Dear Editor,
There is a positive correlation between democracy and development. The records will show that growth and development in Guyana were much more pronounced when the country experienced democratic rule as opposed to colonial, minority or dictatorial rule.
Prior to the 1950s when the country was under British colonial rule, there was limited growth but no development. The economy was export-oriented with a narrow economic base. Sugar, and to a much lesser extent, bauxite and rice, were the main sources of foreign exchange earnings. There was a serious divergence between domestic needs and resource utilisation with most of the foreign exchange earnings going overseas.
It was not until the emergence of nationalist leaders in the 1940s most notably Dr Cheddi Jagan and his wife Janet that organised pressure was exerted to change the then prevailing status quo in favour of the ordinary people. This was particularly evident following the formation of the Political Affairs Committee (PAC) in 1946 and the PPP in January 1950. Indeed, the first major assault against the status quo was in 1953 when the PPP under the leadership of Dr Cheddi Jagan won a landslide victory at the polls, the first to be held under universal adult suffrage.
The evolution of our politics since the 1950s is demonstrative of the classical Marxist-Lenninist postulates of class contradictions and the role of the state as an instrument of class rule. The democratically elected Jagan-led PPP was removed from power by the British Government under pressure from the United States administration because of a perception that the PPP was too much to the left which could pose a threat to foreign dominated business interests in the colony. The concern of the working masses was ignored and an interim government was imposed in 1953 to administer the affairs of the colony. During the four year tenure of the interim government, the country only marked time with no real progress and no development of significance actually took place.
It was not until the PPP took office in the elections of 1957 that real development took place both in terms of an expansion in the delivery of social services and production of main exports in particular rice and sugar. Several new agricultural and housing schemes were opened up in several parts of the country. Emphasis was also put on health and education with the construction of several new primary and secondary schools including the University of Guyana.
The economy grew at an accelerated pace despite the several roadblocks placed by Britain and other Western powers to get developmental assistance from the socialist bloc.
The removal of the PPP from the seat of government saw a reversal of the economic and social gains made by the PPP regime. At a more fundamental level, the right to vote which was fought for and won by the PPP was taken away by the PNC regime which broke with the UF in 1968 and set up a de facto one party state.
Under the twenty-four years of PNC authoritarian and dictatorial rule the country was reduced to the second poorest country in the Western hemisphere and life for the vast majority of the Guyanese people became a living hell.
The country experienced a political crisis which resulted from the shameless rigging of national and regional elections in order to perpetuate minority PNC rule. That political crisis in turn led to an economic crisis which impacted adversely on the living and working conditions of the Guyanese people. In other words, the political crisis generated an economic crisis which in turn led to a social crisis which manifested itself in poor sanitary and housing conditions, falling education standards, a woefully deficient health sector to name but a few. The dialectical interplay between the polity and the economy was very much in evidence.
It was not until the return of the PPP on October 5, 1992 after twenty-four years of dictatorial rule that the conditions of life of the Guyanese people began to show significant improvements.
This is why it is so important that the democratic character of the state be preserved since as our own experience has demonstrated whenever there is a rupture in our democracy the consequences can be extremely painful and far reaching.
This coming election on May 11 will once again provide the Guyanese people with an opportunity to preserve the democratic essence of the state and at the same time allow for an acceleration of our economic and social gains.
Yours faithfully,
Hydar Ally
