The People’s National Party (PNP) must to be painfully humiliated by current happenings inside the party. As if humiliation were not terrible enough for the party to overcome, its image took some not-so-subtle battering last week from Lisa Hanna, Member of Parliament for St Ann South Eastern, and from General Secretary Paul Burke.

Hanna tabled a caustic no-confidence motion against Burke. He, in turn, took Hanna to task. This article will not dwell on the ensuing cass-cass.

Separate and apart from that, MP Hanna also emphatically declared: “The PNP appears to be a relic of the past, with obsolete messages desperately trying to appeal to a generation whose sights are set on their future. We [in the PNP] are disconnected by deep chasms of brutal internal conflicts and divisions…” These are strong statements indeed. And, although there is something mildly quixotic about them, there is a lot that is revealing about them.

Given all that is already in the public domain, there is hardly anything to protest in the preceding declaration by Hanna, except for the very significant references to the PNP as “relic of the past” with “obsolete messages” and its “appeal to a generation whose sights are set on their future…” If, by these statements, Lisa is alluding to the urgent restructuring, reconstituting and rolling out of a modern and highly functional PNP organisation and secretariat, then there should no incongruence. Signs are pointing to the need for renewal and in-depth organisational renaissance because, over time, the PNP has become little more than an election machine — something against which the late Michael Manley warned.

With respect to her specific statement concerning “deep chasms of brutal internal conflicts and divisions…” all I am willing to proffer is that, as the Jamaican aphorism advises: “If fish come from river bottom and seh shark down deh, believe ‘im.”

However, missing from Hanna’s statements are references to the cliques of male and female divas who leak the party’s business faster than it takes plain water to pass through a strainer. There was no mention about the disruptive and deadly “carry go, bring come” squadrons. Lisa is right; the PNP is stuck if it fails to exorcise the “back and belly rats” in its midst.

Insofar as Lisa’s other declaratory statements are concerned, I find it strikingly unfortunate, but comically intriguing that, despite the fact Comrade Hanna has been part of the same “relic of the past” PNP for just about six years now, it took the defeat of the party for her to comment publicly about the state of the party and specifically about the party’s “obsolete messages” and its apparent state of ideological rigor mortis. While one can only guess what Hanna means by “obsolete messages”, it is reasonable to infer that she is speaking about political developments, government policies, ideas, programmes and achievements covering the periods between 1938 and 1980 and between 1989 and 2007. Who knows? She could even be alluding to the period between 2012 and 2016.

Be that as it may, one thing is clear: by virtue of association, Lisa has been and remains a prominent “item” among the festoon of cobwebs covering the political artefacts that she suddenly finds offensive, dysfunctional, outmoded, and lifeless. Hence, she is as much a significant part of the PNP’s illness as she could be of the cure. If, by “obsolete messages” Hanna is referring to the PNP’s slavish devotion to remind the country, especially young people, of the political advancements (1938-1962) and of the socio-cultural reengineering of the 1970s, then inherent in her rather bold observations would be a remarkable, but equally inconsistent recommendation for the PNP to ignore its own record and purpose as an organisation that commits itself to improving the lives of the people.

The brutal irony in Hanna’s chilling assertions that the PNP “appears to be relic of the past” and [clinging to] “obsolete messages [while] desperately trying to appeal to a generation whose sights are set on their future…” is that her bluntness is also a double-edge sword — it cuts both ways. That this generation has its sights glued to the future does not, in or of itself, mean that looking in the rear-view mirror automatically becomes millstones of impediments or hindrances to success. Neither could knowledge of our political history (obsolete messages) make young people into instant replicas of Lot’s wife. We have to be careful not to conflate or confuse “obsolete messages” with any deliberate plans to use repetition of non-fictional political stories to hammer home particular historical truths about our advancement. That is why the PNP continues to talk about its fight for universal adult suffrage in 1944, self-government in 1957, and ultimately political independence in 1962.

Given the preceding, it is easy to identify with Paul Burke’s observations about the low youth support for the PNP in the February 25, 2016 General Election. It is easy to make a connection between that outcome and Lisa’s theory on “obsolete messages”. The fundamental question is: Did Lisa, in her capacity as minister of youth and culture communicate the political value proposition to young people sufficiently for them to accept that a vote for the PNP would result in automatic advancement, collectively and individually? Or, did she abdicate her responsibility because she was conflicted between her private convictions and her assessment of the obsoleteness of the PNP’s message?

Obsolete or not, young people need to know of the past, even as they look to the future. As a former minister of youth and culture, Hanna would have been familiar with the writings and teachings of National Hero Marcus Mosiah Garvey. She should be particularly au fait with his famous declarations about the relevance of history, especially when he declared: “A people without the knowledge of their past history, origin and culture is like a tree without roots.” As unexciting as it may appear, there is nothing “obsolete” about using “political civics” — for want of a better metaphor — to remind young people of the foundation laid by the party.

While it is not clear what to make of the totality of Hanna’s observations, she seems to mean the party well. Upon closer scrutiny, however, the statements stretch beyond what the natural eyes can see. Unwittingly, Hanna may have opened the Pandora’s box, as aspects of the ensuing discussion may show, based on inferences drawn from her statements.

Generally speaking, politics is about transitions; it is also about the ability to pivot. As a consequence, and to remain relevant, political parties must engage appropriate messaging strategies to bridge generational divides without losing sight of its purpose or history.

Therefore, context is always necessary to guide transitions, to inform reforms, and assist with organisational innovation. Additionally, there must be reliable “text” on, and from which to build the context [narrative] that will drive political change and help foster a better understanding among the various publics about why things are the ways they are, but also where they ought to be.

I am willing to give Hanna the benefit of the doubt here. However, if by “obsolete messages” she is suggesting that the PNP purge itself of its history, then the suggestion would not make sense, certainly not from a historical perspective. It would be akin to removing one’s spine yet expecting to stand up and walk.

If she is suggesting that the PNP change its method of political outreach and communication to reflect modernity, then brilliant. However, if she is using “obsolete messages” as a synonym for “obsolete ideas”, then that would be problematic. For purposes of this article, let’s assume the former — that she is recommending that the party take a “wash out” to relieve itself of any excesses due to political, ideological and philosophical bloatedness. Even so, the “obsolete messages” would not have anything to do with the party’s recent management of the political economy because the PNP, between 1980 and 1989, underwent far-reaching ideological metamorphosis.

In fact, the PNP has become, quasi-philosophically, but strictly fiscally speaking, what the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) used to be, and vice versa. By the time the party regained political power in 1989, it had essentially abandoned its adherence to Fabian Socialist principles. Many think this was a mistake.

The PNP was no longer talking about “Project Land Lease” in the same form or fashion as it did during the 1970s. And, although an item of immense triviality, Michael Manley even traded his tropically appropriate Kariba suits for the more stylish Wall Street-like American jacket and tie.

That aside, there is nothing “obsolete” about the message of moving from a highly regulated economy, one with price controls, to a liberalised, deregulated, free market-oriented economic model; because the world has changed and so must we. There is nothing obsolete about the idea of reducing government’s debt and involvement in commercial activities or allowing the private sector to be the engine of economic growth. There is nothing obsolete about facilitating economic development through infrastructure spending on modern highways, bridges, schools, development of the knowledge economy, expanding telecommunications and rural electrification, water supply, renewable clean energy technology, etc.

Additionally, there can be no advancement of political education that ignores history. It would be quite simplistic if Hanna thinks the PNP would be best served were it to trample on its origins, identity, history, or accomplishments. It is for reasons such as these that greater clarity is needed surrounding the use of “obsolete messages”. There is nothing “obsolete” about a political message that reminds people about illiteracy and the creation of JAMAL. There is nothing obsolete in talking about inequities and the establishment of a National Minimum Wage, or the passage of legislation that ensured equal pay for women.

There is nothing obsolete about highlighting the horrors of social injustice; the historical legacy of stigmatisation and inequality. And there is nothing obsolete in the message about educating the youth about the Bastard Act, the National Housing Trust Act, and so on. Any political party that is worth its salt must remind present and future voting generations from whence they came. It must, as a requirement of its existence and viability, talk about the socio-political, cultural and economic conditions that gave birth to its existence in 1938. There is nothing “obsolete” about political messaging or messages that highlight historic policy development and national advancements. That the PNP came out of the horrible industrial relations climate of the 1930s and came to maturity in the aftermath of the global depression is significant because much of the economic and social narrative of 2016 was written way back then.

It would be a painful political miscalculation, one that could cause political strabismus, should the PNP move to eliminate historical messaging as part of the process, or as a tool in the arsenal of political education. Remember, context is vital to communication and messaging. Signs of the knowledge deficit — particularly concerning our history — are ubiquitous, with the greatest manifestation popping up in instances where young people expect everything to happen all in one fell swoop, instead of incrementally. Their “microwave” expectations spring primarily from a lack of history, because they simply do not know or care to understand the symbiotic relationship between efforts and outcomes and that outcomes are by-products of transformation.

What Hanna may, correctly or incorrectly, see as “obsolete messages” could very well remain essential to exposing and explaining the stubborn antecedents that continue to increase the degree of difficulty for us to attain economic independence.

Burnscg@aol.com