Dear Editor,
As we concentrate on the issue of potential candidates for the presidential elections we address questions such as the position of the candidates with regard to inclusiveness, presidential powers, etc. However, what is not being discussed is the type of economic policies, strategies that would be employed to take us out of the crisis we are in.
It would be argued that we are not in a crisis and that we have a viable economy, but the issue we have in my opinion, is the growing gap between the rich and the poor, the haves and the have nots; and the unemployment and under-employment of so many of our people, especially our youths.
Many try to say that we are worse off than in 1992, but this is absolutely ridiculous. There has been development, such as the improvement of our infrastructure, while our per capita income has risen from US$204 to over US$1100. Our health and education system have improved. We however have not affected performance in a qualitative way. We have too much corruption and waste. There is too much cronyism with regard to facilitating the business people. This cronyism is reflected in a way that allows a real basis for the claim of discrimination.
While this is so and needs to be addressed, there is no doubt that the system even if it allows wider participation would still result the marginalization of the vast majority of Indians, Africans and Amerindians. What we have to ensure is that we tackle the structure that allows a minority, even though multi-racial, to hog the wealth of this country at the expense of the working class, professionals and poor farmers.
Too many do not even attempt to make objective analysis of the situation and so too often writers condemn the PPP as being communist and forget that the economic policies being followed are fundamentally capitalist. Even if they are correct to classify the rule as autocratic or dictatorial, the reality is that capitalism itself can exist under varying forms of government from fascist to parliamentary democracy. And so I repeat that President Jagdeo has been following the Washington Consensus slavishly with no demonstrable vision and creativity, albeit with cronyism attached.
This allowed unfortunately for a capitalist free for all with trade, capital and financial liberalization. It is known that the USA which pushes these policies in its own interest did not open its economy until the 1970s, after it became an economic powerhouse filled with multinational corporations that needed to go out there and invest in other countries where the profit rates are higher, so as to repatriate profits to fund the welfare state. Prior to that it protected its own capitalist class from foreign competition. This makes me recall the fact that Dr Cheddi Jagan acted affirmatively to protect local businesses to allow them space to become strong.
So I maintain that, in addition to elections and the election of the best possible candidate, we have to consider how we tackle the economic issues. What economic strategies should we adopt?
Here is the biggest problem, as so many of even our qualified people seem to be locked into systems of ideas that preclude objectivity. It is a known fact that the so-called free press is under the control of the ruling economic elites, and so it will not in a big way support the dissemination of information, ideas and concepts that are not in their interest.
So many have become subject to this, but are unable to accept even the possibility that they are being manipulated by the media. This manipulation is further expanded as conversation with those of like mind reinforces the ideas that they have internalized. They have not come to accept that they do not produce ideas that are fully independent of the media and other mechanisms of indoctrination. So, for instance, they would discuss Venezuela and Iran to the exclusion of other countries, because that is what the press pushes. The fact that Americans call Obama socialist and communist is proof of this lack of understanding and indoctrination.
Now suddenly we have come to realize that while the USA pushed us to concentrate and talk about Chavez, and the Iranian leader (both elected) and condemned them for being undemocratic, there is no discussion of the countries, allies of the USA and the United Kingdom, that are undemocratic and repressive. Remember Oppenheimer who writes constantly about Chavez and the repetition that Chavez is a narcissist-Leninist? Now the allies of the USA and the West as we are now becoming aware, were not placed there by the people, and I am speaking of the recent uprisings in the Middle East. The press is now forced to discuss the dictatorships that are/were in place in many of the countries that were allies of the USA and the UK, supposedly the big defenders of democracy.
This should open our eyes to the real possibilities that we are being subjected to mental manipulation. Further we should begin to appreciate that learning is relatively easy, but that the unlearning process is the most difficult. We therefore have to deliberately consider ideas that we once would have rejected off the cuff. We must commence to throw the clichés we have in ready answer and ask questions of clarification and information to acquaint ourselves with ideas that we were taught to reject automatically.
So often I have tried to open the debate on economic issues and more precisely on the type of economic structure, strategies that could and should be considered that would facilitate the development of Guyana; economic strategies that would be more equitable; that would not only see growth but real development; that would address and reduce the growing inequalities that have condemned the majority to subsistence existence; that can form the basis for a way forward out of the dependent capitalist structures that are operating at the moment. There is a need for an economic structure, a new paradigm of thinking that would not relegate the workers and small farmers to perpetual poverty; that would afford our professionals a decent existence; that would dismantle the conditions that are breeding the widening gap that most of us recognize to be wrong.
Dr Jagan wrote and spoke on the issue of dependent capitalism, but unfortunately many in the PPP leadership of the government seem unable to learn anything, or else threw his ideas aside.
Regardless of what happens at the coming elections we the working people need to commence serious organization in keeping with our interests, for whoever gets in must be pressured to act in our interests and in the interest of the future as represented by our children. The reuniting of the trade unions should be one of our priorities.
Race should not be a barrier; race should not be a divisive factor; and race while important should not blind us to our real economic interests. We need to organize and we will, so that whatever the outcome of the elections we would demand an inclusive government that would carry out policies that place the genuine interest of the working class on top of the list.
It is within this framework that I call upon the press, the letter writers and those on the blog sites to commence discussion as to the type of economic strategies that would take Guyana forward. While political democracy is important economic democracy should be the concomitant objective that any future president and government should work towards.
The USA should recognize that they have to be more flexible. The Middle East is a clear reason why.
Yours faithfully,
Rajendra Bisessar
