A preliminary integrated framework for addressing inequities in Guyana

Jun 29, 2008 Letters

---

DEAR EDITOR,
What makes race an important issue within the developmental context?
To highlight this premise I would like to advert to a significant political process unfolding in the United States.

The preparatory phase for the November Presidential election has, undoubtedly, attracted the attention of large sections of the populace across the various continents.

While many are grappling with the process of the election and how it intersects with America’s commitment to the global principles of transparency, fairness and accountability, others are also closely interested in how the issue of race, which continues to plague many of our societies, will be addressed as it seems to take centre stage.

The United States of America, within the New World context, is what could be described in relative terms as an old democracy – yet when the creature of race reared its ugly head there was an outburst from various sections of the society.

However, there is no doubt that America has made progress as it continues to struggle with the treatment of race and the principle of inequity in all its forms and manifestations.

Last month, Guyana completed 42 years as an Independent nation and in February 38 years as a Republic.

Our membership in the United Nations and other international and regional organisations affords us the opportunity to interact in a number of global fora and by so doing we can learn from other countries, share experiences and take notice of the errors of the more advanced nations.

We have struggled, as a young nation, with the issues of race and inequity.

Indeed, we have experienced a marriage of both which has been destructive for the national well being.

Prior to our attainment of independence, the political struggle lead by Cheddi Jagan, LFS Burnham, Eusi Kwayana, Martin Carter, John Carter, JP Latchmansingh, Jane Phillips Gay and many others was under-girded by a focus on the need to remove the inequities and discrimination of the colonial period which inhibited our growth and development.

The political movement which emerged galvanized our collective political energies but in the struggle leading up to national independence the problems of race, politics, power and culture intervened in a destructive manner thereby impeding our developmental process.
For me, these four critical variables are yet to be addressed within the context of an integrated construct.

We have not yet focused on them in such a way for us to regain that collective confidence and energy which is necessary to catalyze our growth and development. This does not mean there were no attempts to address some of the inequities.

We sought to address the educational and housing inequities, for example, but the fact that our society continues this struggle today for the similar degree of equity, which seems to have once been achieved, is indicative of the absence of a mechanism which can ensure sustainability, continuous monitoring and evaluation.

What seems to have evolved is a political culture which is linked to the maintenance of political power as a guarantee of the sustainability of progress in the various elements or categories of inequities.

In other words, we have created the mechanism of a political watchdog as a guarantor of our progress towards equity.

This concept of a sustainable mechanism, based on the dependence of retaining political power, is a paradigm of the past which no young developing country can afford.

Even though we may all feel that we have a sense of doing good and understanding inequity, we are not in the league of God and as humans we must create objective instruments which will avoid any willful or inadvertent action that can corrupt our national processes.

In essence, as in our personal health when we see a physician, there is always the option of a second opinion which provides us the best evidence for decisions to be made.

And so as with our nation we must devise mechanisms devoid of processes which, whether real or imagined, can have the appearance of cloudiness.

Today in Guyana, the principle of inequity in many of its forms continues to plague and, indeed, retard our development as a nation.

We really have no mechanism by which Guyanese can objectively say that the inequities are, or are not, being addressed.

This issue is even more complicated and the manipulation of our lack of understanding of the variables and their related integrative power runs the risk of our destruction by way of violent rebuttals.

The flawed vision of how we see these variables – race, power, politics, economics and culture – in relation to our inequities have been etched in our psychosocial fabric, both individually and collectively, in a framework based on our divided political environment.

One therefore has to ask the following questions: What then are the other contributing variables which run counter to how we collectively operationalise the National Motto of One People, One Nation, One Destiny? Did we understand what is required to make our motto live, or have we made and continue to make the most grievous error believing that by expressing a desire we achieve that objective?

As we consider the role of the Guyanese Diaspora and how it makes a significant contribution to Guyana’s development beyond remittances, we must make a commitment to find answers since it bears a relationship also to the question of race, politics, economics and culture in Guyana.

When we seriously consider race and culture, we are likely to conclude that we have not been able to gain an in-depth understanding of the cultural antecedents related to our traditions.

What we have done in the main with respect to the African and Indian cultures is to view their religious practices as “culture.”

But many of us are totally ignorant of these cultures because, primarily, they are an amalgam of many other ingredients based on various phenomena.

In the realm of democracy and economics we have given pre-eminence to Europe; we neglected to understand the relationship of the cultures of Africa, China, India and indeed, our Indigenous Peoples and make the false assumption that democracy and economic development are alien to those cultures.

But in our struggle to deal with the inequities linked to culture and race we have come to a place where our physical appearance has defined us and, in that process, defined these cultures in one way or the other as inferior and superior, based on the classification ascribed to us by our appearance.
How much longer then must this charade go on?

Is it not possible for us to clearly establish indicators which will address the inequities, the marginalisation of different sectors of our society – real or imagined?

Can we not establish a clear monitoring mechanism which is linked to the functioning of our Parliament beyond the decision making process of a simple majority?

Can we not de-link some of the basic needs of each member of our society from the dependence on safeguarding the political power of a political party or religious entity?

I want to urge Guyanese to not waste the opportunity to make the change before our nation attains the significant milestone of 50 years.

Let us be prepared to leave a country to the next generation which will be born with a different vision, untied to division, but one which makes our National Motto live in real terms – a vision striving for equity as a continuous task of all.

Let us remove the stain, the stigma of racial hatred, division and inequity and develop the ethos of respect for the promise of an amalgam which can catalyze our collective energies in harnessing the economic potential that we and our global partners so often make reference to.

Let us have a vision which will make manifest our motto of One People, One Nation, One Destiny. It is indeed the time for change and action.

As we prepare for CARIFESTA let us take that bold step which puts a new meaning to what culture can offer – not only in our development – but how it can contribute to a deeper understanding of our roots.

Let us have a CARIFESTA which goes beyond the superficial trappings of each one of our cultural antecedents to a deeper understanding of the values, ethics and principles on which our nation has been founded.

Let CARIFESTA serve to portray an image which signifies what culture really means in the development construct and negate the potential for violence of any kind – thereby highlighting the central and equitable role of people in our development.

Let CARIFESTA move us onward to greater integration and unity of purpose as we move to our 50 years of national independence.
Dr. R. A. Van West-Charles

---

---