Dear Editor,
I begin by quoting from pp 667 of Cheddi Jagan’s ‘The West on Trial’ epilogue 3: “We do not share the view that politics in Guyana is cast in rigid racial/ethnic compartments and that allegiances would never change. It is this false assumption that we would not win a majority at the 1992 elections.” This was written in January 1997 by President Cheddi Jagan in epilogue 3 to The ‘West on Trial.’ It was just two months before he died in March 1997 and less than five years after he was elected to office following the victory of the PPP/C at the October 5, 1992 election. Inherent in his thoughts in that particular paragraph are certain specific and profound precepts that need to be analyzed and contextualized in order to understand their political, philosophical and ideological underpinnings.
From the outset, Dr. Jagan openly disassociated the PPP from, and at the same time, debunked a view held by some who at that time, and to this day, claim that ‘politics in Guyana is cast in rigid racial/ethnic compartments’. In refuting this jaundiced view, Dr Jagan declared that ‘the PPP does not share the view that politics in Guyana is cast in rigid racial/ethnic compartments.” In so doing, Dr. Jagan demonstrated the pragmatic nature of the politics practiced by the PPP. It was political praxis based on principle but at the same time, flexible, taking into consideration the changes in the social and political forces obtaining at a given time in the country. It is clear that he viewed politics as a science, and like any other science, can be a great transformative force providing it correctly reflects the needs of the material life of society.
As far as Dr. Jagan was concerned, politics is a ‘concentrated form of economics;’ it is in constant motion, and should not be applied dogmatically, nor in a sectarian manner, but creatively as a dynamic phenomenon.
In the same paragraph, we come to his denunciation that; ‘allegiances would never change.’ Implicitly, Dr. Jagan was, broadly speaking, referring to evolutionary changes that are likely to occur at the rank and file level of political parties, civil society and in Guyanese society as a whole. Dr. Jagan’s reference to change in whatever shape or form should be viewed as his deep and unquestionably appreciation of the dialectics of change and its impact on the Guyanese body politic. Contextually, at the time when he expressed that view, the political situation in Guyana had changed dramatically viz; the cold war had ended; President Burnham had died; the struggles for free and fair elections by Guyanese from all walks of life had intensified at home and abroad and new thinking had emerged in the then US administration, the legislative bodies and think tanks.
It became clear that support for free and fair elections in Guyana was to be no exception. On the domestic front, as we approached the ‘92 election, changes in allegiances were manifested within civil society including those who helped constitute the Civic Component of the PPP, the business, professional and religious communities who in the past had either supported the PNC covertly or remained neutral. These forces had now come out openly, throwing their political support behind the PPP/C with Dr. Jagan as its presidential candidate. In the spirit of continuity, and with 1992 setting the precedent, changes in allegiances became commonplace in the run up to all future national and regional as well as local government elections after 1992. This was evidenced with the inclusion of more and more non- traditional members and supporters of the PPP/C, as well as erstwhile members and supporters of the PNC in election campaigns and political activities of the PPP/C.
As a matter of fact, changes in allegiances impacted both the PPP/C and the APNU/AFC during the period 2011- 2022. As recent as the 2020 general and regional elections, and the subsequent local government elections, major changes in allegiances took place. A recent example was the appointment of Richard Van West Charles as Ambassador to Venezuela, a move reminiscent of the appointment of Dr. Kenneth King as ambassador to Brussels. Both men were at one time, leading lights in the PNC. Here is Dr. Jagan again, ‘It is this false assumption that led to the prediction that we (the PPP) would not win a majority at the 1992 elections.’ Dr. Jagan’s reference here was directed to certain elements in the WPA, especially Moses Bhagwan who openly espoused the view at PCD meetings that the PPP would not win more than the 24 percent of the vote as it had done at the elections held in 1961.
But there were others in the political hustings who held to the same position. By doing so, they had totally underestimated the persistent struggles and intense political/ideological work the PPP had conducted among the Guyanese people while it laboured for twenty three years in the political wilderness. Let’s turn again to Dr. Jagan: ‘Had race/ethnicity been the only factor, the PPP/C could not have polled 54 per cent of the votes.’ Here Dr. Jagan couldn’t have been clearer; the PPP/C would not have won the 1992 election even if all its supporters had voted for the party. In the circumstances, this meant that cross-over votes from the indigenous and mixed race communities as well as changes in allegiances by persons belonging to other political and social forces had become critical factors in the contest to occupy State House and the majority of seats in the National Assembly.
Flowing from the logic of what was pointed out earlier, each to the observations made by Dr Jagan in effect meant that internally and externally, the political situation had matured to the extent favourable conditions had emerged for the PPP/C to assume office after being for almost three decades in the political wilderness. Thus the victory at the polls on October 5, 1992.
Sincerely,
Clement J. Rohee
