Power: A comparison between Guyana and the USA

Jul 24, 2011 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that Cheddi Jagan and Forbes Burnham were genuinely likeable personalities who were committed to a certain level of societal obligation.
But it begins and ends there. Jagan and Burnham had a conceptualization of power that had to bring tragedy.
Absolute power is the only source for the explanation of the ongoing tragedy of this country. It began with Dr. Jagan. What Jagan believed in he didn’t possess power long enough to practise.
The paramountcy of the party, the maximum leader syndrome, the group-think culture etc., were embodied in Dr. Jagan.
As Premier and as President, Dr. Jagan did not last long enough to become what Forbes Burnham became. In 1997 Dr Jagan died, but if he had lived longer as President, we would have seen the same culture of absolute power as we saw for 16 years in Forbes Burnham.
The 1980 Constitution was inevitable. It was the final touches to the imperial power of Burnham that inhered in his character. It wasn’t a surprise when, as Mr. Yesu Persaud said on his television programme to Moses Nagamootoo, a group of businessmen requested President Jagan to abolish that very constitution, he evaded the discussion by asking them if they could conceive of him being a dictator.
Jagan’s response was deeply Freudian, because at the conscious level, his answer acknowledged the dictatorship fabric that the 1980 constitution was made of. At the sub-conscious level that document spelt out the kind of politics that Dr, Jagan was schooled in. Jagan and Burnham passed on the instinct of absolute power to their respective parties.
The PNC, in opposition since 1992, did not vote for the abolition of the 1980 document. The PPP if it wins again will not do away with it.
Enter Mr. Jagdeo. There can be no question about it in this columnist’s mind; Mr. Jagdeo enjoys having absolute power. It destroys his capacity to conceptualize any other dimensions of governance. This explains his annoyance with the private media.
In what must be one of the most ironic statements about politics and the press, Mr. Ralph Seeram, a weekly columnist for this paper, wrote that Mr. Jagdeo on a recent visit to the US, said to him that the Guyanese private media only print the negative things about the Guyana Government and he, Jagdeo cited the New York Times (NYT) as being more balanced in its editorial content.
Mr. Jagdeo left out the whole picture. If any American president enjoys the protected authority Mr. Jagdeo possesses and uses it in the absolutist ways Mr. Jagdeo does, the NYT and other respected dailies would bring down that president with relentless journalism.
The Jagdeo style of power is not possible in the White House because the independent press would not allow it. The Washington Post was single-handedly responsible for the resignation of President Nixon. The NYT was inexorable against President Bush for his conspiratorial war manoeuvres. The liberal New Yorker magazine was the first to break the Abu-Ghraib prison torture which further weakened the Bush administration.
The NYT is known throughout the world for its policy of publishing confidential governmental documents, even on security issues. President Bush at one time claimed that such publications undermined national security, and set up a committee to investigate the sources of the leaks.
There is no citizen in this country from judiciary to the security forces to the business sector to the academic community to the teaching profession to Guyanese youths and students to the churches in all religions to the ordinary John Public, who could be so indecent to stifle their conscience and believe that the private media of the US, starting with NYT, would allow the American President to get away, scot-free, with the excesses that so characterize Mr. Jagdeo’s rule.
If Mr. Jagdeo wants to see how persistent a critic of government can be, he should read the very New York Times more often.
I say in the boldest way, no American President would have survived the marriage controversy that once surrounded Mr. Jagdeo.
It will take a book length manuscript to have adequate space to enumerate the episodes of corruption, scandals, absolutist policies and undemocratic output of the Guyanese presidency that would not have been tolerated by the US media.
It may be true, as Mr. Jagdeo said, that the New York Times is more balanced in its editorial content.
That is because the paper responds to the more balanced approach to power that is found in the US. Sadly this is lacking in Guyana.

Latest News

Power: A comparison between Guyana and the USA

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | November, 18th, 2024

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Dolphin Secondary, East Ruimveldt seal Round-5 victories in Republic...

Golden Jaguars to host Barbados tonight in...

Members show confidence as they re-elect Ninvalle...

Badminton Team enjoy decent success in Suriname

Successful 8th Charity Event hosted by Inniss...

Nine years old is latest recipient of gear from...

Features/Columnists

A shameful abdication of leadership

Rising Gun Crimes in the Caribbean: Urgent Action required by all

Guyanese are so lucky: bad cop, bad cop

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

Power: A comparison between Guyana and the USA

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | November, 18th, 2024

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]