.
Pragmatism is not about whining that you do not see this or that..
Pragmatism is about analyzing reality and then developing strategies of dealing with it. What you don't understand is that most people on this planet don't have the time or energy to be high minded.
They do what they perceive to be in their best interests. If they are reasonably satisfied they don't give two hoots about the larger picture. So any one who wants their votes will have to come down to their level and display a better ability to deliver to these people that which they want better than the other guy.
And yes most Indians see the APNU AFC coalition as a risk, given their apprehensions of the PNC.
And if APNU AFC wins, the PNC supporters will want to get their share that they perceive not to gave received. Tensions can then develop with the AFC supporters, especially those (Indians) who don't trust the PNC to begin with.
So yes there is risk.
Now does one do like you and scream that to make note of this is "whining"? Or does some one take note of this and develop strategies to mitigate this risk?
If you don't understand this, I am afraid that you are an idealistic liberal arts kid, not an adult who has developed some wisdom over the years.
Pragmatism is not validating a means to end schema.It is taking what works and using it because it is necessary to address the immediacy of a problem. Pretending you have the time to deliberate on the minutia in a short turn around as the present election is for nitpickers. Losing is not an option.
One takes the best of the message and deliver it for the benefit of winning. The message is the simple, general one. We have is a kleptocracy that survives on and aggravates racial tension. It is not ever going to change. The promised of change is on reforms beginning with general constitutional reforms, local government, procurement etc. Trying to examine the means one create institutional fences against racism, or pretending Indians in general will move on rational deliberations to APNU-AFC is pure nonsense. You address those supporters you know that will come because you have determined a win number and you know where you can cherry pick to achieve it.
This is campaigning not policy development. Indeed one must have the visage of an underlying profound layer but to say that is concretized and sell it as such is nonsense. It is about delivering a clear, understandable, credible and persistent messages to those who will vote and who will serve to get you over the top. The message will all converge on the idea of change and why not the minutia of why. If asked directly one of course must be able to answer in some coherent way because afterall, it is not build on air.
Also, I am a scientist not a liberal arts dilettante. I also do not do anything half way so petty insults don't get to me. I merely makes me tell you in plainer terms what I think of you and that you should know that to this point . You are a whiner...nothing positive comes from you, no directive to solving any problem. What comes from you is what you think others miss and how good you are at chiding them as if you are god with an omniscient view. When it comes down to any matter, again, you simply a whiner. When you tell me how you think one may achieve positive ends in positive ways I will say otherwise. It has never happened in our dozen or so years arguing over hundreds of issues.