Importance of working together to confront imperial domination seems to be lost on Guyana’s leadership

Dear Editor,

On July 4th, 1776 the British colonies in America declared their Independence. On July 5th, 1811 our western neighbour, Venezuela, declared its independence from the Spanish monarchy. Canada gained its independence from Great Britain on July 1st 1867 and on July 6th the Comoros Islands proclaimed its independence from France in 1975. Early July is an interesting period in recent human history that should allow this generation to ponder the price paid in the pursuit of that prize of freedom.

The other break-away from Great Britain was in November 1965, when Ian Smith proclaimed the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Rhodesia from Great Britain. But then, the international situation was quite different as Smith attempted to avoid the consequences of one-man, one-vote in a country where the white minority ruled and controlled the black majority and the country’s resources. His adventure ultimately failed for reasons well known.

In context, freedom should mean much more than the hoisting of a flag and the singing of an anthem. Importantly, it must also mean the control of the State’s natural resources for the benefit of all, and I emphasise all of the people. In essence, this is what was manifest in the American civil war.

One hundred years ago, on this date, Brazilian rebels captured Sao Paulo, killing approximately 150 persons. Fifty years ago, those of us in the political battleground recall President Nixon’s Watergate issue, also Turkey’s refusal to be pressured by the might of the United States on the question of opium production. In each of the above examples, there are useful lessons. First, that people everywhere wish to be free from the domination of others. A lesson necessary for Guyanese everywhere to learn from. However, the billion-dollar question is why leaders everywhere seem, for whatever reason, unable or unwilling to benefit from the lessons that history has to offer.

In the case of our own Guyana, the importance of us working together to confront imperial domination, sometimes disguised like the traditional wolf in sheep’s clothing, seems to be lost on the leadership of our country. Today, in our neighbouring countries, there is the worrisome prospect of hurricanes. Further afield, we don’t have the plight of Palestinians in Gaza, nor the unfolding tragedy in Sudan and Haiti.

In Guyana, we have an unbelievable situation, which is in direct contradiction to the inherited and established pattern of our Constitution and inherited norms of behaviour, a practice for good reasons, where senior public servants must not appear to be involved in the cut and thrust of party politics. Not so in Guyana. We have senior members of the PPP defending the indefensible. That is, a Permanent Secretary being intimately involved in Partisan Party Politics. Shameful and totally unacceptable.

We must be reminded however, that certain attitudes and beliefs by the governing party top brass, the PPP, seem changeless. Remember, the highly regarded and respected public servant Arthur Abraham was transferred from the Premier’s Office to a lesser Ministry, we were told on promotion. Recall, Arthur Abraham perished with his seven children in a fire set by an arsonist at his home in Hadfield Street sixty (60) years ago. Is it that we have a ruling group that has scant or no regard for senior public servants who are not sycophants nor persons? An unhappy situation, where professionalism, competence and integrity have all taken flight.

This letter poses the question to young Guyanese, many born after the Abraham fire, whether the attitude of the PPP has changed?

Citizens of every age or class who are witnessing this development must let the powers that be know that such behaviour is unacceptable. Supporters of the Party in Office should realise that when you tear asunder the already delicate fabric of our society, all of us, everyone of us, become the hapless and helpless victims.

Let our Independence be meaningful, let our Independence translate to be liberation, let our Independence mean that this vast wealth given to us be fairly distributed, so that poverty and want disappear. Let our Independence mean that those in office have the good sense to involve the Opposition in so far as the use of revenues, oil, gas, gold, diamonds, timber, and other non-renewable natural resources.

Yours truly,

Hamilton Green