Dear Editor,
I do agree that political commentators (as one prominent columnist with the Kaieteur News recently suggested) ought to be courageous in speaking the “truth” and suffer whatever consequences might be forthcoming. The writer cited Eusi Kwayana, as an example of one who has been speaking the “truth” for years, and although he didn’t say what was the price that Eusi paid, I guess those of us who have been following politics in Guyana over the past thirty or forty years, will agree that Mr Kwayana did pay a price and just leave it at that. But Editor, is it really a matter of courage, or does it depend on the goal that you are trying to achieve? For example, a person may be more diplomatic and less reckless with his or her comments, if that individual honestly feels that perhaps the government has gotten a few things right and therefore a blanket condemnation should not be made.
Another person may also feel that since the government was legitimately elected to power, therefore the survival and well-being of the Guyanese people are largely dependent on the government and give credit where credit is due. In such a situation, one would want to take a more cautious and responsible position in one’s criticism of the government and it is not really a question of a lack of courage by that particular individual. After all, I sincerely hope that as Guyanese (political analysts and ordinary people alike) we are all concerned about the economic development of Guyana, in the same way that most Americans (Democrats as well as Republicans) want President Obama to succeed, not because they all like Obama, but for the sake of the country.
So, even when we criticize our government in Guyana, we must also acknowledge that President Jagdeo is, in fact, our best hope for economic success at the national level. What is Mr Jagdeo doing so wrong, that he doesn’t deserve our critical support most times and our whole-hearted support whenever he does something right?
We all have our different opinions about this, but we should also acknowledge that governing a country (especially in these times) is a very difficult job. And I know someone is going to say, “Well, you guys are comfortable in the US, you just don’t know.” To that I would simply say that life is also a struggle here and it’s not always easy. In fact, we have to work hard, if we want to get ahead.
Besides the fact that one man’s truth may be another man’s ‘bunch of lies,’ we also have to recognise that in speaking the ‘truth’ some people do not have the luxury of thinking only of themselves, as they may have a wife and children to think about.
So, for this poor guy, it’s not really a matter of courage, it’s really a matter of being a little unselfish about your public comments, so that your spouse and children wouldn’t be adversely affected by things that you say and do.
So, in conclusion, Editor, I would like to urge that as Guyanese, let us think about the goal that we are trying to achieve when we take public positions and make public comments.
For example, the goal of the average American is to make a lot of money, but back in the day, the goal of the English was to be a gentleman or lady and to present oneself to others with a sense of dignity. The English also wanted to make money and be rich.
It is not that the Americans are lacking in dignity and the other finer attributes, but that is not their primary goal. So, as a result the Americans have turned out to be much more affluent than the English. As Guyanese, it would also do us well to reflect on what we are trying to achieve when we take a public position.
Yours faithfully,
Rudy Vyfhuis
