Dear Editor,
Some friends and countrymen think that I have been too critical -even ultra-critical- of the ruling party. I suppose that some basis for this could always be found if looked at from a narrow and purely party perspective. However, when viewed through the wider lens of larger society, I believe that what has been tabled represents the anguished soul of a country faced with harsh realities and implacable truths.
The year 1992 had many believers and hopefuls. More than a few were not diehard supporters of the incoming administration; neither were they all brown. But a very significant segment of the population dared to hope.
It was supposed to be a breath of fresh air, the return of light, a new beginning. The returnees had had a history of struggle; of being harassed; of intimidation; of marginalization; and of identifying with the masses. Yes, the fulfillment of a promise –a promise long and cruelly denied. It was McArthur wading ashore at Luzon and Ulysses restarting at Ithaca.
Against this backdrop, it is now time for the reality of the last seventeen years. The reality has been a betrayal of the highest order. The poor are poorer, and there are growing multitudes of them. Many are the citizens who cannot look forward to two (not three) solid meals daily. Corruption, crime, cocaine, and containers have all contributed to ease the pain in some quarters at the lower levels; and to power the golden parachutes of those who glide above sea level. Yet too many see abundance in a land promised to a chosen few only, as they are compelled to eke out a subsistence existence. They scrounge, improvise, dabble, and experiment at legitimate pursuits to get by; others sell themselves to participate in the sweep of illicit activity to rise above their circumstances. To the many who suffer, the promise has turned into a bitter, poisoned chalice.
Tens of thousands of workers have seen their representatives demonized, their bargaining power diminished, and their purchasing power devalued. Tens of thousands of youths fritter away their hours in the throes and ghettos of unemployment; they are an army available to nebulous bidders at any price for any nefarious deed. In this environment of no-holds barred, no questions asked, no price too high politics and commerce, not many dare to be left behind. This is the maelstrom that permeates the atmosphere, sometimes blatantly, sometimes subtly. This is the sorry pass to which the people’s party has marched the masses.
Then there is the scourge of narcotics. There was a time-and in the face of the obvious-when the ruling party repeatedly accused the opposition of criminal connections and criminality. “Produce the evidence,” taunted the latter. Another time-and again in the face of the obvious-but this time from the opposition, a nexus is alleged between the lords of the underworld and the political overlords, as such unraveled on Cadman Plaza. The inevitable response? Produce the evidence. This the frightening precipice at which the nation finds itself, compliments of a party that is loud on its innocence and bloodless hands. Seventeen years have created narco billionaires and political millionaires many times over; and somewhere in the middle are shadowy networks and secret societies of phantoms; almost all of which originated during the watch of this party. This is the believed carefully camouflaged collusive nature and confluence of party, power, and mutual protection. The Romans called it quid pro quo; the Yanks are more prosaic: there is no free lunch; Guyanese call it “hand wash hand…” Is this the same people’s party from three to four decades ago that wishes it were communist, thinks it is socialist, but now lives like capitalists?
Where is the change under the sun-or the new light from it-when the poor and unconnected has no standing in the domain of the curative processes of the law, and must grasp gratefully for the hand-out of an out-of-court settlement? When retired practitioners of the law must resort to the courts to collect monies owed, then what hope is there for the impoverished and not too literate in their own adversarial proceedings against anyone, but especially against the state? How low and petty and vindictive can a government get? I suppose the answer lies in some of the more publicized personal escapades and events that have graced an increasingly deplorable tenure.
Make no mistake: the previous ruling party was bad, real bad; it was inconceivable that it could have been surpassed in every area and sphere of operation. Yet, this is the stunning achievement of the current set of political padrinos.
But the daily struggle continues. Guyanese have proven themselves resourceful and adaptable. The stories are many of starts elsewhere with no money, no food, no roof, and no job. It is the same stories that compel individuals to move, to seek, and to lift themselves out of the pits and salt mines; to be somebody. It is because they dared to hope and dream. It was what was done seventeen years ago in the belief that it was the dawn of an environment that would nurture, and a political culture that would invigorate. Those hopes and dreams have died. And in its place, there has been social, economic, and political cannibalism of a most voracious kind. This is the state to which the ruling party has ushered the nation. And if this is considered unduly harsh, then so be it.
Yours faithfully,
GHK Lall
