I say it the way I see it. I don't care who is offended. It is my right to question the integrity and character of any politician who goes on the aggressive side. TK and many others have been dreaming of the day when new a political party would emerge on the scene to replace the PPP as the representer of East Indians. Their view of the PPP is not all wrong. They see the party as one that has misled IndoGuyanese for a half century. What is so interesting is that the AFC is now dominated by members of the PPP.
It is not a matter whether you care what I think but whether you care what you think.
I do not know on what basis you challenge TK's character. As an agent of or as one inclined to accepting the PPP as is; that is perplexing. The aggregate character profile of the PPP party and its explicit culture is that of the aggressively corrupt. There is no moral basis for how they want to rule. Their way alone cannot be the way in a democratic, plural and multiracial society.
I question your understanding of what you do as an individual outside that PPP culture. If I am mistaken and you are already be swept up in that melange of necrotiizing amorality; woe is you. The party as it presently stands, is under pinned by a system of rhetorical ethic. It is useless as a source for guidance or as lessons for life.
It is the right of anyone to want to replace any Party. That is healthy political activism. If you get the vibe that the PPP represent East Indian ( and I do not doubt the logical necessity of your conclusion), it is an unworkable reality for our society. Cooperation with not a subjugation of other pluralities must be the norm.
That brings us full circle to your question. TK must get along with others in the society and his party be they old communist or new liberal capitalists. It is about all of us getting a say and those representing us being respected and included in the deciding as we make our way in the world.