Dear Editor,
Ah, the political season in Guyana—where development programs are less about actual development and more about who can shout the loudest during campaign season. It’s truly heartwarming to see our nation’s future being used as nothing more than a blunt instrument to whack the opposition over the head with. After all, why bother with genuine progress when you can simply weaponize a few roads and schools?
Let’s pause and marvel at the genius of this approach. Development programs, those shining beacons of progress meant to uplift every citizen, are now the latest pawns in our political chess game. One can almost imagine the strategists huddled together, plotting how to best wield these initiatives like a cudgel against their opponents. Because, clearly, nothing says “for all Guyanese” quite like using public projects to deepen political divides.
And with the oil industry promising a flood of cash—$7 billion by 2025!—it seems we’re gearing up for an even bigger, better, and more divisive round of this game. Picture it: oil wealth not as a tool to build a better future for everyone, but as the ultimate prize in a winner-takes-all political brawl. What could possibly go wrong?
Of course, the real pièce de résistance is how these tactics continue to play right into the hands of racial voting patterns. Why strive for unity when you can double down on the very divisions that have kept us in a perpetual state of political gridlock? Because let’s face it, nothing brings a nation together like watching their leaders squabble over who gets to take credit for the latest infrastructure project.
So here’s the million-dollar question—or rather, the $7 billion question: Are these development programs really about uplifting every Guyanese, or are they just another notch on the electoral scorecard? If it’s the latter, then perhaps it’s time we stopped calling them “development” programs and started calling them what they really are: campaign props.
As we stare down the barrel of our oil-rich future, it might be worth considering whether we want to keep playing this game, or if it’s finally time to rewrite the rules. Maybe, just maybe, we could focus on ensuring that this newfound wealth benefits everyone, without the usual political grandstanding. But then again, where’s the fun in that?
Sincerely,
Keith Bernard
