Dear Editor,
In M.A. Bacchus’s letter captioned “The reality is that race is of major political significance in Guyana,” (07.02.26) the charge was made that Dr Randy Persaud and I may not have taken cognizance of the realities on the ground. M.A Bacchus contended that race “is manifested and entrenched in the political process we call elections. Then, thereafter, the distribution of wealth, power and resources.” I can assure M.A Bacchus that my analysis of the political situation in Guyana is very cognizant of these realities. I am also cognizant that other political realities are available which have been exempt from consideration in Guyana’s political sociology.
Let me state from the onset that the question, should class take precedence over race as a medium of political mobilization is a question intended to confront the ineptitude of the political party in Guyana. Very often racial groups are forced to bear the burden of incompetent and inept political elites.
When analyzing other considerations there are some facts that are important to consider. According to the 2002 census, East Indian Guyanese constitute 43.5 per cent of the population and African Guyanese constitute 30.8 per cent. Mixed Guyanese constitute 16.7, Amerindian 9.2 per cent and other ethnic groups, a combined 0.6 per cent.
It is known that in Guyana, most East Indians vote for the PPP/C and most African Guyanese vote for the PNCR. If voting is purely along racial lines then no party purporting to represent African Guyanese or Amer-indian Guyanese has a chance of winning national elections. Therefore it does not make sense for any party other than the PPP/C to mobilize along racial lines. As such, how can the PPP/C be defeated?
Our mixed population is still an anomaly. I rather suspect this group, whose numbers have increased 4.6 per cent since 1990 has distributed their votes evenly. The Amerindian population who are concentrated in regions 8 and 9 (75.9 and 89.2 respectively), distributed their votes evenly in 2001 among PPP/C, PNCR the (WPA, GAP), but in 2006 most of their votes went to PPP/C.
In 2001, 440,185 people were registered to vote, and in 2006 this number increased to 492,369, an increase of 52,184. In 2001 the PPP/C won the elections with 44 per cent of the number of registered voters but in 2006 they won with 37 per cent of registered voters, but 54 per cent of those who chose to vote. However, while 89 per cent of registered voters voted in 2001 only 68 per cent voted in 2006. Guyana, since 1992 has been turning out a very high percentage of voters, one of the highest in the world. The questions that need to be asked are (a) why has there been a 21 per cent drop in those going to the polls? (b) why has the PPP/C party been able to win with just 37 per cent of the total number of registered votes? (c) If only 37 per cent of voters voted for the incumbent party, why were the opposition parties only able to attract 30 per cent of the votes?
The answer that comes to mind for (a) is voter apathy, the answer for (b) race as a medium of political mobilization continues to be the concern of political parties, only the PPP/C can win when this is a fact, and (c) while voters are not satisfied with the performance of the incumbent party, they are equally dissatisfied with the performance of the opposition. So in 2006 many decided to stay at home. From 2001 to 2006 the PPP/C had a reduction in votes in every region except Region 9. Their biggest drop off as a percentage of registered voters was in Region 6, a PPP/C stronghold, likewise, the PNCR had a reduction of votes in every region except Region 1, and their biggest drop off as a percentage of registered voters occurred in Region 4, a PNCR stronghold. This tells me that both Indian Guyanese and African Guyanese are dissatisfied with these two traditional parties. It also tells me that while Indian Guyanese were dissatisfied with the PPP/C, the PNCR never offered them an alternative. Would Indians have voted for the PNCR? We will not know as long as the PNC/R political machinery is geared towards mobilizing only African Guyanese votes. If any political party is serious about winning an election, then no section of the population is exempt from consideration when canvassing for votes. The PNCR usually exempt heavily populated Indian areas because the thinking is that those votes automatically belong to the PPP/C. No consideration is given to Indian voters who may be dissatisfied with the PPP/C. The result is that the PPP/C wins with 37 per cent of the total number of registered voters.
In most democratic countries voters do not vote for political parties unless given a good reason to do so. The assumption in our political analysis is that Guyanese voters are incapable of considering any other factors other than race when voting. Well according to my analysis it is the opposition political party that has this incapability, when taking into consideration their method and mode of mobilization. The 2006 elections show that tremendous voter dissatisfaction exists in the Guyanese society, but prior to 2006 the opposition political parties were clueless and unprepared to take advantage of these dissatisfactions, either through incompetence, lack of willingness or concentrated efforts on mobilizing racial votes.
It should be realized that the factors that cause voter dissatisfaction are the same regardless of race. These are poverty, unemployment, poor wage distribution, improper health care and education, inadequate water and electricity, poor drainage and irrigation, high cost of living etc. Very often these are concerns of the working class and the unemployed poor. Any political party in Guyana that is prepared to give these concerns precedence over race as a medium of political mobilization is serious about defeating the PPP/C.
Let me hasten to point out that this analysis does not propose that in Guyana we should ignore racial interest, and the fact that the PPP/C is more concerned with satisfying their racial constituency when distributing resourc-es. One cannot disagree with M.A.Bacchus concerning the PPP/C and their total dismissal of those interests that concerns and affect African Guyanese. My argument concerns the strategy for mobilizing voters. Race or class: It is my calculation that ethnic based organizations should take the lead in raising issues that concern their racial groups. Ideally the political party on the other hand is in the business of competing for authority to change the existing realities for every group.
In other words, what I am saying is that another political party, other than the PPP/C can win a general election in Guyana. But that party should not concentrate on race as a medium of political mobilization. Given our political system issues of dysfunction of parliament, electoral systems, power sharing, lack of an economic plan to foster development, corruption, incompetence, drug economy, crime, inequality, transparency etc. are dependent on the willingness of the ruling party to make changes. That willingness is absent from the ruling party, therefore we have to seek alternatives. Using a class analysis to mobilize against the ruling party can defeat the PPP/C, because class interest crosses racial boundaries. It deals with a commonality of suffering among all ethnic groups.
Yours faithfully,
Dennis Wiggins
