Important lesson from TTUTA elections

THE EDITOR: The recently concluded TTUTA elections have confirmed what I have always advanced, ie that Trinidadians vote on their perceived interests and not race. For too long many have advanced the position that politics is expressed mainly on a racial basis. Simplistically it was argued that Indians vote for an Indian party and Africans for an African party. The historical fact of the geographical and therefore community division of the two races is never acknowledged. How can one expect, given these divisions, for many to support candidates who are not of their community and culture and who may not fully understand the day to day problems they experience. Moreover, the two ethnic groups over the last 150 years, having been separated geographically, one urban based the other rural based, adds to the divergence that exists between the two communities.

I would like the politicians from either side to explain how it is that in a national election for TTUTA representatives, where over 50 percent of the electorate are East Indians, that the East Indian candidate for President got approximately 500 votes, whilst the two African candidates polled over 7,000 votes. What therefore is responsible for this result. Why did the East Indian candidate not receive the majority of the East Indian vote? Hasn’t it always been argued that Trinidadians vote race? Why therefore in TTUTA’s national elections the voting pattern did not reflect the racial voting pattern that many argue is endemic in Trinidad. The national community should learn some very interesting lessons from the TTUTA election results.

RUTHVEN ‘DICKIE’ GODDARD
Trincity