Independence at 60 Must Unite the Nation, Not Deepen Division

On May 26, Guyana will commemorate 60 years of Independence — a defining milestone born out of sacrifice, political struggle, labour resistance, and the determination of generations of Guyanese who fought for the right of this nation to chart its own destiny. Independence is not the property of any political party, government, or administration. It is the collective achievement of the Guyanese people.

That is why the unfolding approach to the 60th Independence celebrations by the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) government is so profoundly disappointing.

The historical irony is impossible to ignore. The PPP did not support Guyana achieving Independence under the leadership of Forbes Burnham and the People’s National Congress (PNC) government that ultimately led the country into nationhood on May 26, 1966. Yet today, the PPP appears eager to politically brand and dominate the anniversary while marginalising many of the institutions, movements, and stakeholders whose sacrifices made Independence possible.

Among those being insufficiently recognised is the trade union movement, which laid critical groundwork for Guyana’s democratic and independence struggle long before the emergence of modern party politics. As early as 1926, the trade union movement, led by figures such as Hubert Nathaniel Critchlow, was advocating for “one man, one vote” and international self-government under colonial rule — nearly 24 years before the formation of the PPP in 1950. Those struggles helped shape the political consciousness, worker mobilisation, and democratic agitation that contributed significantly to Guyana’s eventual march to Independence.

Where then is the meaningful inclusion of the trade union movement in these national celebrations?

Where is the national inclusiveness befitting such a historic observance?

Where is the meaningful engagement of the parliamentary and non-parliamentary opposition? Where is the acknowledgment of the role played by the PNC government in securing Independence? Where is the recognition of the trade union movement that fought colonial exploitation and advanced workers’ rights? Where are the grassroots communities, civic organisations, cultural workers, and ordinary Guyanese whose sweat and sacrifice built this nation?

More troublingly, where are Guyana’s artistes — the musicians, poets, dramatists, dancers, and cultural voices who have historically given emotional meaning and patriotic spirit to national celebrations? A nation cannot celebrate Independence while sidelining the very people who give expression to its soul.

Instead of using this historic milestone to heal divisions and foster national cohesion, the government appears intent on consolidating political ownership over what should be a unifying national moment. This is dangerously shortsighted.

Guyana stands today at one of the most consequential crossroads in its history. Oil wealth has transformed the country economically, but it has also intensified political competition, deepened anxieties about inequality, and heightened concerns about governance, accountability, and exclusion. Simultaneously, Guyana faces external territorial threats, rapidly shifting geopolitical realities, and mounting global economic uncertainty.

This is precisely the moment when mature, inclusive, visionary leadership is required.

Instead, too many Guyanese increasingly feel alienated within their own country because of political association, perceived affiliation, or refusal to conform. Fundamental democratic protections — including freedom of association, protection from discrimination, equal treatment, and respect for dissent — are increasingly viewed by many citizens as principles honoured selectively rather than universally.

This trajectory is deeply dangerous in a society with Guyana’s political and ethnic history.

The framers of Guyana’s constitutional reforms understood this reality. Article 13 of the Constitution speaks explicitly to “inclusionary democracy” as a principal objective of the political system. Yet more than two decades after those reforms, Guyana still struggles to meaningfully operationalise inclusive governance. The political culture remains heavily rooted in winner-take-all domination rather than shared national stewardship.

Independence celebrations should never become partisan productions wrapped in national colours.

True patriotism is not measured by the number of flags displayed, the scale of government concerts, or carefully staged public relations campaigns. Patriotism is measured by whether citizens genuinely feel respected, valued, represented, and included in the national journey.

The Irfaan Ali and Bharrat Jagdeo administration still has an opportunity to rise above narrow politics and demonstrate statesmanship worthy of this historic anniversary.

That requires opening the celebrations to all Guyanese, meaningfully involving opposition parties, engaging the trade union movement, embracing artistes and cultural workers across political lines, and honestly acknowledging the full complexity of Guyana’s Independence story — including those with whom the PPP historically disagreed.

No nation can sustainably prosper while politically fragmenting itself from within.

Oil wealth alone will not secure Guyana’s future. Roads, bridges, skyscrapers, and massive state spending will mean little if the society itself becomes more divided, distrustful, and politically hostile. Development without inclusion breeds instability. Wealth without unity breeds resentment. Progress without democracy and fairness breeds decay beneath the surface.

Sixty years after Independence, Guyana must decide whether it will mature into a truly inclusive republic or continue repeating the mistakes that have haunted its post-Independence journey.

Good sense, humility, and national maturity must prevail.

The future of the Republic may very well depend on it.