A historical disquisition of the success of the 1992 Clinton presidential
campaign, reveals the extent to which how a political narrative was
identified by a political scientist-cum-pollster and how the narrative was
cannily crafted into a political slogan that has all the characteristics of
historical legend. In choreographing the genesis of what later amounted to
the focus of Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign and its populist but
sophisticated slogans like "It's the economy, stupid" and "Putting people
first", Washington Post legend, Bob Woodward, acknowledged the stupendously
wise-cracking pollster-cum-political scientist, Stan Goldberg, with
encapsulating the political narrative of the time into a political message
that had the tantalising propensity of catching and sticking with the popular
imagination. This accreditation of Goldberg with Clinton's powerful but
simple political message that struck a chord with ordinary and sophisticated
peoples alike came from Goldberg's long-held view that America's next major
socio-political crisis was what has been effectively dubbed the gradual
decimation of America's middle classes or America's "declining middle"; i.e,
the current inability of or difficulties associated with the average American
to live the American Dream of "a good job, a college education for their
kids, owning a home, affordable health care, and retirement with economic
security." To the extent that this was true of America in the post- Reagan
years, Goldberg felt it was the ONLY message that was a seller and a winner.
Bob Woodward writes:

" Greenberg had been advising Clinton since his 1990 gubernatorial campaign.
In 1991, he gave the governor a draft of a long article he was writing for
the American Prospect, a liberal political journal. In part a review of three
books that examined what Greenberg called "the Democrat's perceived
indifference to the value of work and the interests of working people," the
article was the culmination of a lot of analysis and polling. It was also a
personal manifesto of sorts. Greenberg was devoted to studying the crisis in
the Democratic Party and the defection of middle-class and working whites -
the so-called Reagan Democrats - to the Republican presendential candidates
in the 1980s. These voters held the balance in national elections, and
Greenberg argued that they wanted to return to their party, to come home.
Party leaders had to reach out to this disaffected and forgotten middle
class, which saw itself squeezed - paying for programs for the poor and tax
breaks for the wealthy, while getting little in return from government. The
middle class crisis presented an opportunity for the Democrats." [Bob
Woodward, The Agenda - Inside the Clinton White House, pp. 24-25, Simon &
Schuster, New York, 1994]

It is worth a moment's pause to free myself of what could later amount to a
contextual obfuscation of my lifting of the above passage from Woodward's
book. Let me categorically state that i do not and never will view the
current Gambian as a class problem; i.e., that is to say that i do not see
the Gambian crisis as one precipitated by a crisis within one class or a
pitting of the classes against each other. Whilst i remain loyal to my
trenchant bourgeois convictions, obsession with social status has never and
never will factor in my outlook. I lifted the Woodward passage for
comparative contextual purposes; and not necesaarily believing in every jot
and tittle of Goldberg's convictions. Rather, as would be crystal clear
later, the above passage typifies how political narratives for a political
struggle are encapsulated into a simple but sophisticated theme that easily
strikes a chord with all constituents alike.

To the extent that this is the case, the Alliance - as a first measure -
ought to engage in a dialectical exercise of the current Gambian crisis and
broadly define the forces that are at work; how it ought to be tackled; and
most importantly, the manner and ways in which it ought to be tackled. In
this, there is both a good and bad news for the Alliance. The bad one first.
It seems to me that the fundamental defect of Gambian Opposition since July
22nd 1994 has been one of selling a coherent, simple and sophisticated
message to those constituents that had been lulled into a trance by the
AFPRC/APRC's populist and simplistic narrative; especially, the bits
embodying its grotesque infrastructural developments as signs of changed
times for better. Indeed, the Opposition has identified the lies behind the
fabrications that Gambian lives have improved since 1994 and effectively
debunked them. But beyond the sophisticated urbanites, their message has left
much to be desired. Because the message has, to this day, not changed, it
means that what in other ways, contexts and eras resembles an ingredient for
mass agitation and disaffection remains a body of complacency and
indifference. This is the deficit we ought to correct if we are going to
impact upon those still lulled in the trance of Jammeh and the APRC.

Now the good news. The dialectics of the current Gambian crisis has been
pretty much fleshed out by rigorous debates. Suffice to say that when it
comes to the intellectual and moral case against Jammeh, it is a foregone
conclusion that on these grounds by themselves alone, the Alliance wins hands
down. In essence no serious or credible intellectual and moral arguments
persist today that in effect primes another day of Jammeh as Gambian
president. That has always been the easy bit. The earnest emptiness and
evilry of the Jammeh era is self-evident: all the stuff that makes up a
crackpot African dictatorship are all evident in Jammeh. The extra judicial
killings of innocent Gambians; the plundering of scarce Gambian resources by
Jammeh; the abrupt withdrawal of basic civil liberties; the absence of a
judicial regime that rigorously upheld the Rule of Law; the continued
fettering and harrassment of journalists; distate for democratic and
governance values; and the refusal to acknowledge the essence of dissent in a
polity purportedly buoyed by liberal democratic politics. This list, is by no
means exhaustive. We can spend the rest of the day here stating the
intellectual and moral case against Jammeh. The case against Jammeh is simply
overwhelming.

The problem that faces us now vis-a-vis the manner and ways in which the
Alliance conducts its campaign, is to glibly translate these intellectual and
moral arguments against Jammeh into a common populist language without so
much losing the essence of its moral and intellectual roots. When Goldberg
identified the enemy as the decimation of the middle-classes, the trick was
to communicate this newfound moral and intellectual truth in a way which will
strike chords with not only the mentioned middle-classes but those also
aspiring to be one. The message has got escape the quirky bounds of
intellectual and moral rigour and populism be breezed into it without
compromising the coherency, effectiveness and seriousness of the message.
This is the first point.

The second point is one of looking beyond the crisis and enacting a proactive
mechanism that will sufficiently address the problems that gave imptus to the
crisis. It is simply not enough to tell Americans that the middle-classes are
fast disappearing; and it was caused by reckless Republican tax cuts for the
upper classes. That way you are embroiling yourself in un-necessary class
warfare and unproductive arguments. Rather, you have got to imagine ways in
which the highlighted crisis can be seriously and effectively addressed. So
instead of empty anti- upper class rhetorics, you come up with effective
slogans like "its the economy, stupid" or inclusive ones like "putting people
first". That you are not smeared as a bunch of firebrand leftist class
warriors.

Similarly, and with regard to the Gambian context, when the Alliance
incessantly highlight the human rights abuses and other anomalies associated
with the APRC, and engage in fiery rhetorics of justice, they always risked
being described as a violent and angry bunch of vindictive politicians who,
by virtue of their angry and vindictive rhetoric, have the propensity of
creating social upheaval in the event of their ascension to power. Indeed,
intellectual detractors of the Alliance enjoy nothing more than doing just
exactly that; especially during the presidential elections of 1996. One
recalls the columns of papers like Foroyaa, which wasted no time immediately
after those elections to caricature the UDP along those lines. To avoid the
current presidential elections being dragged into such ignoble intellectual
distractions and frivolities, the Alliance must temper its rhetoric with the
message of moderation that is inclusive and not divisive. For instance,
whilst it should uncompromisingly state that there would be enquiries into
the April Massacres, it ought to state categorically that there would be no
witch hunts and any or all political actions will primordially follow the due
process of established laws and civil liberties will be respected. That way
we eradicate any mention of angry vindictiveness from the message. 'Cause we
are moving on without Jammeh.

To sum up my argument, i will humbly suggest that we learn from Goldberg and
the New Democrats when they successfully took on the Republican incumbency of
Bush without attracting their endless spins, control freakery and tackiness.
We have got to translate the intellectual and moral narrative of the current
crisis into a message that connects with Gambians of all walks of life. In
this scheme of things, the moral and intellectual arguments against Jammeh
ought to be neatly incorporated with the Alliance's Social, Economic and
Political Rectification Programmes. Out of this incorporation, we mustcannily
craft a message that strikes a chord with ALL Gambians irrespective of
social, economic and political status. To this end, what undergirds the
Alliance's message and overall agenda is - to paraphrase from a slogan from
my compatriot, Kebba Dampha - that after 7 catastrophic years of Jammeh,
Gambians are now MOVING FORWARD. And what slogan exists today that best
encapsulates this fundamental moral truth than saying that after the October
presidential elections, the Gambian Peoples will begin a journey of what
signally promulgates a national sense of Gambians MOVING FORWARD? To localise
the slogan, the Alliance can easily refer to it as "Nyato" in Mandinka or
"Siikanam" in Wollof. The slogan can easily be translated into ALL the local
languages of the country. That way, we will effectively succeed in informing
the Gambian Peoples that it is about time we begin MOVING FORWARD from the
barbarism and decadence of the APRC era to a new era of decency, liberty and
the Rule Of The Law without alienating any constituency.


Hamjatta Kanteh

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask]
if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your full name and e-mail address.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------