Is Charles Brumskine Liberia's Howard Dean?

By John S. Morlu, II 

18 May 04

How many of you out there have heard the phrases “herd mentality,” or “momentum”? I will not provide the answer directly, but the following questions will demonstrate to the reader what these words mean: How many times have you been caught holding an empty bag at the tail end of a foxhole? How many times have you embarked on an event in business, financial matters, or personal affairs just because everyone in your neck of the woods was doing the same thing and you did not want to be left behind? Have you ever been to a restaurant because it was the coolest and most popular place that your friends frequented, even though you did not have a full grasp of the type of food that was served there? All the fashion-conscious folks out there, have you ever just gone out and bought a dress, tie, or shirt because everyone was buying it? What does Brumskine’s campaign have in common with the above statements? As I take you through the logical minefield, I ask that you stop and think about how each example relates to the discussion at hand—Mr. Brumskine’s campaign.  

Example One: It is no doubt that at one point in each of our lives we have personally experienced, read or witnessed extraordinary popular delusion and the madness of crowds. For the world’s financial market gurus, what do the following events have in common—Tulip Mania and the Dot.com revolution? They were driven by mass hysteria and the madness of crowds led by a small group of very talent and persuasive individuals, who hoped for nothing but to create many, many more fools in the market place. More importantly, during each of the events, ordinary folks refused to ask the obvious questions: where is the beef, or show me the money? As John Maynard Keynes, the father of modern day economics brilliantly expressed his view on the world of investing and financial market, “a fool is born every hour”; the only question is that do you want to be the last fool born that hour? Basically, there is a sucker born every minute and do you want to be left holding the bag? In any case, the combined effect of the gullibility of the masses coupled with a few smart people trying to make fools of everybody created a powerful force that created these events of mass delusion, which cost mankind dearly—both in terms of financial distress and social upheaval.  

First, let’s take the case of Tulip Mania. The story begins in 1559. Conrad Guestner brought the first tulip bulbs from Constantinople to Holland and Germany, and people fell in love with them. Soon tulip bulbs became a status symbol for the wealthy, because they were beautiful and hard to get.  Although early buyers were people who truly prized the lovely flowers, later buyers were merely in for the money, and it didn’t take long for speculators to get involved. They created trading activity, and eventually, tulip bulbs were placed onto the local market exchanges. By 1634, the rage for owning tulips had spread to the middle classes of Dutch society. Merchants and shopkeepers began to vie with one and another for single tulip bulbs.  

How bad did it get? Well, at the height of tulip mania in 1635, a single tulip bulb was sold for the present day value of a nearly $35,000! Can you imagine spending $35,000 for a single tulip bulb? This was happening in Holland in the mid-17th century. It was getting so bizarre that people were selling everything they owned – their homes, their livestock, everything – for the privilege of owning tulips, on the expectation that the bulbs would continue to grow in value. As a result, prices – in today’s dollars – ranged from $17,000 all the way up to $76,000 for a single bulb. 

Tulip prices soon plunged to less than the present equivalent of a dollar each. Imagine having bought a tulip for $76,000, only to discover six weeks later that it was now worth less than one dollar. Commerce in Holland suffered a severe shock, and did not recover for many years. Tulip collectors, speculators, and gamblers who had tulips at the time of the collapse were left to bear ruinous losses. 

Now I know what you are saying, “Come on John! … who on earth could possibly have gotten caught up in that craze?” I know how you feel. After all, we’re talking tulips here – not food, shelter, clothing, or firearms for defense! We’re talking TULIPS! What practical value could tulips have had in Holland in 1636? And what could cause people to lose such control of their senses??? Well, if you think the story is too preposterous to be true, trust me it did happen. And believe me, too, when I tell you that it could happen again. No way, you say? Well, I have only three names for you: The dot.com bubble, Howard Dean and Charles Brumskine. You get the point. That’s an indisputable fact, but you most certainly have the right to disagree with my assessment.  

Example Two: In the go-go-days of the 1990’s, for example, many of us were left holding an empty bag because we foolishly believed that there was no limit on how high stock prices could rise, even when history was looking right into our very eyes and giving us a clear warning through past events. A few group of smart and persuasive Wall Street’s Investment Analysts made us believe that the advent of the Internet had revolutionized the world in a way never seen before—that we were undergoing a fundamental paradigm shift that was totally unimaginable and unthinkable just a few years ago. That the world economy was operating on a higher trajectory, driven largely by the “information superhighway”, borrowing a phrase from former Vice President Al Gore. That only divine intervention would alter the trend the world economy had embarked on. So, we invested every penny that came across our way, including our children tuitions and our own very retirement funds that we had once put safely in Certificate of Deposits, U.S. Government Bonds and other low risk investment portfolio. We wanted to be part of this new thing—the Dot.com millionaires—and nothing under the heavens was going to stop us from achieving that goal.  

In fact, I was so convinced that the world was heading toward a never-ending wealth creation that I quit my nice job that allowed me to travel the world over to join a fast-growing telecommunication company. I was offered a good starting bonus and healthy stock options that clearly put me on the path of joining the ranks of the successful and well-to-do. But what was really strange was that I received all these goodies even though I knew very little about my new, exciting career. In any case, I jumped right into it, arrived at work at 9 a.m. on my first day and stayed at work until 12:15 a.m. I even skipped all of the orientation programs.  

My new company was not making any money, and I really could not fathom how we were ever going to make a dime of profit. Sadly enough, I convinced myself that I was actually part of something remarkable, and who was I to begin questioning the will of the majority of the world population, especially since I was just a poor farm boy from Bolahun. I was lucky to be in America, to have a job and a good retirement benefit that would soon make me very, very rich. I was gone with the wind. There was no turning back—I was part of a big thing—I was part of a movement. I was so engaged in the movement that many people would run away from me when I attended gatherings, because I tried to convince them to buy one technology stock after another. Unfortunately, I could not give them specifics on my recommendations, only generalities. Each person that I managed to persuade to join the group of fools in turn went right on and persuaded another fool to join in the market, astronomically multiplying the number of fools. Even by brother-in-law joined the craze and lost big time. Poor guy! 

Well, the moral of the story is that I did not get far enough to achieve that dream. Those that I managed to get to buy into my excitement also went down with me when the bubble burst. We all soon found out that each horse that we had placed a bet on had no close—no substance but all talk. Basically, stocks declined in an instant, without much notice. We all lost everything, including our hopes and dreams. Some of us even lost our jobs because the companies we worked for lost so much in stock market valuations, making them violate their bank covenants and forcing them into unthinkable bankruptcies. What was really embarrassing, at least from my vintage point, was that we should have taken a lesson from history and quickly come to the conclusion that the astronomical increases in stock prices were not supportable by any fundamental financial performance; they were built on mass hysteria and popular delusion and were nothing but a craze. In other words, the fundamentals were deplorable or non-existent, but we still believed and followed blindly. What does Brumskine’s campaign have in common with the above narrative? Stop and think, and then move on. 

Example Three: Most recently, Americans witnessed yet another mass hysteria, herd mentality, momentum, and popular delusion in the political arena—in the case of former Democratic Presidential Candidate Howard Dean. Mass popular delusion propelled Howard Dean to the top of the Democratic Party only to see his political stock value fall precipitously, baffling even the most astute politicians. This brings me to the long awaited subject matter of this commentary: Is Liberian Presidential hopeful Charles Brumskine Liberia’s Howard Dean? The answer clearly depends on the analogous relationships that a reasonable person would like to draw. However, in order to answer this question, the reader needs to know who Howard Dean is and how he came to be revered and massively followed, but lost the contest at the same time—a great paradox.  

Dr. Howard Dean is a former governor of one of America’s smallest states—Vermont. He was a very successful governor, who was a fiscal conservative and social liberal. He was one of only a handful of governors to balance a budget. He was also a fervent believer in free trade, although he changed his position later on as he competed to lead the Democratic Party in the upcoming U.S. Presidential election. On the social front, under his leadership, Vermont became the first state to provide all children in the state with health care benefits. In addition, he was the first governor to sign a Civil Union Act into law, allowing gays and lesbians to have, with the exception of marriage, several of the benefits that are enjoyed by married couples.  

Furthermore, Howard Dean was the first to declare his candidacy to contest in the Democratic primaries. Upon declaring his desire to run for president, the press categorized him as an obscure governor from a small state with zero chance of winning. Against all odds, he plowed along forcefully making his case to whoever would listen. He finally got a break when Bush decided to go to war with Iraq, and remove mass murderer Saddam Hussein from power. Dean supported President Bush’s decision for the United States to invade Afghanistan and topple the dictatorial, terrorism-loving Taliban government. However, when it came time to invade Iraq, Dean had the solo courage to unambiguously state his opposition to going to war in Iraq. This was the very time when key members of the Democratic Party were capitulating and giving President Bush support on all major issues that matter most to the base of the Democratic Party, because President Bush’s approval rating was in the high 70th percentile, and no one dared to mess with him. Bush had accumulated a lot of what is referred to as “political capital” in the aftermath of the worst attack on U.S. soil, and he was willing and prepared to flash his muscle against any democrat who questioned his judgment. Democrats panicked, and with only a few exceptions, went quietly back in their cages and supported President Bush on even matters their party base opposed, like the war with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. So, Dean stepped right in to fill the opposition to the war vacuum created by the vacating, spineless democrats. 

Over a period of a few months, Dean began to build a grassroots support since he was the only single opposition voice in the Democratic Party. He capitalized on the popular anger against Bush to build a strong, ardent grass root support. In no time, money started to pull in like no one had imagined. Overnight, Dean built a following and revolutionized Internet fund raising, by capitalizing on some of the strategies that Arizona Senator John McCain had used to raise money on the Internet in his contest against Bush in 2000. In a matter of a few months, Dean’s campaigned raised a whopping $40 plus million from individual donations averaging approximately $77. The press immediately picked up on the momentum and transformed Dean into the man to beat. Throughout the summer and into most part of the fall, everywhere you turned there were Deanites holding meetings.  

Dean’s campaign even popularized Internet blogs, which allowed his supporters to create community or neighborhood Web sites for members to share ideas, disseminate information and plan neighborhood get togethers. Dean became the talk of the town and the press declared him the presumed frontrunner. Everyone now wanted to be a Deanite. It was the cool thing around town. As stingy as I am, I even contributed some money to his campaign, not because I knew anything about the guy, but because all my close friends were doing it. Basically, the mass hysteria and popular delusion, which resulted from people’s desire to be part of a bigger thing, quickly skyrocketed Dean’s political stock value and put him at the top of the world, making him rather vulnerable to any adverse event. As the saying goes, what goes up must come down, and the faster you climb, the quicker you will fall, especially if the reason for your quick rise cannot be supported by any obvious fundamentals. The case of Howard Dean now appeared to have been no different. As events unfolded, and as the campaign entered the critical months of voting, Dean’s support vanished. He lost in Iowa and New Hampshire to John Kerry, an aloof man but who was perceived to be a stronger candidate to match Bush’s strengths. Dean suffered a series of losses after Iowa and New Hampshire and won only his home state Vermont, leading to his campaign’s eventual demise.  

While political pundits will continue to wonder why the presumed Democratic nominee Howard Dean rose fast and fell like a rock, a reasonable person would see with 20/20 hindsight that Dean had three fundamental problems. First, Dean’s campaign team miscalculated or misinterpreted that the tens of thousands of folks that supported him believed in what he stood for, when in fact they were supporting him only because they hated the opponent President Bush. In other words, these folks were driven to Dean’s corner only by their hate for the President, and there was no other viable candidate that they believed was echoing their hate for President Bush. Second, the Dean campaign underestimated his followers desire, above all else, to defeat Bush in November, and that they were not driven by principle—the only thing they wanted most was to defeat Bush at all cost. So while they agreed with Dean on some principle grounds, their fervent desire to defeat President Bush superseded principled issues. They would quickly abandoned him when a viable candidate that they believe provided them the best shot at hitting back at their nemesis President Bush and eventually ousting him out of office. Hence, the support Dean received from the Bush haters was not easily translated into real votes when it came time for each supporter to stand up and be counted.  

Lastly, Dean peaked too early. By peaking too early, it allowed all of his opponents in the race to sharpen their attack and criticism of him, which diminished his favorability rating. As it is widely noted in the political arena, a candidate’s favorable rating in the polls is only as good as your opponents allow it to be. As we watched as events unfolded, every little misstep by Howard Dean was magnified in the press and on the campaign trail. For example, we all remembered the now famous “I have a scream speech” that Dean gave after losing in the Iowa. Dean was just trying to boost the morale of his followers by asserting that the campaign has just begun and he was prepared financially to take his fight in several critical primary states. However, the speech was played over and over again on our television screens so much that we all became sick of seeing it. 

So what? A careful review of Charles Brumskine’s path to the presidency seems to parallel Dean’s three fundamental problems. Mr. Brumskine’s campaign misunderstood the mood of the country when he arrived in Liberia and received a rousing welcome back home. His campaign team miscalculated by categorically believing that the Liberian people gravitated toward to him because they believed in what he stood for, when in fact they were supporting him only because they hated Charles Taylor. Over a period of a decade, Mr. Taylor oversaw a “death squad” that molested, raped, murdered and deprived ordinary Liberians of their livelihood by emptying the treasury and effectively bankrupting the country. No wonder that Liberians from all walks of life were willing to support a candidate that would defeat him badly. Brumskine was the only man in town, or at least the only one who returned to challenge Mr. Taylor.  

Furthermore, many Liberians, living in America and Europe were driven into exile by the chaos created by Charles Taylor and his band of murders and rapists. Mr. Taylor, in the view of exiled Liberians, was public enemy number one, and anyone daring to challenge his iron-fisted hold on to power was bound to receive their support financially, or otherwise. So, a great number of Liberians attended Brumskine’s fund raising dinners and parties and contributed lots of doles to his campaign. Even one of my sisters and several of my cousins and their husbands contributed some money to Brumskine’s campaign. My sister would get so upset when anyone said anything remotely negative about Mr. Brumskine, because she really wanted Taylor out of office no matter what. I don’t think she really cared much at the time who replaced him as president. My sister, like many Liberians viewed Taylor and his entourage of murders and kleptomaniacs through a single lens—the embodiment of the evil that Liberia has come to represent. Hence, they were willing to empty their pocketbooks and wallets to defeat Taylor, and they were looking for a vehicle to achieve that end. Mr. Brumskine’s campaign came to represent that vehicle, and so, my sister and Liberians from all walks of life acted to support Brumskine and did so in significant numbers.  

While Brumskine did not raise as much as Howard Dean’s $40 plus million, he was doing quite well as measured by the Liberian standard and by the amount of money his lesser known and less financed candidates were receiving. I must confess that this was the first time around that I was not sucked into the herd mentality—the extraordinary popular delusion and the madness of crowds that surrounded Mr. Brumskine’s accession to the highest office in the land. I did not give his campaign a dime—don’t even suggest that I did not have to give. I could afford $100 to attend a dinner, but I just was not going to be a fooled again by some popularity contest, with no beef at the party but all bones. I wanted to see some substance. In fact, I am so proud of myself that I finally come to accept the saying “fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me”.  

Unfortunately for Mr. Brumskine, the now much hated, infamous rebel groups LURD and MODEL came to town soon enough to force Taylor out of town, diminishing Brumskine’s solid political standing. The departure of Taylor removed the single issue upon which Brumskine’s campaign was based. The single issue that Brumskine’s campaign staff ran can be categorized in the following sentences. I am not Taylor, so vote for me and give me money. I don’t think I stand for anything that is different from what Taylor stands for, but I am not Taylor. I don’t plan to change the “business as usual mentality” when I become president, but give me your money and support anyway, because I am not Taylor. I used to be Taylor’s buddy and we did lot of bad stuff together, but give me your vote and money because I am not Taylor. I just want to bring in my buddies to line their pockets like we were doing under Taylor’s regime, but give me more of your money and vote for me because I am not Taylor.  

My name is Charles Brumskine and I am from Grand Bassa County and I am not Taylor. The only thing that I plan to do differently when I become president is not kill too many of you, but I am not Taylor so give me more of your money and vote. I have not had a real job since I ran away from Liberia and I am coming back home because I did not make it in the United States to take little money here and there, but I am not Taylor so give me your money and vote. I have lot of smart people working for me, who doing a fantastic job to help me to build a house on shaky foundation but I am not Taylor. My name is Charles Brumskine and I am running for president to do nothing but for people to serve me. I hope you continue giving me your little hard-earned dollar so that when I become president I can help my folks, buddies and cronies. I am not asking you to forgive me for being part of Taylor’s inner circle and in fact I really enjoyed being with Taylor but I am not Taylor and I need your vote. Finally, don’t expect much from me as president, but just give me your money and vote for me.  

Liberians did not seem to care that Brumskine was not going to give them anything in terms of substance. All the really wanted was Taylor out of office and whoever was perceived to give them that satisfaction was their man or woman. Why would they continue their support for Brumskine since Taylor was no longer an issue? Brumskine’s team could not fathom that and so was ill prepared when that eventually happened—They are now trying to regroup, albeit less successfully.  

The second characteristic of Howard Dean’s campaign that directly correlates with Brumskine’s is that both men peaked too early, albeit Brumskine’s by a course of events beyond his control and widest dreams. The sudden and precipitous fall of Charles Taylor created a new timeline for the presidential election that made Brumskine to peak too early—it effectively postponed the election to October 2005. His steep rise was driven mostly by the Liberian press. The Liberian press crowned Brumskine as the eventual, inevitable successor to Taylor and showered him with accolades that are only destined for a queen, emperor, mullah or sultan. Tom Kamara, on this very page, listed in vivid descriptions the overwhelming accolades that Brumskine received from the Liberian press. He was in fact dubbed by the Liberian press “Man of the Year,” and praised incessantly as man come to save the poor people of Liberia. His campaign team even believed in his inevitability as the eventual president that it was rumored that they begun to divide up cabinet positions. Taylor’s departure from the Liberian political scene and the arrival of formidable candidates that Varney Sherman, Dr. Harry Moniba, Winston Tubman, and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf have brought Brumskine’s campaign to a new political reality, and change the entire equation.  

The press has now become to look at other candidates, and everything Brumskine does is magnified and bemoan. For example, just look at the various stories that emanated from the in fighting in the Liberian Unification Party, where the Secretary General of the Party tried to derail Brumskine’s eventual ascendancy to the position of Standard Bearer. It must be noted that the in fighting still continues, and who will become the eventual Standard Bearer of Gabriel Kpolleh’s Party remains a wide open question. Moreover, another story that the media rightly broadcast was the alleged criminal wrong doing of one of his top aide. Why the story was just about one man, but his close alliance with the Brumskine’s campaign made it a legitimate source of news and the media took the liberty to leverage it more broadly, even forcing a press release from Brumskine’s United States Campaign Manager.  

More strikingly, however, is the fact that the number of news stories on Brumskine has declined tremendously since the apparent but sudden departure of his confidant, now turned nemesis Charles Taylor. Just step back a little into history, and you will realize that the biggest news was all about Brumskine and nothing but Brumskine. Now, we can barely hear good news about the guy, demonstrating that his popularity and surety to his climbed at the apex of government has clearly and remarkably waned in a matter of just a few months. Even people, who used to preach to us about Brumskine at Liberia gatherings, are now ambivalent about his chances. These people are now quick to point to Brumskine’s association with Taylor, and considered that a baggage—the supposedly fervent supporters are today candidate shopping. I do not fault them at all, because that’s the nature of politics. Candidates are measured against their opponents, and people like to be part of a winning team and they clearly were convinced that Brumskine might be the man. May be, Mr. Brumskine can still pull this off, but his chances of doing so now are gradually diminishing as people look at the alternative candidates that are out there.  

Another problem that is associated with Mr. Brumskine peaking too early is that his money cup is running very, very dry. He was able to raise lot of money early on because he was perceived to be the only viable candidate in town that would defeat former President and war crime indicted fugitive Charles Taylor. Every Liberian, who had a few bucks to spare, gave it to Mr. Brumskine. Now that public enemy number one—Charles Taylor—has left the scene, Brumskine’s campaign is having a tough time raising money from even people who can afford to give his fledgling campaign. Importantly, Liberians don’t like to give money twice—we all know our folks—they are likely to say when asked to give more money that “I have already given him money before, what more does he want from me…I ain’t got that kind of money…does he thinks money grows on trees”.  

Mr. Brumskine has got some serious challenges on his hand, and he must now play his cards right or he is out of the game even before it starts. His campaign must realize that the upcoming election is no longer just a race, but a marathon. Liberians are going to look carefully at each candidate’s credentials and make a sound and impeachable choice for president. Mr. Brumskine is probably kicking himself in the knee that Mr. Taylor left so soon. He is also probably upset with members of LURD and MODEL for ruining his chances from becoming Liberia’s next president. I have no doubt that he would have defeated, criminally indicted Charles Taylor in a head- to -head presidential race. But again, even my dog could have beaten Charles Taylor, given Mr. Taylor’s record on human rights, economic depravation, social degradation and a whole host of issues.  

I am very sorry for Mr. Brumskine and my sincere sympathy goes to those hardworking Liberians, who wanted a quick knot out against Taylor. I understand that the campaign has been struggling since Taylor left to develop a strategy to fit the new reality. But while Brumskine’ campaign started several years ago, for many Liberians the campaign has not yet begun. Brumskine has run out of money, even before the campaign gears up in full swing. Every Liberian that wanted to give Brumskine money has already given it to him, and he is still not president. Other candidates have yet to seek the support from the very Liberians that gave money to Brumskine, which I am sure they will soon begin to do. With little money in the pockets of Liberians, they are going to be judicious about giving it to anyone, much less a fledging campaign they have already contributed.  

The chicken has come home to roast, dooms day has arrived and the princess of darkness has just entered Mr. Brumskine’ neighborhood. Mr. Brumskine has already received money from these people, so again his chances of receiving the second round of funding from them are almost negligible, at best. Liberians are very good at applying the phrase well known in the venture capital business, “cut your losses short and keep your profit rolling”. A Venture Capitalist, Liberians in this case, have cut their losses short on Brumskine and are out there searching for new investment opportunities—new presidential candidates. They are not going to provide mezzanine financing—second round of funding—known that he has nothing tangible to show them for the first round of funds that he has received. Think about this: Will you like to keep pouring money down the drainage? I bet you not. That’s Brumskine predicament and he must figure out quickly how he will revamp his troubled campaign or he is a dead candidate walking. I wish him and his campaign best of luck. However, I think he is finished!

On the most part, arguably, the events that have created this untenable position and could very well lead to Mr. Brumskine’s eventual demised and his campaign going bankrupt were totally outside the control of the good counselor at law. However, this is the new reality. There is not second chance when it comes to spending someone’s hard earned money for any purpose, political campaign or otherwise. Liberians have decided to cut their losses short on Brumskine and keep their profit rolling somewhere else. Other presidential candidates must prove now that they are better investment opportunities, or else they will soon face the same fate as Mr. Brumskine. The one advantage the other candidates have over Brumskine is that they are neither Mr. Brumskine or his onetime best friend criminally indicted Mr. Charles Taylor, and they have time to showcase to the Liberian people what make them tick. Brumskine does not have that luxury. Mr. Brumskine is like an old dishwasher, where everyone in the household knows how many times it breaks down, how much they have spent repairing it, and the consensus now in the house is that it needs to be replaced with a better working Warpool dishwasher—a new candidate. Let me know if you disagree! Adios! 

_______________________________