Dear Editor,
Expressions of a desire for positive change appear in discussions across Guyana’s political spectrum. However, differences soon emerge, and they are always underpinned by the issue of race. If there are numerous areas of agreement, but only one source of difference, shouldn’t we openly examine that source?
Reference is made to Mr Ralph Ramkarran’s most recent article, which was featured in the Sunday Stabroek of December 28, and on his Facebook page. Mr Ramkarran writes, “The electorate will be called upon in 2015 to decide the political shape of Guyana for the immediate future. The performance of the economy and resolution of social problems will be dominant considerations. The electorate will punish the party in office if it feels that its economic and social conditions have not improved.” Implicit in Mr Ramkarran’s piece is his recognition that Guyanese think before they vote, as opposed to blindly voting as a means of expressing their identity. While Mr Ramkarran’s article did not focus on the issue of race, for many Guyanese the theme was uppermost in their minds, based on the comments on his Facebook page.
Editor, in a previous letter (‘We take intellectual shortcuts when voting,’ SN December 16), I had said that Guyanese do indeed consider their own interests before casting a ballot. I had said too, that Guyana’s racial voting pattern is the result of the voter consciously considering the ‘race’ of a party as the major factor which may determine whether or not that party will make his/her life better. It appears that Mr Ramkarran and I may share that opinion.
In his column, Mr Ramkarran writes, “There is no great difference in the economic philosophies of the main political parties…” Editor, I too share this view. In my letter I had written, “…we know that in Guyana there are no major policy differences among political parties, and the interests and concerns of all Guyanese are relatively homogeneous…”
It appears then, that we agree that, 1) voters think about their own interests before they vote, 2) political parties in Guyana are fundamentally similar, and 3) voters may change their voting behaviour based on considerations of their circumstances. It follows then, that leaders have the ability to convince voters to change their voting behaviour.
Editor, one will agree that the problem which progressive leaders must solve is, how to get Guyanese to think beyond race. Mr Ramkarran’s piece suggests that he believes that it can be done.
Unfortunately, the question of how, has never been satisfactorily explored.
Editor, we know that window dressing a party has not worked; arguably, all three parliamentary parties have tried it to no avail. Additionally, the AFC has proven that cobbling together a mix of political personalities under one umbrella also will not work. One may say that those tactics only scratch the surface, while leaving the underlying problem untouched.
Evidently, pro-democracy leaders must change their approach. Superficial tinkering has not and will not work; leaders must attack the problem at the root, at the level of the thought-process of the voter him/herself.
Editor, I have always believed that a problem cannot be solved unless it is examined and understood. Leaders must therefore go to the people, ask them why they vote the way that they do, and try to understand their concerns. To do that, leaders must first acknowledge the race issue, bring it into the open, expose all its facets, and encourage a national discussion about it. Guyana will not make progress if leaders continue to pretend that we do not have a problem, while feeding the beast by covertly pandering to racial sensibilities. The time has come for total honesty.
Political analysts, commentators and observers must also be forthright. Guyanese know that apart from subtle racial appeals, some political opportunists are guilty of blatant race-baiting. Editor, obviously, when discussing this issue, emotions may run high. It may therefore be understandable that many analysts are reluctant to say which politicians are to blame. Instead, commentators are often vague in their critiques and inadvertently paint all political aspirants with the same brush. The fact is though, some politicians try to incite racial animosity and some do not. Analysts must be honest; they need to acknowledge the reality that given the makeup of Guyana’s population, only some politicians could benefit from race-baiting, not all. Leaders who are perceived to represent racial minorities have no reason to appeal to race.
The reaction of Facebook commentators to Mr Ramkarran’s piece says it all; Guyanese are ready for an open discussion about the racial problem. Political leaders and analysts alike, should take their cue from the people and facilitate candid discussions. Talking about the problem is not a solution, but it may mark the beginning of the journey to finding one. Granted, many view the issue as a hot potato; if not handled correctly, it could burn. And we may expect that once a national discussion starts, the political race-baiters will do everything possible to poison the atmosphere with incendiary rhetoric. But the alternative is not attractive. In any case, difficult though it will be, if the people decide to talk about the problem, they will. And leaders can choose to either provide wise leadership or be left behind as the discussions go on without them.
Yours faithfully,
Mark DaCosta
