Dear Editor,
Guyanese must reject politicians and political organizations that promote politically motivated crime and violence. To this end, reference is made specifically to the recent inflammatory and callous remarks by a WPA member at an opposition led public outreach in Buxton. It is well documented in our political, social, and economic history that our development and prosperity as a country and as a people have been largely stymied by political crimes of the past. Our post-independence struggles are characterized as such. It is worth noting, too, that this phenomenon only occurs when a certain political party is in government―that is, the PPP/C government.
Since Guyana transitioned to a market economy―Guyana suffered from 17+ years of political instability characterized as politically motivated disruption, unrest, violence, and crime. Consequently, an entire generation of people has been deprived of the development taking place now that ought to have already been achieved in the last decade. Hence, we cannot allow another generation to be so deprived of the national prosperity being pursued for another decade or two by allowing the irrelevant and mischievous fossils of the past to destabilize the country.
Guyana is at a major crossroad for the first time in its post-Independence history. Political instability can directly hurt the economy by affecting the investment decisions of firms. It takes time for firms to make the investment decisions, especially the manufacturing firms. In unstable political environments, it is very difficult to determine the net present value of an investment, as there are many uncertainties regarding social conditions, which make it impossible to determine the rate of return. Further, the expectations on the future policy and financial return depend very much on general socio and macro-economic conditions. If the expectation is dim in the future, then development in the economic sector is almost impossible for any country.
I therefore urge our fellow Guyanese and the political leaders across the spectrum to exercise greater care and responsibility in their public utterances―and avoid inflammatory remarks at all costs given the potential ramifications of such as described herein.
Sincerely,
Joel Bhagwandin