Never say never is the first rule of politics, so it may be premature to write the National Democratic Movement’s obituary. But with declining poll ratings, ineffective leadership and muddled policies, the NDM increasingly appears a spent force.

Now more auspicious circumstances for establishing a new Jamaican political entity could hardly exist. This PNP administration has performed dismally - the murder rate has doubled since 1989, the economy is stagnant, and corruption is rife. Yet it is a model of executive acumen compared to the disorganized JLP. Plainly fed up with an incompetent government and even worse official opposition, the Jamaican electorate appears willing to embrace any plausible alternative. So why has the NDM failed to capture its attention?

Some say no third party can succeed in Jamaica. But most free societies have seen new parties rise to prominence and old ones fade. Indeed the evolution of the political process to suit a nation’s changing needs is the very essence of democracy. Canada has been voting since 1867, but its official opposition party is less than a decade old. Which is more likely - that Jamaica is uniquely impervious to change, or that the NDM is not offering voters what they want?

Despite polls showing Jamaicans with little interest in the issue, the NDM defined itself from the start as the party of constitutional reform and vowed to replace Jamaica’s Westminster system with an American presidential model.

Now Jamaican politics in definite need of structural reform - entrenched patronage and violent garrisons are not signs of faultless governance. But there is no evidence that presidential models are superior to parliamentary ones. America is no better run than Canada. And as Robert Dahl says in ‘On Democracy’ “The American system is exceedingly complicated and would probably not work in any other country… it has not been widely copied. Probably it should not be.”

Separation of powers can easily be accommodated in a modified parliamentary system, as New Zealand and Israel have demonstrated. (And polls do show that most Jamaicans would prefer to cast separate votes for local representative and prime minister.) So where was the logic in the NDM’s extremist ‘presidential’ position? 

According to surveys Jamaicans are not against constitutional reform. They simply consider violence, corruption and governmental mismanagement more pressing concerns. And while making a worthy if unexciting idea a part of your platform inspires respect, building your entire campaign around a low voter priority issue defies common sense.

Position yourself on the right ground, said Napoleon, and you win the battle. Talk only about issues that bore voters and you lose the election. The NDM’s constitutional reform fixation brought to mind the British Labour Party’s radical 1983 manifesto, which was dubbed ‘the longest suicide note in history’.

And here is the NDM enigma. How could a grouping of highly intelligent persons produce such an inept campaign? A disillusioned ex-member gives a one-word answer – arrogance.

“NDM people can only see things from their point of view. After the 1997 elections it seemed obvious to me that the party had to rethink its strategy. Because 5% of the vote means you have not connected with the people. But the NDM people disagreed. They were proud of what they had achieved. People liked what the NDM stood for. Once the population truly understood its message, then we would see how popular it really was. I was astonished. Here were some of Jamaica’s best and brightest. Yet they seemed totally disengaged from reality. If a humiliating wipe out in the polls couldn’t convince them they were doing something wrong, what could?

What does the NDM stand for anyway? ‘Change the system’ says what you are against, but not what you are for. And not even its own executive can tell me if it is still a presidential party. It could at least put together a one-page position paper. Who is going to vote for a ‘puss in a bag’?”

Perhaps the PNP and JLP also lack policy definition, but they are established brand names. Consumers must be given a compelling incentive to buy any new product. Jamaica’s implicit challenge to the NDM is ‘give me a convincing reason to change my 50 year old two party habit’. So far it has offered none.

Some say the NDM has not done enough work on the ground. Many NDM candidates, they charge, seem chiefly interested in profiling and getting on TV and have shirked the necessary hard grind of building grass root organizations. Others claim the NDM is ‘afraid to lose its virginity’, presumably implying it should embrace ‘white rum and curry goat’ populism. The party says it is unwilling to sacrifice principles for the sake of winning votes, an admirable stance. But did it really face such a choice? Had the NDM run a coherent campaign its mutterings about ‘ignorant and ungrateful voters’ might be understandable. But a storekeeper offering shoddy goods should not complain when customers shop elsewhere. 

There is also a colour issue. The NDM may be racially broad-based, but it put up 3 light brown men on the 1997 TV leadership debates. Which confirmed the view of many that it is a ‘redman’ party in a 90% black country. In a perfect world skin shade would be immaterial. But on planet earth humans have an instinctive affinity for those who look like them. Colour may matter less in Jamaica than most places, but only the naive think it doesn’t matter at all.

Leadership is also a problem. Many NDM members privately moan about Bruce Golding’s indecisiveness. As one put it “Jamaicans don’t like wimps, and Bruce comes across as a man afraid to take a stand. When Lorane Ferguson publicly attacked the gas tax rise last year he ignited people into a 3 day protest. If that had been Bruce the NDM would be ahead in the polls today. But Bruce would never do something like that. He would be afraid of looking foolish.”

P.J. Patterson is no firebrand, and he won two landslide victories. But cautious planners suit established organizations. New entities need dynamic leaders willing to take chances. Ironically the present JLP badly needs a systematic and conciliatory manager like Mr. Golding. While the NDM could well use a leader with aspects of Edward Seaga’s robust and fearless approach.

I would like to see the NDM become a permanent political force. Greater freedom of choice is always a good thing, and the more options Jamaican voters have the better. But unless the NDM takes a long hard look in the mirror it will never happen. changkob@hotmail.com