The UBP's new vision

I've just got back from tonight's UBP shindig at the Southampton Princess, at which Wayne Furbert made one of his first public speeches since becoming leader. Here's what he had to say.

Some of the highlights: the UBP would create a Tourism Authority; measure the performance of schools and publish the results; liberalise height restrictions for certain housing developments; and provide free basic healthcare, prescription drugs and glasses for seniors.

In addition, the UBP committed itself to democratic reform, having apparently taken on board many of the ideas raised at the recent public forum on the subject. In a short speech earlier in the evening, which stole some of Mr. Furbert's thunder, David Dodwell expressed the party's support for fixed term elections, increased use of referenda, more bipartisan committees, a code of conduct for MPs, more conscience votes, having a member of the Opposition in Cabinet, and even the ability for the public to recall an MP (although he was uncertain about how the latter would work). I was impressed.

Comments

[Combat Banker on 24.03.06 at 00:28]

Amazing. I actually agree with all of those. Well Wayne seems to have a pulse on what the people want.. or at least what posters on this site want (Which are not necessarily always the same thing!).
Its a bold platform & I hope either they get a chance to impliment, or P steals them all. Either way we'd all win.

[Lost in Flatts on 24.03.06 at 05:27]

Speeches and plans are great, but until the UBP can show they're actually about action, they won't get the majority listening. Let's face it, it shouldn't be particularly difficult to oust the PLP based solely on what they've accomplished (lack thereof) in their first 2 terms, but I doubt that will be the case. Instead the UBP need to step up and start creating tangible examples of their commitment and principles, because without those, I just can't see people beginning to look past the UBP of old.

If Wayne can really lead the party in the direction that speech implies, and the voters take notice, who knows, maybe we'll all be alright after all.

[observor on 24.03.06 at 06:53]

Limey I agree. They certainly have provided some concrete commitments to accountability, performance & transparency. The proof of the pudding, of course, will be in the eating.

Too bad the current government have been such little piggies at the trough of the public purse and have no more room for pudding!

[silencedogood on 24.03.06 at 08:08]

It's a step in the right direction. Promising...

[J Starling on 24.03.06 at 08:34]

As per Mr. Furbert's New Vision, I am not opposed to them. Not everything the opposition comes up with is worthless, just as not everything the government comes up with is gospel (or rubbish depending on ones party :) ). I am suspicious about how committed they really would be to carrying out these reforms, and whether they would be implemented in substance and not simply cosmetically. How ironic though that the UBP is forced to out PLP the PLP while the PLP tries to out UBP the UBP. Politics does make strange bedfellows afterall.

[Phil on 24.03.06 at 09:14]

There was very little direct criticism of the PLP at last night's "celebration". The focus was instead on what the UBP wants to do. I'd appreciate it if comment on this thread was the same.

[Rev. Goat on 24.03.06 at 09:36]

Limey thats good news, all to often Bermuda politics is about blaming the other side. I remember the election campaign that the PLP ran in 1998. For two years before that they actually stopped all the accusations and paranoid conspiracy theories they always used as campaign fodder and actually came up with good ideas and positive outlook(turned out to be lies though).

I believe that if the UBP focus on what they can do for the people of Bermuda instead of childish school yard argueing in the house and paper, they may actually have a chance.

[His Excellency, Uncle Elvis II on 24.03.06 at 10:10]

First off, thank you, obsie! "The proof of the pudding, of course, will be in the eating."
It's a pet peeve of mine when people get that wrong.

Second...
Finally, they have actually said something!
It's nice to see them be proactive, rather than recative. I just hope that they at least TRY to get some of this stuff in gear in the next few years, lobbying for referenda, showing us the plan (Not TOO slick, please. The last big plan you had at election time, with the houses, came off a little too... too, y'know?) for the Tourism Authority, showing their willingness to be transparent by letting the people know what they're doing, etc. etc.

This could be a decent platform for them.
It certainly seems to be full of good ideas.
To extend on what Limey said, let's throw away our opinions on what their intentions are and concentrate on the actual ideas put forth.
Anyone disagree with any of them?

[AP on 24.03.06 at 11:35]

Like Lost In Flatts said giving speeches at the Southampton Princess is all good, but the UBP have to get out there and press their agenda. This means primarily getting to the black population of Bermuda, because let's face it 99% of whites are going to vote UBP no matter what. And they have to be prepared to to fight back when the PLP invariably play the race card and start calling them uncle toms or the rich white slave master party. It's their timidness over the last couple of years combined with not pressing hime their message that has hurt them.

[b,w&p?? on 24.03.06 at 14:03]

"99% of whites are going to vote UBP no matter what" - AP

Don't presume you know me or my intentons based on the my skin colour - thats the whole problem with politics today. I vote for some who will provide good government, who is accountable and has respect for the people of Bermuda. These traits run alot deeper than in the colour of one's skin.

[Somers on 24.03.06 at 14:09]

Well said BW&P...

[Nicole on 24.03.06 at 16:53]

>>This means primarily getting to the black population of Bermuda, because let's face it 99% of whites are going to vote UBP no matter what. And they have to be prepared to to fight back when the PLP invariably play the race card and start calling them uncle toms or the rich white slave master party. <<

That statement is so very racial and divisive. I would find it scary in its implication if it wasn't such an old and established viewpoint.

What are the UBP people really fighting to protect? Protect Bermuda from the black population of Bermuda? Fighting against the black population of Bermuda? Might not the black population of Bermuda also have a stake in Bermuda society for which to fight? If you set a fight against a person, how can you honorably complain when they don’t welcome your presence and don’t speak to you so nicely? That can’t be a basis for positive political relations, unless you like cracking the whip to maintain it.

AP, if 99% of whites are going to vote UBP, why isn't that an indication THEY are playing the race card? Why should the onus be on the UBP to 'get to' the black population of Bermuda, rather than the PLP to 'get to' the white population? Cynical by nature, I am not inclined to believe entirely that all or even most of those 99% of whites are voting UBP because they aren’t ‘racial’ at all, and that all or even most of those blacks voting for the PLP are the ‘racial ones.’

Is the PLP really more 'racial' than the 99% of whites voting UBP? Maybe some support UBP because they want to protect a system that is favorable to them and that is what ‘unites’ them. Thinking that what is good for them is good for Bermuda because they are more ‘important’ and ‘know best’ doesn’t sound so non-racial, just or even fundamentally correct. That is colonial, racist, paternalistic, demeaning and something indeed for any sane black Bermudian to fight against with every being of their person. This idea of 'we aren't racist/racial because we don't speak of race' really cannot exist against rational inquiry into the perspectives behind it.

I offer a far more arguable view that many black Bermudians have a vested interest in a system that effects fundamental justice and good practices for the broadest spectrum of Bermuda society, that results in a general elevation of the population, rather than maintaining privilege for a select few and tossing just enough tokens to the mass to seem honest, but not enough to disrupt the same social structure that has existed in Bermuda for decades upon decades. The not at all hidden belief that without white Bermudians and Expatriates as the CHOSEN ONES, Bermuda will go to hell because the “people” (wink wink) can’t exist without them, is inextricably going to be reflected in fighting for government policies that reflect that sentiment and maintain that privilege given by situation not be ‘noble birth.’

It is also bound to spark some resentment from people because it is racist, it is wrong. And people speaking against the silent code of such attitudes is NOT playing the race card, it fighting against injustice.

Wayne Furbert tries very hard to emulate the temperature and tone of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s speech and ideology. Had he not failed so miserably to match the sense of justice and reason of MLK, Jr., an argument could be made for plagiarism and uninspired paraphrasing.

What Furbert does succeed at is mocking MLK’s beliefs in a speech that best reflects the attitudes, both white and black (conservative preachers) that Dr. King fought against. That Mr. Furbert is likely unaware of his crime, speaks less about the Bermuda educational system and more about a general status quo ideology under which he, many white Bermudians and white expatriates were so thoroughly formed and so thoroughly left uneducated and uncivilized.

Furbert said that there appears to be 'greater polarization'(now) between black and white, rich and poor. Compared to when?? Can people be so violently unselfconscious and shameless as to believe that such polarization is greater now than when blacks were openly legally segregated against? Or is the definition of “polarized” that people speak more openly about such matters? When Furbert speaks about seeing when race becomes irrelevant, he is appealing to that idea of the ‘race card.’

Furbert said “I sense a profound change taking place in Bermuda. The last time I felt like this was in the 1960’s. Let me stress that I was a youth then. Young people throughout the world were in revolt. Women were asserting their identity. Oppressed minorities were demanding their rights. Colonized people were fighting for their independence.” I think Furbert should have stressed most clearly that he has no idea of the thinking that governed MLK, Jr. and like others of that time, since he somehow manages to quote and mime the man, yet wrap up his statement still a member of the UBP.

The only profound change desired is to put back in firm power a party that wouldn’t truly question (much less challenge fundamentally) the status quo. Reduce some signs of social problems that are off-putting to the tourists, the expatriates and ‘upper class’ (wink wink) Bermudians who want the quaint place they used to know. I believe there was a southern song of such a nature “How I wish I was in Dixie..” I pray that there is never any political unity in Bermuda, if it means rule by people who prefer a negative peace to a positive peace. MLK, Jr's work was so great, his words so profound, that when they are so maligned and misunderstood, they deserve to be articulated correctly. So on that honor:

In “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” MLK,Jr. wrote, “First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the…Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice… Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

“Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself, and that is what has happened to the American Negro. Something within has reminded him of his birthright of freedom, and something without has reminded him that it can be gained. Consciously or unconsciously, he has been caught up by the Zeitgeist, and with his black brothers of Africa and his brown and yellow brothers of Asia, South America and the Caribbean, the United States Negro is moving with a sense of great urgency toward the promised land of racial justice…The Negro has many pent-up resentments and latent frustrations, and he must release them.... If his repressed emotions are not released in nonviolent ways, they will seek expression through violence; this is not a threat but a fact of history.

So I have not said to my people: "Get rid of your discontent." Rather, I have tried to say that this normal and healthy discontent can be channeled into the creative outlet of nonviolent direct action. And now this approach is being termed extremist.

But though I was initially disappointed at being categorized as an extremist, as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a measure of satisfaction from the label… the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be… Will we be extremist for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice?....Perhaps the South, the nation and the world are in dire need of creative extremists.

I had hoped that the white moderate would see this need. Perhaps I was too optimistic; perhaps I expected too much. I suppose I should have realized that few members of the oppressor race can understand the deep groans and passionate yearnings of the oppressed race, and still fewer have the vision to see that injustice must be rooted out by strong, persistent and determined action.”

“I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fan in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress... "

“My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent-resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth.

Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, we must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood.”-MLK,Jr.

If all political sides in Bermuda honestly dedicated themselves to justice -- even if it means they lose some social privilege built upon injustice -- they will find they have for more in common upon which to unite both politically and socially. This is what is truly good for BERMUDA.

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” - Martin Luther King

[Count Zero on 24.03.06 at 17:24]

"Cynical by nature, I am not inclined to believe entirely that all or even most of those 99% of whites are voting UBP because they aren’t ‘racial’ at all, and that all or even most of those blacks voting for the PLP are the ‘racial ones’."

Can't say I blame you about being cynical, Nicole. Understandable enough in this degraded environment. Excellent piece -- well written with some references and citations that were once extremely relevant to the Bermuda situation. But I'm afraid most of them don't apply any more. Even the bloc white vote the UBP used to atttract finally splintered at the '98 election -- an estimated 20 percent of whites opted for the PLP on the basis they couldn't do any worse than the incumbents. A goodly portion of them veered back to the UBP in '03 when it was proved, beyond any shadow of a doubt, the PLP could do worse. But not all white voters returned to the UBP fold. Opinion polls as well as anecdotal evidence suggests younger, working class white Bermudians did not feel the same knee-jerk obligation their parents did to vote for the UBP. They've been raised with blacks, educated with blacks, socialise with blacks and have none of the hang-ups that might have prevented their elders from voting for a black-based labour party. These young people are jaded, disenchanted and increasingly pissed off with an IB-dominated economy they believe has left them behind. In terms of voting for a party that *should* be pursuing their interests, it's not surprising they would opt for the PLP. But in any event, the dwindling white Bermudian population means dwindling white Bermudian influence come election time and dwindling white Bermudian influence in general. White Bermudians don't hold the economic reins anymore -- Smith's is gone, Trimingham's is gone, the whole tourism-based socio/economic framework that gave birth to the PLP and the UBP is gone. Our political parties cannot remain locked into a past that grows more remote with every passing day. The UBP is at least suggesting it wants to evolve to meet current and future conditions. I see no hint of that from a PLP that tends to use race as an all-purpose distraction from its internal problems (the Scott/Brown leadership battle continues behind the scenes) while essentially ignoring the tremendous strain an economy in transition is putting on this community.

[SmokingGun on 24.03.06 at 17:30]

Strong post Nicole. I think I'll have to re-read. One thing though. Regarding AP's ascertion that 99% of whites will vote UBP being a racist comment. Is it really or is it maybe a flippant but true observance?

My thinking is that 99% of white people may indeed vote for the UBP because they see it as a mixed party as opposed to the PLP which has to date condoned some pretty strong rhetoric that only serves to divide the races. So in that case the core party leaders in the PLP are driving the whites away and in effect forcing them to not vote PLP. As far as I'm concerned the PLP could take all of the UBP's economic ideas and implement them tomorrow and even if they were a great success I'd still want to vote the UBP or even a third mixed party in the next time.

I for one can honestly say that I'm just totally exhausted and done with anyone who chooses to continue allowing race to keep us apart. It's time we started realizing that it's not race anymore, it's economic standing and all the problems that come with it that we need to be concerned with. If there's one thing I've noticed in my life it's that we have no control over the color of our skin but we can do something about our economic stature. And the only way we can move forward is if we start showing some dignity and bury the race card and pull together.

[No Justice, No Peace on 24.03.06 at 20:35]

I read the speech, and it does make good politicking. But I can't trust Wayne fully if he attempts to push forward the idea of forgiveness without confession. That's another thing the good book talks about. If he thinks that the cure to Bermuda's race problem is his economic empowerment plan, then he is in denial about the illness. Exactly what does he think that people (read blacks on LIB) need to forgive whites for? Let's define that as a starting point, shall we? Exactly what wrong have whites done, that blacks need to get over?

No justice, no peace?

[J Starling on 24.03.06 at 21:14]

As Limey has allowed the post to diverge from his own mandate that:

"There was very little direct criticism of the PLP at last night's "celebration". The focus was instead on what the UBP wants to do. I'd appreciate it if comment on this thread was the same."

I hope he will forgive the following as it diverges also from the desired thread. There is a constant attempt by certain peoples, primarily from UBP supporters to portray the PLP as an all black party. This is nothing new. The UBP portrays themselves as the party of racial equality, the PLP as a black nationalist party. I admit that certain elements of the PLP do express blatantly black nationalist or black racialist views. These views do not constitute the PLP. As Count Zero has pointed out an increasing number of whites, primarily the youth and the white working class are increasingly identifying with the PLP. His analysis is correct. Despite the few racialistic elements within the PLP the more important and growing trend is one that says a boss is a boss is a boss and a worker is a worker is a worker. Race is only superficial, the objective economic relations between boss and worker, employer and employee are of much greater relevance to reality than the accident of skin colour. Even should the racialists win the current battle, in so doing they dig their graves as the workers see no difference between white and black exploiters. To stop the hate we must not separate but cooperate - that is the realisation amongst the workers and youth. We are entering a period of heightened political consciousness, worldwide, seen in the French and German labour struggle, the anit-war movement, the Bolivarian-socialist movement in Latin America, the people power of Ukrania, Georgia and Haiti, the fall out of Katrina and Ivan, immigration laws, and a growing global economic crises. In Bermuda people are looking beyond race, and the sooner we purge the pernicous poison of racialism, this cancer, from our society and political worldviews, the sooner we can confront our reality with sober senses. The UBP's New Vision comes across to the cynical PLPer as a party bankrupt of ideology and creative ideas, cynically claiming to stand for justice when in relaity it serves as a front for the bosses with their viewpoints seldom differing from the Chamber of Commerce. Yes, lets reform the democratic system of our nation, but I don't think the UBP is serious but our desparately grasping at straws like a drowning man. I support these democratic reforms - but I don't see them seriously commiting to them.

[No Justice, No Peace on 25.03.06 at 07:43]

I just read on IMHO that Bootsie was the MC for this event. I really would like to take the UBP seriously, but Bootsie's inclusion leads me to believe that this is all window dressing. In one wing you have Patricia Gordon Pamplin attacking Col Burch for the house nigger comment. You see the greatest offense taken at Brown's plantation remark and P's email. But Bootsie, the guy who claimed something like: black UBP members were just whites with suntans, is remarkably escaped a landing on the persona non grata list. How is this possible, except in a realm where morality and justic only exist when it is politically expedient. Isn't Bootsie being given the green light because he enhances the UBP's marketability to black Bermudians? This is outright fraud, and it is stunning that whites aren't outraged at this, even if Bootsie gave a hollow apology. You just lost all credibility, Wayne.

[RedOnion on 25.03.06 at 08:24]

No Justice ... Suppose the UBP had a white MC for this event. There would be an outcry about that ... you just can't win in a race versus race discussion or debate!

[No Justice, No Peace on 25.03.06 at 08:36]

RedOnion. The issue is not that they chose a black MC. The chose an MC who claimed that black UBP members are just whites with suntans. How can his inclusion be defended in the political climate the UBP claims that it wants? It's no different than if they hired Burch from "The Col Speaks" (or whatever his show is called) if he wasn't an MP or Senator.

[No Justice, No Peace on 25.03.06 at 08:40]

A direct quote from Limey

*The PLP has 22 MPs and not a single one of them is white. At the last election, their advertising claimed that the only thing new about the UBP was its suntan. Deputy leader Dr. Ewart Brown said returning the UBP to power would be voting to return to the plantation.*

How is it that the same guy is given the job as MC and no one is disgusted or offended at the irony?

[Full Fullish on 25.03.06 at 08:51]

I just read on IMHO that Bootsie was the MC for this event. I really would like to take the UBP seriously, but Bootsie's inclusion leads me to believe that this is all window dressing.

NJNP - While I was surprised that Bootsie was the MC as well, the point that they were trying to make was that it was time to forgive and forget. Hopefully Bootsie learned his lesson from this and has instilled some additional moral values, which everyone needs to do whether work or personal life.

However if you read further in my bit on the rally, you should have made note of the audience (or even better been there yourself). The audience spoke volumes over what was said about the diversity of the makeup of the UBP.

Are you saying that Patricia Gordon Pamplin shouldn't take Burch to task over what he said? He should be accountable for it as a senator and an MP.

[No Justice, No Peace on 25.03.06 at 09:03]

"Are you saying that Patricia Gordon Pamplin shouldn't take Burch to task over what he said? He should be accountable for it as a senator and an MP."

What I'm saying isn't entirely complex, so I don't understand the confusion. What is the justification for the lack of venom for Bootsie? To me it looks like he is not condemned as Burch and Co is because he can draw black votes to the UBP. This is the suntan guy, remember!?!

[Phil on 25.03.06 at 09:24]

No Justice

So you're saying that black people will vote for the UBP because they heard that Bootsie was the comedian at a UBP rally?

Somehow I doubt that very much.

[Full Fullish on 25.03.06 at 09:49]

No Justice -
Come on now.....that is the most retarded thing I've ever heard and quite frankly if I were a black person in the UBP (of which by the way there were many more black people than white people in the audience, about a 60/40 split, kinda like Bermuda's makeup AND they had no idea that Bootsie was even going to be there!) I would have to smack you upside your head for that statement! No one has forgotten what Bootsie said, however he did apologise for it, something that Burch and the rest of them have yet to find the moral aptitude to do by the way, and as I said, HOPEFULLY he will start being a bit more ethical while on the job. There was a lot of venom for Bootsie when he said it back in 2003 (or was it 2002?) and it was not appreciated.

I'm not going to argue over this. As I said in my piece on IMHO, if they do get elected, and with the reforms they have proposed I sincerely hope they do, it is up to all of us to make sure they stay the course and task them on what they have promised us. Next time, I would suggest that you come to the next rally and see it for yourself instead of making 2nd hand conjectures. I would also suggest that you take this up with them as well. I emailed Wayne Furbert what I wrote yesterday, this is what he wrote back:

"Thank you for attending last night. I meant everything I said and my
colleagues and I are committed to making it happen."

This was in response to my last paragraph. I'm going to hold them to this, I would suggest you emailing Wayne or anyone else with your questions and do the same.

[J Starling on 25.03.06 at 12:10]

I doubt that PLPers are going to attend a rally by the UBP, just as I doubt UBPers would attend a PLP rally. Bootsie has to pay rent and make ends meet like anyone else, and a job is a job when one is living hand to mouth as most of us are now despite the superficial keeping up appearences. An unfortunate consequence of this is that Bethel AME on Shellely Bay held a forum discussing the issue of Independence that same night. The three speakers were Peter Everson of the Chamber of Commerce, Senator Kim Swan (standing in for Mr. Furbert) and Senator Roban. My guess is most of the UBPers were at the UBP rally and thus left the field to PLPers in the opposition leaders own constituency. I think the PLP should call the UBPs bluff and initiate some of these democratic reforms in partnership with the UBP, it does after all fall in with their mandate (as written in the constitution of the Party) and similar proposals have been made by the PLP in the past, of which the constituency redrawing was only a part of.

[SmokingGun on 25.03.06 at 12:22]

"The UBP portrays themselves as the party of racial equality, the PLP as a black nationalist party. I admit that certain elements of the PLP do express blatantly black nationalist or black racialist views. These views do not constitute the PLP." - J Starling

I do not want this to become a racial dicussion, even though I did post in response to AP/Nicole's comment regarding it. The fact is sometimes one will judge it's book by it's cover.

What we must seek, demand and show is dignity. Dignity in how we go about our daily lives, dignity in how we treat others, talk to others and work with each other. Dignity in how we handle the position we were given by those that voted for us and gave us control over their lives. With dignity comes respect. With respect comes appreciation, confidence and trust. With trust we all move forward.

[No Justice, No Peace on 26.03.06 at 07:40]

"and as I said, HOPEFULLY he will start being a bit more ethical while on the job. There was a lot of venom for Bootsie when he said it back in 2003 (or was it 2002?) and it was not appreciated."

Like I said, there is hypocrisy going on here, because it is politically expedient. Bootsie making the excuse that his suntan comment was just something he did "on the job" is disgusting. It's the equivalent of saying, "Sure I'll make a bigoted joke if someone will pay me for it. But sorry, at least tonight." Bootsie gave a hollow apology and you know it. If you want to accept it, because it suits your purposes, then fine. Just don't be surprised if the double standard gets pointed out.

"So you're saying that black people will vote for the UBP because they heard that Bootsie was the comedian at a UBP rally?

Somehow I doubt that very much."

Limey,

You should feel ashamed of yourself and call it like it is. Bootsie does enhance the marketability in the same way that celebrities on the worldwide stage do for other countries. You've written about the suntan and plantation comments all the time, and yet here you have so little to say about his inclusion and "apology". I could respect your position if Bootsie just came right out and said it was wrong to do under any circumstance and that he unconditionally regrets making the joke. If anything he should have endorsed the UBP's approach to race relations and given an unqualified rejection of the race rally he attended. But he didn't, and it's fine with you, because it helps the UBP. What a blatant double standard!

[No Justice, No Peace on 26.03.06 at 07:45]

Just imagine the Premier saying that Burch's house nigger comment was something that was just "on the job" at Hott107.5, and that it should not affect his decision to appoint him to the Senate. Everyone would want to crucify him even more for offering such a ridiculous excuse.

[Phil on 26.03.06 at 10:23]

No Justice

Perhaps all the black members of the audience were actors too, hired by Wayne to make it look as if the UBP has some black supporters?

And I wonder how much they paid John Swan to say how impressed he was by the racial diversity of the audience? After all, we know he really thinks the UBP is a white organisation, don't we?

[No Justice, No Peace on 26.03.06 at 12:43]

Limey,

I am very disappointed to see the lengths you are willing to go to in order to avoid a real discussion about Bootsie's inclusion in the UBP rally. This is someone who made one of the most racist comments in Bermuda's political history. This is right up there with "house niggers" and "voting back on the plantation". Just do a search on this very website to see what people here thought of Bootsie before now, and you have to wonder what the real deal is. The UBP hired Bootsy for the same reason the PLP did - he has a strong following amongst black Bermudians. It is just tragically hypocritical and ironic though that the UBP is welcoming him with open arms after he too branded black members as uncle toms. Where is the integrity? Why aren't the same whites who were condemning Bootsie to hell not outraged at his weak excuse for racist behavior? Because it is in the UBP's favour, that's why.

[smith on 26.03.06 at 12:53]

Do you hear yourselves?

Others do....It's embarrassing.

[His Excellency, Uncle Elvis II on 26.03.06 at 14:46]

I gotta say... it was kind of a bad idea to have Bootsie do this thing. It reeks of the very thing that the UBP are accused of all the time: pandering to the black vote. I'm not saying they do, but it is an accusation that's thrown out.

Not their worst idea everm but not a good one.

[Boots on 26.03.06 at 15:27]

have you thought that maybe they chose him because he is a good host? people dont always plan things as much as we (on this site) seem to think. they are just politicians remember, not the smartest cookies in the jar.

[His Excellency, Uncle Elvis II on 26.03.06 at 16:19]

Mmmmmmaybe... but I doubt it. I wouldn't say GOOD... adequate and the only one available, maybe, but GOOD? Nnnnnot really.

[No Justice, No Peace on 26.03.06 at 16:24]

Maybe they chose him because he was a good host? How many more excuses must you come up with? With his suntan comment he effectively called blacks in the UBP Uncle Toms and puppets, I believe, on the same night that Brown made his plantation comment. It is terribly hypocritical to lash Burch, Brown and P, but welcome Bootsie because he draws the crowd the UBP desperately needs. I can't see how any white person could have sat there and not been offended. I can't see how any black person would not have wanted to toss him off the stage. Those with integrity, that is.

[ace on 26.03.06 at 16:48]

Who is this Bootsie?

[Full Fullish on 26.03.06 at 19:46]

I personally wouldn't have choosen Bootsie for this either. As I said, I won't forget what was said back then, but he did apologise, all be it not a good one, but at least he did that. To my knowledge, he hasn't done anything insulting to any particular race or party since. I'm not making excuses for him, just saying that maybe it's a lesson learned. Believe me, my mouth was one of the first to drop open when he walked out, but at least he was man enough to apologise to a rather large scrutinizing crowd. This was the first thing that was addressed when he came out on stage. Just how long do you expect to keep this bit of hate alive though? You have to let it go at some point.

[sotrue on 26.03.06 at 21:20]

'Just how long do you expect to keep this bit of hate alive though? You have to let it go at some point.'
Posted by Full Fullish on 26.03.06 at 19:46

So true for so many things...

[Boots on 26.03.06 at 21:30]

No Justice, No Peace:
I have personally made no excuses as to why they chose Bootsie, yet YOU single me out why? YOU try to infer that I (or is it 'we'?) have no integrity, but why? Is it because 'we' can forgive? I bet YOU, with all your 'integrity' have made a bonehead comment in your life that has hurt some one or a group of people...have YOU appologized for every wrong thing you have done? Ok, I thought so...and since you have so much integrity which is defined as 'deriving from honesty and consistent uprightness of character' can you please applogize for hurting my feelings with your statement of 'How many more excuses must you come up with?' And yes, i am only 12 years old :P

[Two Cents on 26.03.06 at 22:43]

"Mmmmmmaybe... but I doubt it. I wouldn't say GOOD... adequate and the only one available, maybe, but GOOD? Nnnnnot really"

Come on Uncle Elvis, now that's a kind of harsh critique, alot of people like rehashed, regurgitated Cruise Ship "Cruise Director” humor.

[ice_cube on 27.03.06 at 08:03]

To hell with the UBP's so called new vision smells like the same old bullshit served up in a diffent dish.

[observor on 27.03.06 at 09:13]

ice_cube

wow ... how profound ... you must be a road scholar or something.

[ice_cube on 27.03.06 at 09:16]

Nah, nothing so fancy, just a simple plain old observor like yourself...

[Bermudian on 27.03.06 at 11:13]

road scholar?

[SmokingGun on 27.03.06 at 11:28]

Yeah, road scholar.... from Road Island. :)

[His Excellency, Uncle Elvis II on 27.03.06 at 13:24]

Wow, way to give people a chance, ice.
But you're right. Close-mindedness is DEFINITELY the way forward.

[ice_cube on 27.03.06 at 14:25]

Your Excellency I would add that open mindedness about closed minded parties would be an over-rated experience. New faces don’t always equal to fresh blood, esp. when you have a foundation of old carcasses that take time to see that new faces remain just that.

[His Excellency, Uncle Elvis II on 27.03.06 at 17:05]

You're absolutely right. Let's not give them a chance at all. Not one. Throw them to the dogs.
Why not? The current administration is doing such a fine job.

[loki on 27.03.06 at 17:13]

"have you thought that maybe they chose him because he is a good host?"

Fact: the man's about as funny as kneecap cancer.

[Nicole on 27.03.06 at 17:19]

>>But I'm afraid most of them don't apply any more....But in any event, the dwindling white Bermudian population means dwindling white Bermudian influence come election time and dwindling white Bermudian influence in general. White Bermudians don't hold the economic reins anymore ... Our political parties cannot remain locked into a past that grows more remote with every passing day. The UBP is at least suggesting it wants to evolve to meet current and future conditions. I see no hint of that from a PLP that tends to use race as an all-purpose distraction from its internal problems (the Scott/Brown leadership battle continues behind the scenes) while essentially ignoring the tremendous strain an economy in transition is putting on this community. << (SmokingGun)

One of my favorite quotes came to mind while reading Furbert's speech,

"What's that smell in this room? Didn't you notice it, Brick? Didn't you notice the powerful and obnoxious odor of mendacity in this room? (from, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof)

Is it possible that the UBP is mocking a progressive evolution by using the wording of Dr. King, Jr. without any of the ideological commitment to justice implicit in his words? Maybe it is evolving to use a façade believed useful to appease and disarm a (assumed) gullible population while still protecting or recovering whatever they can of their dwindling political/social assets?

Isn't it just a little (way way a lot) embarassingly transparent, so much so that even a few UBP supporters had to laugh, cover their eyes and peek later asking 'did they buy it?'

Talking about race as a problem was more often a tactic of born out of challenging racism. The side representing an old power structure is not going to address race in the same manner as a newer structure. One side is trying to preserve certain old ways and another side is trying to eliminate certain old ways and make new ones. Necessarily, each side will have different tactics.

I know that when one typically thinks of MLK, Jr. the imagery is of violent racists, shouts of white power, blacks unable to vote or eat in certain restaurants, and an uncracked monolith of a racist power structure. To the extent that this is past, is only because people were committed to challenging the racial status quo through substantive change.

But my comments, and the accompanying MLK, Jr. quotes, spoke only to the hypocritical and disingenuous idea of a ‘race card’ that accuses blacks of racialising a situation, while at the same time not questioning a status quo of white privilege, something so ‘normal and right’ to them that they cannot see it as “racial.”

It is a mind-trick, to convince the other side that race shouldn’t be a factor and shouldn’t be talked about, while at the same time effectively protecting racial privilege in a way that never did require much talking.

It wasn’t the ‘violent racists’ that MLK, Jr. called the 'great stumbling block' for black people in their progress. It was the white moderates. That’s a conversation that some in Bermuda need to have with themselves, that many in Bermuda already know is an issue, even if they articulate it only inappropriately in rude street gestures, angry stares and comments.

And certainly as did MLK, Jr., I don’t mean to imply all white people, or all black people on either side, nor do I discount the idea of a generation of younger folk being raised without that sense of ‘normal and right’ that enshrines racial privilege.

People quote MLK, Jr. on ‘content of character, not color of skin’ so often that I believe that 7 out of 10 of them probably don’t know much else he said. Yet, they are ignorant of or willfully overlook the detail behind what he said. It isn’t quite comfortable, and not as easy to manipulate.

Maybe the opposition is using PLP internal problems as a way of distracting from the valid challenges it makes on racial issues in Bermuda?

Might not the UBP folks be using “racial code words” when they imply that Bermuda will become like those Caribbean islands gone independent and can’ manage properly, international (white, don't want their money risked by people not their own) companies will leave, expatriates (white, educated) will go to places where the people (desperate natives) appreciate them (their civilising influence and superior leadership)? Or when they talk about the need to keep expatriates (white) happy or they will leave the island and the island will go all to hell(if left to blacks)? Oh come on, we all know what it means. All of us, not just you who use them.

Race should not be used to diminish ethical accountability. All politicians need to be held accountable to basic ethics, financial controls, administrative processes, etc. and cannot be allowed to excuse themselves in that area by exploiting real issues and stirring up supporters to overlook those internal accountability problems.

That said PLP requires the experience of being sober and savvy when going up against a group that has learned to keep the word 'race' out of their speech while staying steady on the same mental path (save little email and word slip-ups).

Why get caught up in a battle about race with people so in denial of their own sense of 'racial privilege' that you spend all your time wading in their denial? That will distract them from acting on the power of the people that they do have. I don’t believe they should act in arrogance, but instead of cultivating an ethically weak opposition or their own part strength, they should cultivate the strength of their supporters. Hey, I believe firmly in the Art of War, and the idea of speaking softly and carrying a big stick. They don't have to negotiate with injustice when they can assert justice from a position of power.

AGREED, dwindling white population in Bermuda, means dwindling white influence, and that white Bermudians don't hold the reigns anymore.

BUT if some advocate that "high-level" expatriates (who are mostly white) deserve 'more' respect, access to citizenship, access, ownership, etc., is this simply (by direction or in outcome) a means to slow, stop and/or restore that dwindling white population and influence?

AND if that said expatriate population believes somehow it is superior in ability, potential, value to the prosperity of the island than the 'general population' (sans euphemism: black), just as the dwindling white Bermuda population did, no matter how one tries to erase a 'racial' component to this, then is it unreasonable for black bermudians to notice this fact? Should they pretend to not notice it? Would that benefit them or other people?

Wouldn't it be interesting if black bermudians are just observant, and as for the other side, sheesh imagine the success of al qaeda if they could have independently operating cells so precisely acting on the same mentality that they don't have to have a collective plan to effect a collectively desired goal?

Oh wait, they do.

The way to deal with a situation is not just to edit out the bits that make YOU feel uncomfortable.

Racial issues are a reality for some people who don't have the privilege of ignoring them. I remember my school's Chancellor saying that on a trip to a small village in China he was stared at in a way he didn't deem friendly by people unused to seeing white people. This, he said so very solemnly, was his experience with racism. Deservedly, we mocked him viciously, but understood that because he is fully unused to being in a place where his whiteness did not grant him racial privilege, he for the first time didn't have the privilege of ignoring race.

Maybe there are strains of an economy in transition that have to deal with race that are best answered by not pretending racial issues don't exist, but by dealing with them in a more direct manner?

Black power movements arise out of resistance to white moderates. They forge an independence that is often both blurringly reactionary in its anger but justified in idea and enthusiasm that the path of justice doesn't stop because it leads through the comfort zone white moderates. Mindless aggressiveness for 'show' is ridiculous, but so is mindless passivity to appease injustice, no matter how mild. Again, even Dr. King valued tension and extremism as appropriate to achieving the goal.

One can criticize the PLP for many things, but don't be so unashamed of one's own hypocrisy that it becomes a badge of honor that you wear, but don't want to question how you got it and why you still have it.

Realistically, the past is never so remote for one who has experienced some pain in it, as it is for one who did not have a painful experience. As easily as one side can relegate bad deeds to the past, there are those that have to deal here and now with its impacts.

Most people are neither stupid nor unfeeling of their own situations. Even those who may not best articulate the issue, are still capable of feeling the mental consanguinity between past and present.

Instead of trying to talk them out of their feelings, efforts should go to examining the basis of our own sense of privilege and how it may clash with what really is fair and just in the manner that many of us claim to profess.