Divisional Egalitarianism – ‘unhealing’ the land

Apr 03, 2011 News

---

By Michael Benjamin

The old belief that all men are born equal may be deemed sound thinking until one arrives in Guyana. A friend once proclaimed that all Guyanese are equal but some are more equal than others.
The late Executive President, Forbes Burnham, once spoke of creating opportunities for all Guyanese within the context of egalitarianism. After one such pronouncement, it is rumoured that a smart aleck had piped up, “It is impossible for the small man to view his existence within the context of egalitarianism when your ministers are driving Laurels (luxurious cars in those days) and living in posh houses while the proletariat could hardly afford to own a bicycle.”
The story goes on that Mr. Burnham had listened to the man’s concern then in his usual affable tone responded, “You fail to grasp the true concept of the theory because you perceive the absence of egalitarianism in the face of functional superiority.” That was Burnham’s way of pointing out that while all of us are equal some are definitely more equal than others.
Today, some 26 years since the founder leader passed on to the great beyond, Guyanese are still being bamboozled that they are existing in a society that is egalitarian in every sense of the word.
In the face of all arguments, the concept of functional superiority may seem far fetched especially when the debate involves sections of the proletariat. At the risk of incurring the wrath of members of this group I would argue that seniority must be exemplified not only by rank but by the privileges bestowed upon the individual that bears the rank.
To this effect, it is acceptable for elected officials to enjoy special privileges uncommon to those enjoyed by a large percent of the citizenry at the expense of the very citizens over whom they are elected to serve.
Problems arise when those officials enrich themselves while ignoring the plight of the citizenry. Unfortunately, history is replete with individuals of such ilk that have enjoyed special privileges by dint of their respective offices but abused these very privileges at the expense of the people that bestowed the power upon them to govern.
Third World countries are replete with political leaders that have promised much in order to attain office and when they succeed, promptly ignore the needs of the very people that have voted them into office. We have witnessed such excesses during Idi Amin’s rule over Uganda.
His tenure was characterised by human rights abuse, political repression, ethnic persecution, extrajudicial killings, nepotism, corruption, and gross economic mismanagement and we are not speaking of Guyana’s situation least readers notice a pattern or similarity here.
Fortunately, those individuals that would have chosen their political leaders and then had those choices backfire, being condemned to poverty while these very politicians live luxuriously, are still able to seek redress through the ballot boxes albeit every five years.
Years ago, when I enrolled at the University of Guyana to read for a Diploma in Public Communication, I was a bit chagrined when I realised that I was required to take, not one, but two courses on Politics. As a Communications major I just could not fathom the rationale for delving into such issues as consociation democracy (power sharing), pluralism and micro/macro policies among other issues.
Later, subsequent to the completion of the Diploma programme and the commencement of the Degree I grudgingly admitted that my exposure to such political intricacies was indeed worth every ‘boring’ lecture that I had endured.
Other than the lectures that discussed the pros and cons of power sharing I found those that discussed cultural pluralism interesting and insightful. The lessons helped me to appreciate the other ethnicities and their cultures within the Guyanese society.
Naturally, the cultures and myths endemic in the respective groups baffled me but I realised how much these rituals meant to the respective races and based on that understanding, developed a healthy respect for the various groups.
Further, as a man of African descent, I was exposed to the rituals and cultures of my group and expected that even if other groups were baffled by such beliefs and rituals they would at least respect those cultures.
Years ago, during adolescence, I grew up on a healthy diet of rice flour products. Those were the days of restrictions of certain food items and woe to the individual caught with the banned products. I remembered the ban on wheat flour and other food products like corned beef, sardines and lots more.
I was then a member of the now defunct Guyana National Service. Cassava bread and jam became the common staple that decorated the breakfast table in the various mess halls and almost every product consisted of rice flour.
Long lines dotted the city as families jostled for limited supplies of cooking oil, butter and other food commodities that were available at the Knowledge Sharing Institutes (KSI) and at the Guyana Marketing Corporation (GMC).
I was too young to fathom the reasons for such radical government undertaking and viewed it merely as the deprivation of basic food products.
Subsequent to Mr. Burnham’s death, his successor, Mr. Hugh Desmond Hoyte, relaxed some of the restrictions and introduced the Economic Recovery Programme with the aim of revitalising a sagging economy. The benefits of that initiative were just coming to fruition when Mr. Hoyte agreed to a request by former USA President Jimmy Carter to have international observers at the 1992 General and Regional elections.
The results of those elections are now history. The vote witnessed the accession of the leader of the PPP,  Dr. Cheddi Jagan, to the Presidency in what was touted to be the first free and fair elections after 28 years of PNC rule.
Later, Mr. Jagan’s death paved the way for the installment of Guyana’s first woman President, Ms Janet Jagan, and subsequently, the youngest, Mr. Bharrat Jagdeo whose ascendancy occurred when he was merely 35 years old.
Naturally, doubts pervaded the minds of many of the older politicians on both side of the divide. The general consensus among the naysayer was that Mr. Jagdeo’s age would have precluded him from grasping the fundamental political, social and financial issues related to the development of the nation.
Amidst these contentions, the more rational brains opined that Mr. Jagdeo’s age would have served as a benefit to the nation because he represented a new era that would not be aware of, or overly concerned with, the sordid past of racist overtones and banned food items.
There was also the belief that since Mr. Jagdeo was merely a tot when members of his party and those of the PNC were embroiled in bitter conflict, he would have fashioned a new political culture, wiping out the scars of the past.
The views pertaining to the successes of Mr. Jagdeo in this realm are still divided. Some argue that his tenure was riddled with acrimony while others believe that Mr. Jagdeo had shaped a new
political culture. Notwithstanding the varying views, the President would have greatly improved the level of respect of the masses when he appeared in Buxton recently and beseeched those residents to forget the grievances of the past and develop a fresh patriotic thinking to the future. (my interpretation).
Mr. Jagdeo’s ploy angered a large section of the African community who felt that he was merely attempting to butter up the Buxtonians in order to win their votes in the imminent National Elections.
Once again consensus was divided. Of great importance, though, were the voices of the younger generation that chided those bent on resurrecting the ghosts of the past thus stifling the developmental process. They vociferously debunked the suggestions to relive those horrible events.
Alas, just when it seemed as though the President had grown in stature and would have vacated office (based on the constitutional statutes) with decorum and grace, the nation was assaulted by the very voice that called for reconciliation in Buxton.
Only this time, the President was addressing a group from his own constituency, at Babu John. Unbelievably, the soothing voice that had insisted on the inculcation of a new culture from one section of the divide, was now beseeching another section to regurgitate the ghosts of the past, placing those horrible acrimonious days on the front burner once again.
To say that the electorate would experience bouts of confusion, is putting it mildly. The country, rocked by several travesties over the years, from phantom killings to unsolved murders to election violence, can ill afford similar catastrophes of any proportion especially during elections period, usually characterised by racial tensions and insecurity.
The President is insisting that the residents of Buxton and its environs demonstrate acute amnesia of the mass killings and abuse of their fundamental rights, issues that promoted deep racial tensions and insecurity and almost caused the economy to ground to a halt.
So too must the President urge the residents in Berbice to relinquish the hatred and vitriol that have characterised the seventies, even up to the nineties that have been allowed to fester in this country for far too long creating division and anger among the six races.
It’s the least the president could (or should) do as his final official contribution to the healing process.

---

---