October 5, 1992 destroyed Guyana; can it be reborn?

Oct 10, 2017 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

I don’t write about October 5, 1992 anymore. It has gone from my lexicon of historical milestones. Factually, it is a milestone. Philosophically it symbolizes everything that is ontologically defective about Guyana’s existence. The closest analogy of October 5 in terms of degeneracy is the French Revolution. The rebellion of the oppressed in France led to a revolution that degenerated into psychotic excesses. The French Revolution led to dictatorship.
The revolution on October 5, 1992 deteriorated into partisan, ethnic politics under Cheddi Jagan and his wife, Janet, then in what was to become the first instance of semi-fascism in the English-speaking Caribbean, it climaxed under the depravity of the Jagdeo/Ramotar cabals. How does the historian treat October 5, 1992? It has to be a bittersweet analysis.
You can glorify Burnham how much you want; Burnham’s authoritarian excesses forced you to participate in the politics of regime change. I will always maintain if Burnham was not autocratic, we would not have had Cheddi Jagan and Walter Rodney. Burnham created both men. Jagan got increasing international fame because Burnham became increasingly dictatorial. If Burnham had allowed Rodney to take up his job at UG, maybe there would have been no zero-sum struggle between the two men. Why Burnham chose in 1974 to deny Rodney a UG appointment must be one of the greatest mysteries of world history.
You can use complex analysis to justify the necessity of rigged elections from 1968 to 1985. Some would argue that free elections would have meant the permanent denial of power for one half of Guyana, and sempiternal rule for another half. But it is a fact that elections were not legitimate until 1992.
So we come now to October 5, 1992. It brought down the PNC which had ruled from 1964. The meaning of October 5 was that a new era of freedom had arrived.
Make no mistake; a scholar’s competence can be challenged if he/she does not see that October 5 was the release of flowers of freedom. But it was only for a day. That is why I think we have to be careful how we treat the significance and importance of October 5. PPP leaders, PPP supporters, PPP Indianized scholars (like the woman who is writing a biography of Mrs. Jagan and is not interested in any critical writings against Mrs. Jagan) will continue to maximize the importance of October 5. Theirs is a narrow interpretation of the event.
You cannot treat the fall of the PNC on October 5 in itself. The fall of the PNC should have been followed by the total opening up of the society, the total enjoyment of thought and idea, the reclaiming of liberties in totality. It did not happen. One of the methodological faults in assessing the historical uniqueness of October 5 is the shutting out of the Hoyte period. The scholar grasped the fall of the PNC and held onto that. There is no continuous context. But it should be. The scholar needs no reminding that Hoyte set in motion positive aspects of the rule of law, good governance, ethical values in public service, professional values in the running of the state, dilution of ethnic focus.
October 5 dissolved these important pillars of democracy. And the erosion did not start with Bharrat Jagdeo. It began the day after October 5. All the reclamations of important values that Hoyte recovered for Guyana that were discarded under Burnham were discarded again under Cheddi and Janet Jagan. October 5 has lacerated the legacy of Cheddi Jagan.
It is virtually impossible to treat his four-year-old presidency as one of refreshing, profound changes; one of greater freedoms and liberties. Under Jagan, a harsh revenge mentality took over the PPP. During his four years, Cheddi Jagan took his government into five cul-de-sacs, the consequences of which have destroyed Guyana.
First, he contemptuously dismissed the sacred pillars of good governance that Hoyte reintroduced. Secondly, he unleashed a fury of ethnic preferences that became morbid under Jagdeo. Thirdly, he reinstituted what he learnt from his premiership days and what Hoyte had exorcized from governance after 1985 – installation of party people into the public service. Party people became Permanent Secretaries and chairpersons of state boards, the most egregious one being Roger Luncheon as Chairman of NIS.
Fourthly, he practiced a vicious form of hogging of power. The WPA, which bore the brunt of state violence under Burnham, was nastily cast aside. Fifthly, naked corruption began to emerge and though he and his wife were against it, he put party before country and did not act. Today, Guyana is paying horrifically for the failure of October 5.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

One thought on “October 5, 1992 destroyed Guyana; can it be reborn?”

Kassem_B October 10, 2017 at 7:34 am

Opening Para:
‘I don’t write about October 5, 1992 anymore.’
Then in the next few Para, you started:
‘So we come now to October 5, 1992….’

Comments are closed.

Latest News