Guyana is not just the PPP and its supporters

Oct 14, 2013 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
The PPP celebrations of its 21st year in power were made more remarkable by the charge of former President Jagdeo to the admirers and others at their 6th October Lusignan rally. The former President, as reported in the Guyana Chronicle said, “While people lament about the small things which affect them such as pot holes and drains in front of their yards, which are genuine concerns, they should also be reminded that the PPP/C during its 21 years in government has been ensuring bigger problems are solved.”  He also implied in his charge that the younger generation who are dissatisfied did not know how bad things were really before 1992, and therefore they need to be educated by older folks about a pre 1992 and post 1992.
During those dark days of the pre 1992 era, some of us were fortunate to study George Orwell’s Animal Farm for CXC Literature. There is something Napoleonic about the charge… “forget the ‘small things’ which hinder your lives.. look at bigger pictures.”
We should forgive those who drive in heavily tinted SUVs for not knowing or remembering what pot holed roads feel like, or for those who live in well drained areas or in houses with foundations and internal drainage systems higher than the roads to know the havoc wreaked, when it rain. Younger people as well, who have to negotiate the pot holes and bad drainage and the other ‘little things’ are supposed to compare this to a time when it seems the older folks had to negotiate pot holes and bad drainage and different other kinds of ‘little things’.
There is a certain strangeness in how the vision is being marketed for the future. Fifty years ago, Cheddi Jagan, in his belief in the Guyanese people, sought to build a University.
The University at fifty, languishes. Instead of Jagan’s vision though as a way for young people to achieve dreams, we are told  we must look up from the potholes and bad drains and believe instead in the Marriot and other troublesome projects.
We are threatened with national elections again before the full term.  Many of our older folks remember when Village Councils and others were responsible and did their jobs well in dealing with pot holes, drains and the little things which mattered. Unfortunately, the 21 years of democracy did not include much development of local government and governance.  We have to forgive ourselves. Most of our politicians of all the parties never really lived or participated in functioning democracies.
Most of us as citizens were not taught about participating in democracy.  Some of the young professionals who are not targeted by the opposition have felt the pressure from the leaders in this new democratic era. The young professionals who grew up in this 21 years, tried to assert their democratic right to freedom of expression and association which they might have mistakenly assumed they had in this new era of freedom.  Similar pressure was exerted during the dark days on some of their parents.
Jagdeo also spoke about the need for conversations among the PPP and it supporters about where we were, where we are and where we want to go. The thing is, Guyana is not just the PPP and its supporters. We have very little experience in Guyana in meaningful dialogue and consensus building. It is a tall order then to expect the leaders of the last 21 years to expand their reach beyond their party horizons.
But that is the price of democracy and freedom.  Unfortunately, leaders have to be accountable to the people in new ways which they themselves never experienced.  And yes, unfortunately, the transformational leadership requires that those who want to celebrate democracy have to be accountable to people who when they were in power, never bothered themselves much with accountability and transparency.
One of the tragedies about Guyana is the whole saints and sinners approach to the dialogue and conversation. The flour and dhal bans of the 1980s probably made criminals and crooks out of a lot of us, including the police and customs officers who took bribes from the smugglers. Many persons did then, as they do now, shut up when bad deeds are happening because they need to survive and the alternatives are really dire for them.
If we are to have the conversations, do we all need to prove our sainthood first before talking?  Does it mean that crooks (Jagdeo’s talked about those at Lusignan) from the pre 1992 era cannot engage with the crooks of the post 1992 era? What does redemption look like for all the crooks?  While there is this thing about those living in glass houses should not throw stones, do we all shut up then unless we have some certificate of redemption and sainthood from those who we wish would also transform their behaviour?
Should Carl Greenidge shut up now because he never submitted audited accounts when he was a Finance Minister even though, in this new era of democracy, a significant part of the people voted for him knowing his record?
How can we find solutions for a country to utilise the skills of a woman most qualified for a much needed job in the Auditor General’s office so that there can be no conflict of interest for her since her also much qualified husband has chosen a political career?  What other conflicts of interests have happened in our society? Are we allowed to talk about mistakes without ending up being branded as sinners if we did not resolve them properly?
Do the leaders and celebrants of this new era of democracy realise that when they cuss up and buse out the elected officials they do not like, that they are alienating sections of the population?
What happens if sections of the population do not require that the persons who are protesting the non-functioning democracy do not have to redeem themselves? Is it the nature of Jagdeo’s visionary politics and governance in Guyana that we all vote for the PPP/C, stumble in pot holes while believing in the Marriot,  and shut up afterwards?
Vidyaratha Kissoon

---

---