Ravi Balgobin Maharaj's argument [Daily Express 5 April 2025] is logically flawed, rhetorically manipulative, and fundamentally unsound both in structure and substance. His piece, dressed up in pseudo-intellectualism, collapses under scrutiny once you strip away the emotive language and faulty comparisons. Let's address and dismantle his claims systematically, starting with the most glaring fallacies.
1. False Analogy: Roman Catholic Church vs Church of Scientology
Maharaj argues that because not all hierarchical or belief-based organisations are cults, it is unfair to characterise the UNC as such. However:
- This is a textbook false analogy. The fact that two organisations (e.g., the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of Scientology) share structural or behavioural characteristics does not disqualify them both from being cultic. In fact, the opposite is true: many scholars of religion, sociology, and psychology do classify all organised religions—including the Roman Catholic Church—as cults, especially when they exhibit:
- Doctrinal infallibility of leadership,
- Enforced obedience to authority,
- Suppression of dissent, and
- Mythologising of leaders.
- The fact that the Roman Catholic Church is older or more mainstream does not remove it from cult categorisation. Cultic dynamics are about power structures, not popularity or historical longevity.
- In political terms, if a party exhibits similar cultic behaviours, it should rightly be interrogated as a political cult. The UNC, under Persad-Bissessar, increasingly fits this mould—centralised control, dissent punished or ignored, and unquestioning loyalty demanded from subordinates.
2. Dishonest Portrayal of Free Expression within the UNC
Maharaj claims:
“Mrs Persad-Bissessar has always allowed the members of the UNC to express themselves freely…”
This is demonstrably false and misleading, based on well-documented recent resignations:
- Senior figures have publicly stated that they were vilified, sidelined, and threatened with blacklisting for raising internal concerns (see the resignation letter by Ricky Shanklin and six other executives).
- The party’s response has not been one of open dialogue, but rather defensiveness, denials, and ad hominem attacks branding dissenters as orchestrated saboteurs or sore losers.
This aligns with classic cultic patterns, where:
- Dissent is treated as betrayal;
- Critics are expelled or discredited;
- Blind loyalty is rewarded over competence or independence.
These are not the hallmarks of a democratically functioning political party. They are the hallmarks of an organisation sliding into cult-like behaviour.
3. Hyperbolic and Offensive Historical Comparisons (MLK, Mandela, Malcolm X)
The suggestion that Kamla Persad-Bissessar is the "Malcolm X of her time" is not only absurd but deeply offensive to the historical memory of global civil rights movements:
- Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, and Malcolm X were revolutionaries who resisted state violence, racial apartheid, and imperial injustice at great personal cost. They did not cling to failing political machines or suppress intra-movement dissent for personal power.
- Persad-Bissessar has not faced systemic oppression—she has had state power, and her record in office (particularly during the People’s Partnership) is not one of grassroots revolution but of status quo politics, peppered with allegations of poor governance and internal purges.
- Unlike civil rights leaders, she actively silences critical voices, as seen with the recent mass resignations. To equate her leadership with a liberation struggle is revisionist and deliberately misleading.
This comparison is not only a false equivalence—it is political idolatry masquerading as analysis.
4. Argument by Emotion: “No War is Won Without a Strong Leader…”
The military metaphor used—“no war is won without a strong leader commanding loyal troops”—is classic authoritarian apologism. It reframes dissent not as democratic input but as disloyalty, effectively justifying:
- Centralisation of power,
- Suppression of alternative views, and
- Glorification of the leader as a wartime general.
This kind of rhetoric is used to rationalise autocratic rule, not to defend democratic process. It is a dangerous and deeply anti-democratic justification for internal silencing, under the guise of “unity.”
5. Concluding Refutation: Why the UNC Does Resemble a Cult
Based on political science and sociological criteria, the UNC under Kamla Persad-Bissessar now exhibits numerous cult-like characteristics:
- Leader worship: Kamla is elevated above criticism, with historical mythologising and personality-driven loyalty.
- Suppression of dissent: Critical voices are expelled, marginalised, or publicly discredited.
- Groupthink: Alternative ideas are discouraged; coalition-building is tokenistic and performative.
- False reality: The leadership projects electoral confidence and internal unity despite repeated resignations, declining public trust, and credible reports of internal disillusionment.
Maharaj’s argument relies on logical fallacies, emotional manipulation, and historical revisionism to defend an indefensible structure.
Final Word
To those observing the UNC and identifying cultic patterns—you are not imagining things. You are witnessing the transformation of a once-formidable political party into a personality-driven machine that prizes obedience over integrity and loyalty over competence. The comparison to a cult is not hyperbole; it is an increasingly accurate political diagnosis.
Kamla Persad-Bissessar’s defenders may attempt to spin resignation after resignation as mere noise—but history has repeatedly shown what happens to political parties that refuse to self-correct. Collapse is inevitable.
Let them cling to delusion. But the public deserves the truth.
