Dear Editor,
Guyana is becoming a territory of capitalistic venture. As Guyana furthers its economic relations with foreign states in the age of new opportunities, it becomes prone to a series of domestic political challenges. Furthermore, Guyana’s open market strategy, given the dawn of the local oil industry, places it on the geopolitical map, which comes with its own ramifications long associated with developing countries chasing after big revolutionary dreams. Although currently far from its founding socialist ideals of ensuring equality and equity to citizens, Guyana is undoubtedly on the verge of significant transformation. Whether political decisions will ensure such a transformation is carefully sought after in meaningful and impactful ways is left for history to inform us about the uncertainty that lies ahead. Yet, as of the current, what we are witnessing before us at the political level is the rising effect of classism of the worst kind — elitism.
When the Liza Destiny oil production ship arrived offshore of Guyana’s sovereign territory, it was celebrated by both the political and business elites at the sophisticated and luxurious Marriott Hotel — a place which attracts much political activities today compared to yesteryear when it was scrutinized on moral and financial grounds. The champagne was pouring in fine glass of crystal-clear appearance. Everyone was elegantly dressed and excited. Of course, prospective and already successful entrepreneurs were among the crowd, consisting of people not below the middle-working class. But it is those who fall below this class that makes the entire thing disconcerting, and they certainly did not make it to the celebration — perhaps folks residing in Buxton and Enmore didn’t make it to the invitation list.
The arrival of the Liza Destiny ship was to be celebrated nationally, since Government reiterated over the years about the many possibilities available to the people of Guyana during its production cycle. But who, really, are the ‘people of Guyana’ to benefit? Does it include the vast amount of sugar workers who no longer work on the plantation? What about the bauxite workers who have been exploited by foreign companies in the industry? Or perhaps the mining workers of gold and diamond, though their experience in this industry is no different than that of the bauxite workers.
Editor, there are the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots’. The ‘have-nots’ are at an obvious disadvantage. So, it begs the question, how will these people, many of whom lack the skills in, and the insights of, the lucrative oil and technological industries, meet the promise of wealth and prosperity in the coming decade, as foretold by the Government? This is especially important since measures to elevate the poor out of poverty to prosperity has been, so far, a mute discussion on the national agenda. In fact, when these discussions are raised, they become immaturely dismissed. Consider the idea of a basic income for the poor. And then there is the glaring disadvantage poor working-class people possess when it comes to 21st century technology and business education. Who or what will encourage to lift them out of this disadvantage? Or are they to be left for fate to decide? Will that fate be controlled by the few elites or by their democratic will?
There are many questions of this nature that have significant ethical implications for the overall social welfare of Guyana and its future. These questions need answers, sooner rather than later.
Yours faithfully,
Ferlin F. Pedro
