinet solidarity simply because it is an oxymoron.
I wrote that article in 2016 and AFC leaders read it and ignored it. They knew there wasn’t such a thing in coalition regimes as mutual acceptance of Cabinet solidarity but they used that fictional construct to mask their power drunkenness.

From 2015 to this day, AFC leaders continue to insult this nation by telling Guyanese that they were hamstrung in pursuing their promises to their supporters because they could not go against Cabinet unity.

Dominic Gaskin and David Patterson repeated that aridity on the Freddie Kissoon-Gildarie Show and now in his just released memoir, Moses Nagamootoo boldly stated so. The AFC leaders know that the Guyanese people know that they are hiding the truth and the truth is they enjoyed power so much that they turned a blind eye to the old, Machiavellian, Burnhamistic, habits of the PNC because they wanted to stay in power.

Nagamootoo should never have written his second autobiography because he has earned more enemies than if he had remained silent. His book is about the Granger presidency and not about the second coalition government in Guyana’s history. When you read Nagamootoo’s memoir, then you would know that there wasn’t a coalition government between 2015 and 2020. It was a PNC government.