Dear Editor,
In the relentless political drama unfolding in Guyana, a disturbing pattern has emerged; a government that operates on the archaic principle of ‘an eye for an eye’, while the opposition, in stark contrast, seems to perpetually ‘turn the other cheek’. This imbalance has not only perpetuated a cycle of suffering for opposition supporters but has also raised serious questions about the nature of political retaliation and resistance in our nation.
The PPP government’s record is marred with acts that resonate with an ‘eye for an eye’ mentality. The extrajudicial killing of over 400 young men, the bulldozing of farms in Buxton, and the murders of Crum-Ewing, Waddell, and Satesh Sawh – these actions are part of a pattern of targeted aggression. This government’s actions do not stop at violence; they extend to systemic oppression, exemplified by the bulldozing of Mocha, the apparent indifference to the murder of the Henry cousins, and the seizure of land from African citizens. This litany of atrocities goes on, each act more brazen than the last, with seemingly no retribution from those in opposition.
On the other side of this political battlefield, the opposition’s response over the years can only be described as limp and tepid and this approach has not only failed to protect the supporters of the opposition but has inadvertently placed them in a position of increased vulnerability. Editor, it is my view that the opposition’s failure to match the PPP’s venom, to stand firm against aggression, has left their supporters exposed and unsafe.
This glaring disparity in response and retaliation raises a fundamental question about the nature of political resistance. If the PPP’s approach is one of relentless aggression, should the opposition not match this with equal force? If ‘an eye for an eye’ is a policy that leads us to collective blindness, perhaps it is time to embrace this blindness rather than continue to suffer in a lopsided political battlefield.
It’s time for the opposition to reevaluate its strategy. The principle of ‘turning the other cheek’, while noble in theory, has in practice left its supporters defenseless against a government that does not shy away from vindictive and aggressive tactics. The PPP’s actions have gone unanswered for too long, creating a dangerous precedent that threatens the very fabric of our democratic society.
Our leaders must recognize the dire need for a change in their approach. Matching the PPP’s venom does not necessarily mean replicating their methods of violence and oppression. Rather, it calls for a robust and unyielding stand against injustices, for proactive measures that protect their supporters, and for a relentless pursuit of accountability and could include calls for boycotts, protests, relentless court action and more.
If an ‘eye for an eye’ is the only language that the current government understands, then perhaps it is time for the opposition to speak this language, not to perpetuate a cycle of violence, but to break it and pave the way for a truly equitable and just Guyana.
Shane Headley
