In America, a great exporter of the democratic model, the situation is not much different. Cindy Sherman, whose son was killed in Iraq, started a protest during the summer. She first stalked the president at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. However, the hapless Bush ignored her, as she camped just outside his fence, protesting against the immorality of the war. Then, as the politicians returned to Washington, she moved her demonstration to the front lawn of the White House.

There, this solitary woman, though by then accompanied by many anti-war campaigners, was deemed too dangerous and suffered the same fate as Walter Wolfgang: forcible removal. Peaceful protest was again deemed too radical. And we should not forget that this is the same country that fought a civil war in the past over civil liberties among other issues.

In Mauritius, many can identify with Walter Wolfgang. There are many who would like to disagree with the general direction of their party but circumstances make this impossible. The circumstance in question is the Stalinist approach of our political parties. Stalin, if we care to remember, is the guy that Lenin warned the Communist party against before his death. He wanted to see his influence diminished but his worst fears were realised as Stalin graduated to power and proceeded to eliminate, in one way or another, his opponents. Among the biggest casualties was Leon Trotsky, one of the original revolutionaries and perhaps one of the greatest minds of the Bolshevik Revolution.

Obviously, we are not at the same level of confrontation in Mauritius. However, there is a palpable detection of such a Stalinist attitude and control freakery. If we are to take another ‘what-not-to-do’ leaf from the New Labour book of running a conference, the ban on sweets is quite a remarkable one. Sweets were not allowed in, in case they were thrown at speakers. If this is extreme in nature, we can imagine a party conference in Mauritius. They usually amount to no more than a popular “crowd bath” for the main leaders. This type of sycophantic attitude is unashamedly displayed at any occasion, with a deluge of fireworks and wild senseless cheers.

<B>Swapping allegiance </B>

There is constant ship jumping in Mauritian politics, where one politician will change party overnight and this fits in the general context of the Stalinist approach. Take any party, even outside of the big three of the MMM, MSM and Labour and we can discern the same problem. The PMXD, PMSD, Lalit, etc. are all afflicted by this particular need to keep everyone toeing the party line. Now, it would be unrealistic to suggest that a political party should not have a basic policy to which all members adhere. Sure enough, this makes the core of party politics. However, when it comes to crucial issues, some members, on grounds of conscience must be allowed to disagree without being ostracised.

However, in Mauritius, when people switch sides, it is often to do with personal reasons and a lack of conviction. It sometimes conforms to the stereotype of the politician engaging in politics for personal gain. And this is in complete conflict with the spirit of democracy itself, where debate should be encouraged. By contrast, Irish politics is more open to debate and disagreement.

Government backbenchers are often at odds with their party colleagues, rightly or wrongly, over policies. Mauritius could benefit from healthy discord within the political parties. In our context, where the electorate hands the whole parliament to one party, dissent among government ranks should be encouraged, without requiring the party member to jump the fence to the other side. In almost all democracies, we are now ending up with two big political blocks to choose from. But often, the difference is barely visible.

The recent German election displayed the current monotony of modern democratic nations. Though New Labour eventually apologised to Walter Wolfgang, it should produce a reflection on the true nature of those who declare themselves democrats. Mauritius has long been engulfed in such inside pacification of party rebels. It is now time for the different parties to challenge their Stalinist ghosts. Such unquestioning attitudes can not only damage the political parties themselves but also their rapport with the people. Who ever trusted lame ducks after all?

<B>Diren Valayden</B>

<I>Outlook Correspondent in Dublin</I>