Dear Editor,

There was a muted remembrance a few weeks ago on the anniversary of the death of one-time President Desmond Hoyte.  Love him or hate him, he remains a near unparalleled contributor in the annals of this country’s struggles and history.  That said, this writing is less about what he did, or why he did so.  Instead, it is more of a look at where his political brethren and inheritors find themselves, and who and what they have become.

To begin, there are the well known and widely accepted facts: numerical disadvantage; sordid history; ethnic memory; voting patterns; and electoral intransigence.  Any one of these would be a major deterrent to an opposition; taken together, they are not only inimical, but almost insurmountable.

Next, there are components of a sturdy reality: media dominance, propaganda onslaught, and the infiltration and dilution of traditional bases by government forces.  Further, there is the self destructive strangulation of internal disarray, leadership hegemony, and financial stringency.  From all indications, the walls are besieged from the outside and decaying from within.  This has to be a most uninspiring picture, to say the least.

In addition, there is the unlimited world of perception: clashing and controversial, but intrinsically plausible.  At times, the party seems to have lost touch, foremost with core segments of its own constituency, and some more with larger society.  Many view it as an appendage of the PPP; others question its relevancy.  It might not be an understatement to say that the PNC has become a national formality in the most disparaging sense of the phrase.

Furthermore, the response of the PNC itself to all of this has been instructive.  By and large, it has regressed into a contented isolationism, and a growing distance from both the Guyanese public and the formidable challenges of the times.  As an example, I have difficulty identifying the main issues that the party has made its own; that separate it from nemesis and pack; that separate it from the past; and that have traction with the public.  To cut a real fine point on this, what is the single issue that now defines this once robust group that ruled the nation for almost thirty years?  I ask again: what is this single, bread and butter issue today?

To be sure, there have been the usual packages about goodwill in December, sacrifice in August, along with ditties clustered around high holy days.  But where is it that the PNC has been unrelenting and sustained through presence and decibel on the matters that savage this land, its peoples, and its collective wellbeing and psyche?  Where?

The impression cannot be shaken that when the party must be working overtime, it has been satisfied with part time; when it has to be vociferous, it has succeeded in being muted; and when it should have been challenging, it has retreated into the role of the whimpering.  In most things, if not all, it has become a mystery unto itself, and an increasing obscurity on the political horizon.  Forget horizon; I am compelled to submit that the PNC has relegated itself to a conversational aside at the political table of deliberation.

All of this is problematic for a nation roiled and reduced to a de facto one party state.  Think of it: Desmond Hoyte was astute enough to recognize that the die was cast, and the odds were against him; yet he acted firm in the belief in himself, and confidence that tomorrow is another day, and with its own set of circumstances and opportunities to be pursued and exploited.  He believed.  But can the same be said of his successors and their state?

When looked at today and dispassionately, this is the PNC’s state of affairs.  Its assets are limited, influence questionable, odds overwhelming, and outlook bleak.  However, few will argue that this was precisely where the PPP was in the ’70s and ’80s.  Today, the roles are reversed, and the ruling party is at the helm, mainly because its oarsmen refused to stop rowing.  It is too simplistic to resort to the easy escape of political arithmetic; at the very least, not before the time of its ascent.  Now that the roles are reversed, has the PNC done the reverse of the PPP and given up and stopped rowing and avoiding the very heavy lifting required?

Last, and with all of this in mind, the question is presented to the political descendants of Hoyte: who do you believe in, what is it that you believe, and how is it going to be realized?  The nation would be appreciative if the time could be taken to enlighten it.

Yours faithfully,
GHK Lall