The PPPC does not practice political inclusion

Dec 02, 2024 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

…Peeping Tom

Kaieteur News- The People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPPC) has mastered the art of political rhetoric. Few can rival its dexterity with words. It weaves narratives of inclusion while standing apart from the very institutions and individuals necessary for such ideals.

“Inclusion” is its buzzword of choice, rolling off tongues in press conferences and official events. Yet, like a magician’s sleight of hand, it obscures more than it reveals. The question is not whether the PPPC speaks of inclusion—it does so liberally—but whether it practices it. The answer, alas, lies in an uncomfortable dissonance.

It is no great insight to say that trust lies at the heart of any system of governance predicated on inclusion. The PPPC has repeatedly invoked this axiom, particularly following the 1997 period of political violence. It will be justified in doing so in the aftermath of Guyana’s darkest democratic moment: the 2020 election fiasco. That debacle, orchestrated by the APNU+AFC coalition, left scars on the national psyche.

The PPPC’s mistrust of its political opponents is not unfounded—it is justified by the audacity of an attempted electoral coup in an era when such manoeuvres are universally condemned. But here lies the paradox: inclusion cannot exist in an atmosphere devoid of trust, yet trust itself cannot materialize in a vacuum. It requires engagement, persistence, and a willingness to risk vulnerability for the greater good.

The PPPC’s approach to inclusion appears to be a fortress with a drawbridge that never lowers. It speaks of a “new political culture,” an expectation seemingly directed at its opponents. But asking the Opposition to abandon its history of undemocratic conduct is akin to asking the rain to cease falling.

Political parties, like people, are not transformed by decree; they are shaped by circumstance and interaction. If the PPPC genuinely wishes to usher in a new political culture, it must articulate what conditions are required for that transformation and what steps it is willing to take to foster it. Otherwise, its calls for change will remain hollow and self-serving.

Numbers, as stubborn as facts, tell their own story. The APNU+AFC coalition represents a substantial portion of the electorate, approaching half of the voting population. For all its democratic failings, it cannot be wished away. The PPPC may find comfort in its one-seat parliamentary majority and the delusion of a visible decline of the coalition’s electoral fortunes. Yet the recent local government elections, with victories in Linden, New Amsterdam, and Georgetown, reveal that the APNU+AFC retains a loyal and formidable base. To ignore this is to alienate almost half of the country, a misstep for a party that proclaims the goal of national unity

The PPPC’s history with inclusionary democracy is checkered at best. In the wake of the violent protests of 1997, the party introduced the notion of trust as a prerequisite for shared governance. Trust, however, is not something plucked from the ether. It is cultivated, brick by brick, through dialogue and action. The PPPC’s concessions to appoint Opposition representatives to boards and commissions have been more symbolic than substantive. Such gestures are akin to placing a bandage over a gaping wound; they do little to address the systemic issues at hand.

The present administration, regrettably, has veered further from the inclusionary ideals it once espoused. The PPPC’s interactions with civil society reveal an unsettling pattern: criticism is interpreted as hostility. Organizations that question the government are labeled “anti-PPP,” their legitimacy dismissed. This intolerance toward dissent erodes the very foundation of democratic governance, where opposing viewpoints are not just tolerated but valued.

If inclusion is to be more than a slogan, the PPPC must begin by clarifying its own position. It must articulate the conditions under which it envisions greater political inclusion. What steps must the Opposition take to rebuild trust? What actions is the PPPC itself prepared to undertake to create a more inclusive political environment? Such transparency would signal a genuine commitment to the principles of inclusion and serve as a foundation for dialogue.

Inclusion, true inclusion, demands more than rhetoric. It requires the courage to sit across the table from those who have wronged you and to chart a path forward together. It requires humility, the humility to admit that no single party or ideology holds a monopoly on wisdom or virtue. And it requires vision, a vision of a Guyana where differences are not walls but bridges.

The PPPC must decide whether it is serious about realising this vision in Guyana. If it is, it cannot afford to sideline those who represent nearly half the population, however grievous their political leaders’ sins may be. A democracy is not built by isolating dissent but by engaging it, testing it, and tempering it in the crucible of debate.

For too long, Guyana’s political culture has been one of exclusion and mistrust. The PPPC, as the party in power, has the responsibility—and the opportunity—to break this cycle. But first, it must speak plainly. What does inclusion mean? What does it require? And how will it be achieved? Without answers to these questions, the party’s promises of inclusion will remain a castle built on sand, eroding with every wave of political reality.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this  newspaper.)   

(The PPPC does not practice political inclusion)

---

• Peeping Tom, People’s Progressive Party Civic, political inclusion, press conferences

---