Once there are distinct ethnic groups in a society, particularly a small one such as this, these will often, although not always, generate their own political definition. This does not mean that the members of such groups are necessarily inevitably hostile to other groups in the society, and in fact at a social and cultural level we have in a general sense not done too badly in comparison with certain other multi-ethnic countries. However, in our case at a political level we have had a situation where there was one dominant ethnic party demographically speaking, and a party representing a less numerous ethnic group which did not see any prospect of attaining office on its own through electoral means. This has led to political and racial tensions, sometimes accompanied by violence, along with aberrations such as vote rigging. Both parties were too large to be suppressed by the other.
Right from the outset the confrontation between the PPP and PNC has had its origins in the appetite for power, and both of them have used race and sometimes overt and/or concealed racism in pursuit of that end. It might be noted that we are not the only country in the region with political parties based on ethnicity: Trinidad is not so far different from us, except that owing to their demographics they have been able to achieve changes of government without the violence and the rigging. Our neighbour Suriname has far more ethnicities than we do as well as parties to match, and this has necessitated all recent governments being coalitions.
As in many multi-ethnic societies there are mutual suspicions here, sometimes accompanied by racist-style stereotyping which is not always associated directly with politics, although there are frequently times when it is. The case of the 2020 race riots in West Coast Berbice in this respect is instructive. Although originating in the murder of two African teenage cousins, to which the residents of the area imparted a racist interpretation but not a political one, they came to an end mostly owing to an intervention by the Chair of the PNCR.
There have been other protests with a racial patina, sometimes mostly peaceful, but representing a response to police actions. The Golden Grove demonstrations following the killing of Quindon Bacchus by the police began largely peacefully in a march down the East Coast, but took a frightening turn at Mon Repos where the market and Indian vendors were attacked by the men on motorcycles and bicycles.
Criminal elements have played roles in political violence on behalf of the PNC in more riotous times in the past, and nowadays even where that party is not directly involved in a given event they will often emerge under cover of a demonstration targeting Indians for robbery and violence. As for the police, the African community often eyes them with a certain suspicion, since they are perceived as having political connections with the PPP/C and acting on their behalf. The force is predominantly African, and the government is more concerned with security and control by manipulating elements of the senior hierarchy than it is with developing a professional body. It is not a formula for racial security.
The governing party justifies its actions, particularly its refusal to deal with the opposition, on the grounds that it is democratic and the latter is not; that it has what political scientists call ‘performance legitimacy’; and that it is the only ‘multiracial party’ in the country.
Where the last is concerned the local government elections while resulting in some modest advances in APNU strongholds demonstrated that with the demise of the AFC there is no such thing as a multiracial party in this country. It must be remembered too that the two major parties have always functioned as more than political entities. It is where constituents have gone when they had certain kinds of problems, and even although the PNCR is much diminished, it is still seen as a security umbrella for the base. No matter how much money is distributed in one form or another to its members, that will probably remain so for the foreseeable future.
As for democracy, it has to be noted that the ruling party’s definition of this is very limited and relates only to free and fair elections. And even there it is not above reproach, holding on illegally to the AFC’s seat in Linden after the 2006 election. Then there was the 2015 election which they insisted was rigged, even although declared free and fair by overseas observers. It might be mentioned that the PPP/C did not hold local government elections for 21 years; these were brought back by the coalition.
That apart the PPP/C is obsessed with control of all spaces in the society. With the arrogance of power, coupled with its sense of paranoid insecurity deriving from its earlier political history it wants its own people in all key positions including in supposedly autonomous institutions. And this does not mean that it necessarily equates race with allegiance. What matters is that the official of whatever ethnicity in senior positions reflects its wishes, or at a minimum leans in its favour. While the party may depend on ethnicity in the pursuit of power, where critical individual appointments are concerned it does not confuse race with political partisanship. In addition, merit is not a primary consideration.
The main consequence of this is poor quality governance. The best qualified person to head the EPA, for example, was dismissed on political grounds, since then that agency has functioned more like an arm of the ruling party than a body devoted to the protection of this country’s environment. And we still don’t have a permanent Chancellor and Chief Justice, no doubt because the President and his party seek appointees whom they feel will be sympathetic to their views. The party seems oblivious to the fact that any major decision reached by a judge here can be appealed to the CCJ, over which the government has no sway.
The problem with controlling every institution and governing from the centre, is not just that it is inefficient and if carried to its logical conclusion will mean the country eventually becomes a one-party state albeit within the parameters of democratic national elections, but that it reinforces political racial perceptions. In times of ethnic stress, no matter where these occur, the central government will be seen as the problem. If there is no room for communities to resolve their own racial difficulties, or for local authorities to deal with disputes involving members of different races and recourse is always had to the central government, then the central government will be seen as playing a racial role.
This is exacerbated by perceptions that where contracts and the disposition of land is concerned these go largely to the friends and cronies of the ruling party. Whether true or not, that is how the matter is seen by APNU supporters, and it takes on a racial dimension. For its part the situation is not helped by Freedom House accusing the opposition of racism for making the criticisms in the first place.
Then there is the matter of performance legitimacy, with the PPP convinced it is handling the nation’s oil wealth with “skill and care”, as a recent Chronicle editorial described it, and has set Guyana on a development path. As such, critics are regarded as anti-development and by extension unpatriotic. No matter their race or their qualifications or their experience, they have been relentlessly attacked. There is only one legitimate vision of development, it seems, and it is the PPP alone which can supply it. All that can be said about this is that it is a dogma which goes beyond race and undermines democracy at all levels.
The problems of governance in this country do not only relate to race, but the race factor complicates solutions. It will not be solved by One Guyana Commissions, but by the existence of autonomous institutions, less centralised control, accountability at all levels and professionalism at all levels, an independent judiciary, cooperation with the opposition, far more freedom of action for local bodies, and a greater sense of fairness in the society. Where racism without politics is involved, as far as possible the communities should be left to address that.
