Let the people decide on dual citizenship through a referendum

Apr 11, 2019 Letters

DEAR EDITOR,

I have read, listened and watched quite a few items across the media on the dual citizenship saga as a result of the no-confidence motion of 21st December 2018.
There appears to be an equal number of supporters and opposers of dual citizenship Parliamentarians. Given some good arguments and suggestions on both sides of the divide, it is difficult to discern any potential solution.
I therefore strongly contend that the answer should come from the populace. Such an important matter should not be left to our politicians who may generally have good intentions, but whose actions invariably support the changes that maximize their interests.
With the introductory remarks in mind, and the fact that I have no intention of flouting, or support flouting of our constitutional provisions, I take the liberty to indulge in a sociological explanation as to why Guyanese should not be considered as pledging allegiance to a foreign country in the true sense/meaning of the concept. Further, I have shied away from commenting on some of the list of other potent reasons why the populace should be involved.
In explaining, I venture to say that while many Guyanese hold dual citizenship, perhaps the majority still identify with their native culture. More often than not their allegiance lies with their original country of birth. This is so for two reasons: On one side of the coin, cultural diversity is sustained because the dominant groups in society seek to maintain their power and privilege by keeping minority groups separate and unequal. The other side posits that cultural minorities do not want to assimilate into the dominant culture because they place a high value on their own beliefs, customs and cultural identities.
In the United States, as in other multicultural societies, both reasons coexist; On one hand, assimilation is limited, while on the other, cultural minorities are reluctant to give up their natal cultural identities by way of total assimilation.
If we were to analyze the adjustment patterns of Guyanese in North America or elsewhere, we would observe a strong inclination of Guyanese to hold on to their traditions and lifestyles with respect to family affairs, education of their children, and cultural and religious practices.
Though explained through concepts a number of psychosocial concepts, these immigrants subscribe to what is known as the asynchronous parent-child adjustment pattern according to which they hold steadfastly to their natal cultural beliefs as evidenced in their music, songs, dances, dress modes, religious practices and foods.
As a distinct group, Guyanese exist in several cultural enclaves that facilitate and foster their economic and social existence. So, their existence in foreign climes does not necessarily translate to foreign allegiance despite their pledging alliance upon becoming citizens of the foreign nations.
In a nutshell, we can question the extent to which Guyanese are truly foreign. We can also raise questions about dual citizenship within CARICOM. We can also question the extent of the realistic experience of dual citizens and whether such experience projects a different image/allegiance that is diametrically opposed to that of the regular guy on the street.
I hasten to say that while we must consider our national interest a priority, we should tread cautiously on our decision-making processes and pronouncements on the dual citizenship/allegiance issue. In essence, we should let the populace, rather than politicians, make such decisions.
Yours sincerely,

Ronald Singh

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News