I will vote for my humanity

May 09, 2015 Letters

---

DEAR EDITOR,
As this election campaign winds down, what stands out is that it was not the silly season, as is customarily anticipated; it became a time of the most shameless incitement to ethnic violence and race-baiting, likely to  create  turmoil and open  fractures in an already imperfect and somewhat debased society.
Many well-intentioned citizens and other observers have joined with diplomatic representatives and GECOM to express alarm at a campaign that has emitted so much vitriol and such loathing for the other side. The to and fro of election campaigns, even in older and more tolerant societies, are sometimes brutal and exacting. Something is telling these observers that this campaign has crossed, or is crossing, the frontiers of safety and sanity, and has exceeded the crudities of 2011. The diminution of our national dignity is unquestioned.
The language of the diplomats has been direct, without the professional opacity. They have addressed, if not scolded us, for the excessive inflammatory rhetoric on the hustings; one has even condemned a Minister’s behaviour as “disgraceful” and the Minister deserving of being fired. Absent are the guardians against interference, which technically there is, and breaches of any Westphalian convention on sovereignty; for, as it has been for a long time, who pays the piper, the electoral process, calls the tune.
What is ominous is not just the excesses of misrepresentation and duplicity, a universal feature of campaigns, but the calculated and dangerous projection of the military, some in retirement and others in office, assaulting innocent civilians in the event of a Coalition victory; the emotive reminders of “kicking down the doors” is on mark.
All of this was in the open and, abandoning euphemistic niceties, the language was as coarse and explicit as can be. It would appear that, for the first time, the bottom-house discourse, which was only imagined in the past, was fearlessly and recklessly being played out for everyone’s benefit. Here is where the silliness ended.
It leaves to imagine what was reserved for the bottom-house, where the vernacular can enlarge graphically, if not colourfully, the aggressor and intended victim. If this is a calculated plot to exasperate the anxieties of a constituency justifiably loyal to and respectful of its founding father, to exploit and prime their fears and disdain for stereotypes of a marauding military/civilian horde from a neighbouring village, then it must rank as a travesty of our Constitution and among the most callous breaches of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
So often has the United Nations been seized of this matter of incitement to violence, considering it a real threat to statal and regional security, that it has asked states to take all necessary steps to “build resilience to incitement to violence” that could lead to “atrocity crimes” and prepare contingency plans for its prevention through “the self-regulation of political parties”, promoting tolerance and encouraging respect for diversity.
Leading this incitement are the former President, Bharrat Jagdeo, and the Head of the Presidential Secretariat, Dr Roger Luncheon, with little intimation of distance in tone or sophistication from President Ramotar. From these high presidential offices that are due considerable respect, there is language that leaves no doubt of the concerted manipulation of the expectations, suspicions and timidities of sections of the electorate that can only set in train forces which may not be anticipated, become unwieldy and destructive.
For what purpose?  If it yields a victory, such can only be Pyrrhic. The fears and hate cultivated for the other side may not necessarily subside at the close of the elections; whoever wins will have to contend with the consequences. These undercurrents of passions, animosities and hatred cannot be turned off at any one’s will. They will fester and grow.
To set these views of impending danger and a dark age among the young whom we extol, only mortgages their future already compromised by the huge, incomplete and costly projects, some of doubtful feasibility. Why not rely on the impressive list of successes, some of which are evident? Aren’t these convincing enough for the electorate? Why the provocation, desperation and calumnies? Is there something to conceal?
After twenty-three years of observation and research, as Dr Luncheon claimed, he presented his magnum opus to the nation under the rubric: “Connect the dots”. His thesis, the crux of the incitement offensive, is that an immediately retired Chief of Staff “comporting” with the leader of the Opposition, the respected, also retired Brigadier David Granger, along with other retired officers, leads to the “militarization” of the opposition leadership and compromises “the integrity of the security forces”: simply put, this constitutes a threat to the security of the state.
Alas, some dots are missing, particularly those dealing with Brigadier Granger’s urbane and scholarly writings over the said twenty-three years about the defence and security of the state, the imperatives of reforms of the Disciplined Services, modernization of the physical capability of the GDF and its continuing exposure to advanced tactical techniques so as to execute effectively its mission.
Alongside, there are the proliferation of illegal and heavy weaponry; their increasing lethal use among the citizenry; the inability or disinclination to complete and operate a credible anti-narcotics strategy; the burgeoning authority  of narcotic players in the financial life of the nation; the resultant distortion of the economy; the insidious corruption acknowledged by major financial institutions; the said Office of the President  “comporting” (man, I like that word) with a number of individuals resident in the US who have come under the embrace of US law,  one of whom is a guest of the Federal Penal system to be  shortly  joined by another upon completion of his plea bargain; and the consequences of the unsolved murders of over 450 citizens.
These are real and growing threats to the security of the society of which the Army is an integral part.  As if the foregoing were not enough, there is now the ongoing cavalier sullying of the integrity of high-ranking retired officers with unquestioned loyal service to the nation during the said twenty-three years. This is madness!
Further, with the continuing high rate of emigration, there are greater demands on the professional and patriotic services of retired military officers, as much as on other public and private servants. Over the twenty-three years such a security chasm has been renting our society that this surely is not the time for armchair war-games based upon who called whom theories. Hence, President Ramotar’s somewhat penitent and late letter of April 28 to the Senior, Junior and other Ranks of the GDF on the eve of their vote.
Amidst the din and examination of well crafted manifestos, though not without the recycled and unfulfilled promises; amidst the polemics about past history, meaning selected and distorted aspects of the Burnham years exclusive of the pre-Burnham and the  restorative  Hoyte years where Mr Carl Greenidge made an incalculable contribution: incidentally, it was Mr Hoyte who brought an abrupt end to the ‘kick down the door’ outrage by the controversial reinstitution of capital punishment, I juxtapose two simultaneous incidents as a measure of character and hope.
The former Minister Bheri Ramsaran’s verbal mal-treatment of Ms Sherlina Nageer, a young, courageous, combative and selfless campaigner for human rights, has been well exposed. Condemnation of his threat, inter alia, to slap her and have her stripped has been widespread and it took eight days for the President to “relieve him”.
A writer, Mr Sase Singh, has reminded that to strip a person is the “most evil and un-Hindu of acts.” Further, to slap a person, for which the Office of the President has developed a peculiar fascination, is a most humiliating experience. Allied with the stripping, that reaches back into barbaric times, and is sometimes accompanied with stoning and setting on fire, it is the ultimate debasement of the person.
At the other end, at that exhilarating public Women’s rally on Women’s issues convened by the Coalition, Ms Vanessa Kissoon, at odds with the leadership of her party, could say to Ms Sandra Granger, the wife of the Leader of the party and Presidential candidate:  “I have your back, Sandra”. That vignette of solace and comradeship, rooted in the earliest of Biblical obligations about being your brother’s keeper, sister’s in this instance, was that ray of hope in this dark campaign.
The contrasting narratives further expose some unappealing influences; another Minister’s public conduct and the existing trend of vilification, feral blasts and disrespect for adversaries among some holders of high offices that is eroding the very respect that these high officers believe they are due.
Not only has the Opposition “stymied” the administration’s development plans, as has been claimed, there are also the continuing censorious/unflattering reports of the international financial and other institutions that have highlighted the high incidence of corruption and its deleterious effect on democracy, the rule of law, and the security and quality of life; most have been speedily rejected by the administration.
A reasoned choice ought to hold dearly some principles: full respect for the Constitution; the rule of law and its spirit; parliamentary procedures; transparency and accountability; our common humanity;  our intelligence; all citizens, many of whom are described as hyphenated Guyanese; women, senior citizens and youth; the right to collective bargaining; lastly, consummate leadership to steer through the corridors of hate, resentment and the cumbersome baggage of our history beyond the fiftieth anniversary, emerging renewed, reconciled and inspired.
Desmond Tutu has put it thus: “My humanity is bound up in yours; we can only be human together”.
To guide us safely through this gathering turbulence, upholding our dignity and respect as a nation demands vision, commitment and integrity. I believe that the leadership of the Coalition under Brigadier David Granger and Mr Moses Nagamootoo offers the best opportunity. Accordingly, I will vote for my humanity. I will vote for the Coalition APNU+AFC.
Cedric L Joseph

---

---