Beware of this stratum!

Apr 20, 2022 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

The middle class in Guyana is deadlier than the bourgeoisie class. The latter is interested in making money – as much as possible – but sections of the middle class feels that it has an entitlement to political power.
This is not to deny that there is not a progressive section within the middle class. But there are also reactionary and extremists elements that are seized of a vicious agenda.
This middle class in Guyana cannot be defined simply in terms of economic status. In Guyana, what emerged under Burnham was bureaucratic/technocratic class – the professions, public administrators, and some members of academia.
Jagan referred to this section as the bureaucratic/ technocratic stratum. Together with the propertied middle class, they constituted the petit bourgeoisie.
During the independence struggles, the petit bourgeoisie assumed political leadership. But they were far from a revolutionary force.
Examining the situation in post-colonial Africa, Walter Rodney described the petit bourgeoisie as reformers rather than revolutionaries. In an article titled, “Aspects of the International Class Struggle in Africa, the Caribbean and America”, Rodney accused the petit bourgeoisie of Africa of reneging on the cardinal principle of Pan-Africanism, namely the unity and indivisibility of Africa, during their negotiations with the colonial masters. He further accused them of lacking the capacity to demand both freedom and unity.
While Rodney recognised that the petit bourgeoisie was the source of leadership, he also was suspect of it. He acknowledged that it was the petit bourgeoisie which provided the leadership for Independence but apportioned blame to this class for their role in the post-colonial stagnation and fragmentation of Africa.
Ironically, Rodney surrounded himself with petty bourgeois elements. He is believed to have been betrayed by this class.
Rodney was also critical of the petit bourgeoisie in the Caribbean. Among his criticisms was that they stifled Pan Africanism and the deeper insertion of the trade union movement in the working class. According to Alex Dupuy (Race and Class in the Postcolonial Caribbean, 1996), Rodney had arrived at the conclusion that the postcolonial Caribbean petit bourgeoisie had become a new ruling class with its own interests which was opposed to those of the working classes. This was certainly true under Burnham.
Burnham’s PNC was originally comprised of a breakaway faction of the PPP and the petit bourgeoisie United Democratic Party. The PNC aligned with the extreme right-win United Force to oust the PPP from office following the 1964 elections. Jagan had always argued that following imperialism had established a client bourgeois state in Guyana.
The petit bourgeois comprising middle class elements no longer have an ideological agenda. Their agenda is deadlier. It is anti-PPP and there are elements parading within the class who are keen on pushing an ethnic agenda.
The working class unfortunately have relied upon this petit bourgeois class for leadership. The trade union movement, for example, has long been seized by elements of the petit bourgeois class. And the working class has been betrayed by this class.
The PPP had established strong roots among the working class. It was considered the foremost champion of the working class. But when the PPP/C assumed office in 1992, many of its leaders behaved more like petit bourgeoisie than working class cadres. They ‘wined and dined’ with the bourgeoisie and became entrapped in corruption.
The working class saw who the PPP/C leaders associated with and whose interests they represented. The sugar industry today is in the mess it is in partly because the PPP abandoned sugar workers. At one stage, the PPP/C even threatened to de-recognise the Guyana Agricultural Workers’ Union (GAWU), a union which is perceived as a surrogate of the PPP.
The working class should no longer look towards the PPP/C for leadership. The PPP/C is now aligned to the bourgeoisie class and has been co-opted by a rich and powerful oligarchic class.
The mistakes made by the APNU+AFC resulted in its failure to weaken the oligarchic class. But that had to do with the fact that the AFC had connections to this class and would have derailed any attempt by the PNC/R to crush the powerful oligarchic class which is tied to the PPP. That class pumped a great deal of resources into the PPP/C’s election campaign and is now bound to reap the dividends from that investment.
But the oligarchic class interests are primarily economic in nature. It is not confrontation with the local petit bourgeoisie. In fact, on many economic issues they have shared interests.
On the other hand, the middle class has a stratum with pathological political ambitions. In fact, that stratum represents a danger to working class unity.
The working class must stay clear of this stratum. That stratum is only interested in using the working class for its sinister aims.
(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)