Dear Editor,
Through the medium of both press and electronic news, the nation is being forewarned about the possibility of a merger between the political parties. Some people already feel that it’s a fait accompli, and consider any grandstanding as just that, grandstanding. They are confident that the Fat Lady will sing. Then there are others who have been clamouring for this process for some time. They too are smiling in anticipation of finally getting a piece of the nation’s cake, and that they would be in a position to decide the size of the slice also.
Of course we don’t want to leave anyone out, so the politicians have come up with a great name for the marriage of convenience, or better yet collaboration, ‘A Government of National Unity.’ And it’s a fitting name. This present charade is a travesty.
The situation this country finds itself in did not come about because of the intransigence of one political party. No, it did not.
This was the collective effort of 65 politicians sitting in the legislature. These people are from three different political parties with whom we the people made a political contract, and they collectively failed to do the job – or any job for that matter.
However you look at it they collectively messed up. But is it really their fault? Or should we bear some of the blame for this chaos? In this country we question the ability of many people.
We question the ability of pilots to fly an aircraft safely; we question doctors; we question the ability of teachers to guide our children constructively. We question umpires and referees. But do we question the ability of our politicians? When we speak of this or that politician we do not speak about their ability. We have taken it for granted from a historical perspective that he or she is a politician, therefore they know what they are about, and we have acted as though they were revered people anyway.
The dictionary says a politician is “One who is a member of a political party… or one actively involved in politics.” Just become a member of a political party and get involved in this thing called politics, and presto, you are a politician. I guess in Guyana it’s like a game; you get into the loop, soon you will be talking on TV, picketing – then the big house. Your knowledge of this thing called politics is zilch, but so is everyone else’s. We have lawyer/politicians, we have doctor/politicians, we have trades unionist/politicians, we have activist/politicians, we have accountant/politicians.
So the question then is how good are these politicians to do political things? How are they going to motivate a distrustful people? Would they be able to push button A and get button B in return as in development? Not the big ticket items.
Do we ask them what they know about community re-structuring towards production, and how they will go about it? Do we ask them about their knowledge of infrastructural development? And how they would set it up, and where they will begin? And since they will all be together, the word compromise could be deleted from their vocabulary.
In the meantime we are being ruled by an oligarchy. All the tenets of democracy but the system is controlled by a few (read that as treasury). The police get away with brutalizing the citizens, and why? Because of the failure of the state’s legal system to protect the rights of citizens and punish the perpetrators of violence against civilians.
The army salutes, parades and shakes hands. The people – the so many sheep, as they are characterized – sit around waiting for Godot.
Yours faithfully,
Milton Bruce
