Dear Editor,
It has been suggested by some that race and racial voting is the problem in Guyana. I disagree with the entire premise of that argument. In the absence of exit polling or other data that explains why people vote the way they did, that argument is flawed. It is my view that racial voting is not the problem; it is a symptom of a larger problem.
You published an excellent piece by Angelina DeAbreu on March 31. It was uplifting. She covered many of the things I wanted to say but much more eloquently that I ever could.
The Guyanese people are not the problem. They vote their conscience with limited choices and that must be accepted and respected. Blaming them for the way they vote is insulting but not entirely new. The British did that in 1953 and overthrew the government they elected. The Americans did it in 1961 and 1964. It was contemptuous then and it is contemptuous now.
In recent weeks I heard from several Guyanese, born in the seventies. They are informed voters. They know enough about the political parties and their records. I am a bit older. All but one of my lifetime inter racial experiences, including my marriage, have been positive ones. I have many friends on both sides of the political spectrum and I know a bit of history as well.
One of the first things I learned in business is that if people aren’t buying what you are selling, you either change your product or change your marketing strategy. I discovered later that there are times you must do both. That touches on the problem with elections in Guyana and the solution.
Voting in Guyana is a binary choice. Two parties, the PPP and the PNC, now hiding behind the cloak of a coalition, have established solid bases. Many open- minded Guyanese hold their noses and vote for one party over the other not because of race, but because of record and trust. I am aware of the demographics and the tendency to blame Indo Guyanese for the perceived voting problem so let me address that.
Indo Guyanese voters are not monolithic. However, they, like other Guyanese, are aware of the record of the PNC in and out of government. As long as the PNC is the alternative, many will vote against them and the PPP will have an easier path to victory. For the smaller parties seeking a representative government, that is the fly in the ointment.
For the record, the PNC held office from 1964 to 1992 without winning a fair election and voters know that. They know that the PNC coordinated with the US to create unrest in Guyana and undermine the government in the early sixties. They also know that the PNC welcomed and encouraged US interference and support in the 1964 elections and after. They remember Father Darke, Walter Rodney, the collapse of the economy, the brain drain, the empty shelves, the long lines, the blackouts and long list of other failures. They also remember government propaganda circulating on the state owned media.
The US, as it was helping Mr Burnham to retain power, gave him the facts and the formula to win elections fairly. The formula included the need to broaden his support. He was encouraged to pursue more inclusive policies to attract Indo Guyanese voters. He rejected that advice and vowed not to work with the UF in subsequent elections.
Not much has changed since then. The PNC never made a serious effort to attract PPP supporters. The party continues to use the same playbook hoping that other members of the coalition will do so and get them over the line. Recycling former PPP politicians is not a strategy. It is delusional and it is very transparent. Voters are aware that the PNC is still the dominant voice in the coalition and recent events prove them to be right.
The refusal to accept the No Confidence vote and asking the CCJ to solve a simple prep school math problem was a major embarrassment to a country that once boasted the highest literacy rate in the Caribbean. The refusal to obey the court order to hold elections and the attempt to install a proxy as Chairman of Gecom are now a part of the record. Does anyone believe those attempts to hang on to power helped the coalition in the recent election? If anyone believes the conduct of its foot soldiers in the aftermath of this election will improve its prospects in future elections, I have a snowmobile to sell you. As Mark Twain once said, “History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes.”
Guyanese are no different from people in other parts of the world. They have racial preferences just like every other race on the face of this earth. That is where the story starts but not where it ends. Issues are important and records matter. Issues may change in each election cycle but records endure and facts are stubborn. It is easy to vote against a bad record.
Someone said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
That, I submit, is the real problem.
Yours faithfully,
Milton Jagannath
Toronto Ontario
Canada,