Our Independence 52 years later: Where is the love to be found?

May 27, 2018 Features / Columnists, Hinds' Sight with Dr. David Hinds

BROTHER BOB
Yesterday Guyana observed its 52nd anniversary as a sovereign nation. Bob Marley, one of the poetic geniuses of our Caribbean Independence, was moved in the 1970s in the song “Rebel Music” to ask of the powers that be: “Why can’t we roam this open country/Oh why can’t we be what we want to be/We want to be free.”
Marley asks a very serious question in that verse: Why can’t we be free? This is the question I want to pose today. If you come out of the bowels of slavery, indentureship and colonialism, your appetite for freedom is bound to be large. We Guyanese are no different. That is why when May 1966 arrived, we sang the freedom song in a land that was no longer strange to us. We had turned a “strange land” into a freedom space. The challenges were many, but in the end, we overcame.
You see, Independence was not about who the father of the nation is, or which party led us to 1966. It was and is more profound than that. It was and is about FREEDOM — the opportunity for the sufferers to suffer no more. Bob Marley’s chant pierces our consciousness: we want to be free. But have we really been free? Can we roam the open country? Fifty-two years later, are we what we want to be?
Marley would simultaneously proclaim: “No chains around my feet/But I am not free/I have never known what happiness is/I have never known what sweet caress is.”
We have survived the plantation and we have survived the harshness of Independence, but as Brother Eusi Kwayana, our own sage, would say, the scars of bondage are raw. And I submit that bondage is not a thing of the past, it is very much in our present.
Marley asks: “where is the love to be found?” In Guyana, we have not known what happiness is these fifty-two years; we have not known what sweet caress is. It is not that some of our leaders have not meant well. It is not that our people have not raised their voices in protest against the agents of unhappiness. It is not that there have been no worthy socio-economic initiatives. It is not that our collective creative imagination has not soared. We have done right in the sight of God and humanity, but still we are not free to be what we want to be.
So, to quote Marley again, “we forward in this generation.” But is it triumphantly? On this 52nd independence anniversary, what songs will we sing? Will we join Brother Bob to sing redemption songs? Or will we party as if we are fully free?
Please let us leave some time and space to reflect on our journey and our present condition. Let us not depend on Google to explain our history — our story — we are better than that. Our own Martin Carter speaks for all of us: “From the niggeryard of yesterday I come with my burden/To the world of tomorrow I turn with my strength.”
Our current government finds itself in a tight spot; it is a rare product: it has the burden of facilitating that love and happiness and sweet caress which Brother Bob talked about. President Granger calls it the “good life.” All our people ask for is some love and respect, some sweet caress, some happiness. I see it in their eyes and hear it in their voices, and feel it when I touch flesh with them. Our politics have never been easy. However, we have got to face our demons and cast them out.
IS THERE MUCH TO CELEBRATE?
As we observe independence this year, is there much to celebrate? It would be dishonest not to agree with the President that the government has made some laudable moves over the last three years. But one must make a distinction between routine delivery of government services and progress in meeting the big challenges facing the country.
At the end of the day, one must convince the country that the projects and initiatives undertaken by the government have led to a qualitative change in the circumstances of the citizenry. I think this is where the government cannot claim any achievements
There has been little headway on the country’s major systemic problems. Crime is still a big problem in the country; it may have gotten worse. And that would have a big impact on attracting investments, on the security of citizens, on the overall security of the country, on small and medium size businesses.
Poor education outcomes have remained a big problem. There have been small improvements in exam results. But high levels of functional illiteracy persist. There has been no aggressive coordinated policy aimed at rooting out these problems. In other words, our education sector continues to limp along.
Despite raising the minimum wage, workers still do not have a living wage. The small salary raises have not kept up with the cost of living. This is a structural problem with a long history. The government, in its manifesto vowed to fix it. But after three years, the situation has remained the same. And better wages have implications for the larger economy, proper delivery of government services, migration, corruption, the state of the family and poverty.
The government has at least gotten the oil sector going. But there is no overall policy direction. We seem to be getting less from the contracts than other countries in similar circumstances. At the end of the day the government will be judged not by how many concessions it gives to foreign companies, but by how much it gets for its people in return.
Sugar is a bright light. The government has tackled the problem. It has shown sensitivity to Indian Guyanese interests in the process. GuySuCo has come up with a plan. But government’s implementation and explanation of that plan have been woeful.
Local Government elections have been held, but the poor delivery of services by the elected bodies has not ended. The Local bodies are still dominated by partisan considerations rather than community concerns. The central government still calls the shots. So, there is no positive change there.
Ethnic relations have not improved. Although there is a Ministry of Social Cohesion, the emphasis has been on symbolic things, rather than a systematic attempt to deal with the structural impediments to social, cultural and ethnic reconciliation. Constitutional reform has been a “no show”. This is so pivotal an area. It affects almost every area of governance and politics. At the very minimum, the government should have been trying to negotiate the issue of post-election coalitions.
GOVERNMENT AND THE MEDIA
I completely agree that sections of the media have not been friendly to the government in recent times. But those media outfits to which the President refers were not always hostile. In fact, they played a major role in sensitizing the society to the ills of the previous government, which in the long run benefitted the Coalition. At least two of the media houses, which are now unfriendly to the government, were openly supportive of parties within the Coalition.
Yes, some of the media have become very cozy with anti-government forces. But, the government should ask why this shift has occurred—what went wrong?
I think the government, by its aloofness, the arrogance of some ministers, bad decisions, and its handling of the State-owned media, has alienated sections of the media So, the government is not a victim as the president’s reported remarks seem to suggest. I know the President has been very supportive of journalists, but at the end of the day the media is an oversight institution. In an era when the media have a 24-hour presence, any sensible government would not want to alienate the media
My fear is that this narrative of a hostile media could lead the government to crackdown on the media. We have been down that road before under the PNC and PPP governments. And elements in this government have already shown intolerance for criticism. So, I would urge the calmer minds to try to stem the tide of alienation. Government supporters don’t get their news and opinions from the State-owned media. So, they need the independent media to reach their own supporters.
Ultimately, news outlets gather and sell news and opinions. If the government constantly makes mistakes, they will report those and spin them as part of an editorial policy. If the government does transformative things, I am sure the media would also sell those. Unfortunately, for government, routine government actions do not amount to news. The government must package those as big policy to catch the attention of the media.

More of Dr. Hinds’ writings and commentaries can be found on his YouTube Channel Hinds’ Sight: Dr. David Hinds’ Guyana-Caribbean Politics and on his website www.guyanacaribbeanpolitics.news. Send comments to [email protected]