The country has spent the best part of this week waiting to exhale, with rising tensions and most of the citizenry fit to burst, not to mention the stress placed on children taking CXC papers (and their parents), and the general loss of productivity suffered by the nation. At the time of writing, the unconscionable delays in the declaration of the results of Monday’s general election could be variously attributed to extraordinarily painstaking and painful procedures, political delaying tactics and, in some respects, the egotistical pomposity of one or two key players. All of this is reflective of a nation divided by ethnic insecurities, political polarisation, mutual suspicion and broken systems.
Whilst pondering this pretty pass which we have reached, we cannot help but reiterate the contention that the country needs a new form of governance. In this respect and if we might borrow a concept from the APNU+AFC Coalition Manifesto, some thought might be given to the notion of “inclusionary democracy” and how the nation as a whole, might reap the democratic dividend.
At this early juncture we would like to proffer a few ideas for discussion as a significant percentage of the population seems already to have embraced the concept of “inclusionary democracy.” Political and social inclusion is the very bedrock of equitable and sustainable social and economic development. We do not need to look too far away for lessons to be adapted and emulated.
In Latin America, for example, it is generally agreed that the social gains of the last 15 years are not only due to economic growth but also to democracy, following the end of dictatorship in the continent in the early 1990s and efforts to consolidate democracy ever since. In this regard, it is widely accepted that accompanying Latin America’s wave of democratisation have been innovative public policies aimed at reducing poverty and inequality. These have contributed to the progress of the region, with social investment rising from around 12 per cent in the 1990s to about 19 per cent today. There is, moreover, ample evidence to show that democracy works best when there is more broad-based social participation in democratic processes and local government. This is particularly important in terms of giving a voice to minorities and previously marginalised communities and ensuring that their interests are not only represented but also taken into account in the pursuit of socio-economic progress.
But even though Latin America appears to have put behind it the plague of coups d’état, democracy is still a fragile construct, with the need for constant vigilance and reinforcement, especially in the face of challenges to democracy and development, such as organised crime and corruption. The state alone cannot guarantee democracy; it needs to be buttressed by enlightened thinking in which governments and, to some extent, business corporations too, understand the value of treating the citizenry with respect and the need to work together through consultation and collaboration to ensure popular buy-in and the spreading of benefits. Repression, coercion and paternalism belong to the past; people increasingly know their democratic rights, want to be taken seriously and play their part.
Inclusionary democracy and social mobilisation are inextricably linked and they can underpin increasing social mobility. We may well look to parts of Latin America for models to adapt and learn from, but we recognise that much work remains to be done there. Here in Guyana, therefore, if we are truly about to turn a page in our history, we the people need to propose new ideas, even as we await concrete steps to rebuild our judicial, institutional and educational structures, all in the interest of encouraging a more participatory form of democracy, with the aim of achieving greater social inclusion and cohesion, building trust and, ultimately, ensuring progress for all.
