Dear Editor,
In a previous letter captioned, ‘Voters have the right to abstain from voting’ (SN, February 4), I had posited that both abstentions and valid votes determine electoral outcomes, in equal measure. I had cited legislative and judicial authority to prove that abstaining is as legitimate as casting a valid ballot. Editor, pro-democracy strategists may be well advised to bear those facts in mind.
Political scientists agree that the purpose of government is to fulfil the needs of citizens. In 1943, renowned psychologist Abraham Maslow, studied those needs. He said that human needs form a hierarchy. First, we need water, food and shelter. Without those necessities, our bodies simply cannot survive. Second, we need security. We need personal security, such as safety from bandits, accidents, and violence. We need economic security; citizens must have jobs. We need health-security, in the event of illness. Water, food, shelter and security are the most basic, the most fundamental of human needs. Other things such as wealth and pleasure may come later, but the basic needs are absolutely essential for human survival. Since a government’s job is to provide for our needs, it would be irrational, it would be insane to vote for a party that cannot, or does not meet even those most basic needs.
Guyanese must consider: the PPP has been in office for twenty-two years. We must ask, has this regime done its job; has this government fulfilled our needs? We must ask ourselves, do we have a reliable supply of clean water? Do we have sufficient food? Do we have adequate shelter? Do we have a job? Can we afford an education, so as to get a good job? Are we secure? Do we feel safe from bandits and violent criminals? Is our healthcare system good enough? Do our children have access to a good education? If the answer is no, how can we justify voting for the PPP again?
In the previous letter, I had argued that we can rightfully, respectably, make a choice to abstain from voting, or, we could spoil our ballot in protest. Editor, I stand by that assertion. If the current PPP regime has not met even our most basic needs, we have a duty to refuse to vote for them. Denying them our vote is the least we can do for our families. If we cannot, for any reason, support another party, we must either abstain or spoil our ballot.
As sensible people we have a responsibility to ourselves, our parents, and our own children. In our quiet moments, we must question ourselves. How can we vote for the PPP if we have no job? Why would we support this regime if we don’t even have sufficient food? Who would vote for a government which cannot provide decent healthcare for our parents? How can we even think of giving them our vote if we have to worry about being raped or robbed or beaten or murdered while we sleep? Why would we keep on voting for a party that couldn’t care less if we eat or starve?
The fact is, the majority of Guyanese are still in need of the basic necessities. Therefore, we cannot in good conscience, support this regime.
Once we have made the decision not to support the PPP regime, we can then take the next step; we must listen to the messages of other political parties. As intelligent Guyanese, we can judge for ourselves. We can make up our own minds. If we like what we hear; if we believe that another party can make our lives better, we may decide to vote for them. That decision is up to each of us; we must not allow anyone to take that away. But we must think of ourselves and our families first. Let us forget about the wealthy politicians; their loaves of bread are well buttered. We have to do what is best for us. And the first step is to make the decision not to vote for this uncaring regime. Anything else can come later.
Yours faithfully,
Mark DaCosta
