Kamla Persad-Bissessar exhibits all the characteristics of a leader trapped in the delusion of her own indispensability. She clings to power despite mounting evidence that her leadership is a liability, not an asset. The resignations detailed in the article are not just isolated incidents; they are symptomatic of a deeper structural issue within the UNC: stagnation, disillusionment, and a refusal to evolve.
Bonhoeffer’s Stupidity in Action
As Dietrich Bonhoeffer posited, stupidity in politics is not about intelligence but about wilful ignorance and groupthink. Kamla’s response to mass resignations is a textbook example—she does not acknowledge the legitimate grievances of those leaving but instead labels them “traitors” and dismisses their actions as self-serving. This is a classic authoritarian tactic: deflect, demonise, and deny.
Her supporters—those who remain loyal despite the party’s evident decline—are similarly afflicted. They do not question why so many senior figures are abandoning ship. They do not ask why the UNC, once a formidable political force, has become a party people flee from rather than rally behind. Instead, they accept her excuses, reinforce her delusions, and attack those who dare to challenge her leadership.
Cult of Personality and Nostalgia
Kamla is trapped in nostalgia, constantly invoking the past rather than charting a new course for the future. Her leadership has long ceased to be about governance or effective opposition; it is now about self-preservation. She is no longer fighting to defeat the PNM—she is fighting to stay relevant.
Her attacks on those who resign are particularly telling. Rather than reflecting on why so many loyalists are leaving, she immediately assumes they are opportunists. This is not the behaviour of a leader confident in her vision; it is the paranoia of someone who knows deep down that her grip on power is slipping.
The Political Consequences
Kamla’s refusal to step aside has far-reaching consequences:
- UNC is unelectable under her leadership. The general public sees the party as dysfunctional, reactionary, and out of touch.
- The PNM remains in power. Instead of a strong opposition to challenge Rowley’s failures, we have a fragmented and ineffective UNC that cannot unify the electorate.
- Talented people are leaving. The resignations indicate that many within the party realise it has no future under Kamla, but rather than transition to new leadership, the party is bleeding talent.
- The party’s credibility is eroding. Each high-profile defection further undermines public confidence in the UNC as a viable alternative.
Comparison to the PNM’s Cult of Rowley
Much like Keith Rowley, Kamla has created a personality cult where criticism is met with hostility, and blind loyalty is rewarded. The difference is that Rowley’s cult is still in power, while Kamla’s is imploding.
Both leaders thrive on tribalism and fear-mongering, both refuse to acknowledge their failings, and both rely on political stupidity to maintain their support. The key distinction is that Rowley has state resources and incumbency on his side, whereas Kamla’s party is crumbling under the weight of its own contradictions.
Conclusion: A Party in Denial
Kamla is not leading the UNC—she is suffocating it. Every resignation, every defection, every lost election is a clear sign that she is the obstacle, not the solution. But rather than accept this, she doubles down on the same failed strategies, attacking those who leave instead of addressing why they are leaving.
This is Bonhoeffer’s stupidity in its purest form: a political movement that is incapable of self-reflection, trapped in the fantasy that loyalty to a failed leader is more important than winning elections. Until the UNC breaks free from Kamla’s grip, it will remain an irrelevant, self-sabotaging entity—allowing the PNM to rule unchallenged.
