Veteran activist and executive member of the Working People’s Alliance (WPA), Tacuma Ogunseye, has warned that political fear has become deeply entrenched in Guyanese society, creating a culture of self-censorship and weakening citizens’ willingness to challenge perceived oppression and abuse of power.
In a letter published Saturday in Village Voice News, Ogunseye argued that while Guyanese frequently debate the country’s economic, social and political conditions, there is a noticeable reluctance to confront what he described as the “politics of fear” that increasingly shapes public behaviour.
“I seek to raise the issue of fear in our society, particularly political fear,” Ogunseye wrote. “This prevailing paralysis, while undeniable, is often glossed over in public political discussions.”
His intervention comes amid growing concerns among some academics, opposition figures and civil society advocates about democratic backsliding and the concentration of political power in Guyana.
Earlier this month, political scientist and former People’s Progressive Party (PPP) minister Dr. Henry Jeffrey warned that Guyana is experiencing a form of autocratic governance in which democratic institutions remain formally intact while dissent, accountability and inclusion are increasingly weakened. Jeffrey argued that the country’s political trajectory represents the most serious democratic challenge since Independence and cautioned against what he described as democracy being “undermined from within.”
Against that backdrop, Ogunseye contended that fear has become one of the principal mechanisms through which power is maintained.
According to him, many Guyanese question why citizens appear reluctant to challenge perceived injustices, but such questions often serve to shift responsibility onto others rather than encouraging self-examination and action.
“We have become people who want change without sacrifice, a notion inconsistent with our history,” he wrote.
Drawing on Guyana’s historical struggles against slavery, indentureship and colonialism, Ogunseye argued that meaningful progress has always required resistance and collective action.
“Our greater problem is that we are afraid to confront fear itself, because doing so inevitably raises the question: what is to be done?” he stated. “We have allowed those who govern to cultivate a politics of fear that has encouraged us to police ourselves.”
The WPA executive said Guyanese have not forgotten the lessons of past struggles. Rather, he argued, fear has become internalized to the point where citizens often impose limits on themselves before the state even acts.
“In effect, we engage in self-inflicted fear, granting our rulers far more power over us than they actually possess,” he wrote.
Ogunseye further argued that no major section of society has made a sustained effort to challenge what he sees as a growing culture of intimidation.
“To date, no major section of society, whether political or civil, has given sustained commitment to challenging this culture of fear,” he said.
He identified the WPA as one of the few organizations to have consistently raised the issue, pointing to the party’s position during the 2023 Local Government Elections, when it called for what it described as “an African and national uprising” in response to concerns about intimidation affecting African-Guyanese communities and unresolved opposition grievances.
Ogunseye’s concerns also echo longstanding debates about the relationship between political power and fear in Guyana. The country endured decades of authoritarian rule, electoral manipulation and political intimidation during the post-Independence era, experiences that scholars and political observers have argued left lasting effects on public trust and civic engagement.
The WPA executive also lamented the decline of organised labour as a force for political and social mobilisation.
“Trade unions played an important role in the struggle against oppression and exploitation long before the formation of political parties,” he wrote.
However, he argued that unions have been weakened by repression and changing international circumstances, resulting in a diminished capacity to mobilize citizens around common causes.
“Solidarity forever,” once a rallying cry of labour’s collective strength, “has lost its effectiveness and is now a mere slogan,” he stated.
Ogunseye further identified Guyana’s deep ethnic and political polarization as another obstacle to collective action.
“I have long held the view that Guyanese society is too racially and politically polarised for sustained united action against the rulers,” he wrote.
According to him, polarization has deepened insecurity and mistrust among ethnic communities, making society more vulnerable to manipulation and less capable of mounting broad-based resistance.
Yet he insisted that such realities should not become an excuse for inaction.
“Just as individuals must struggle with their weakness, nations do the same,” he wrote.
Ogunseye argued that citizens committed to changing the country’s direction have a duty to initiate action rather than waiting for political leaders to solve the problem.
“Fundamentally, there are two options: accept the situation or fight back,” he stated.
While acknowledging that national unity would be preferable in confronting political fear, he suggested that meaningful resistance is unlikely to emerge in the short term without significant mobilization within the African-Guyanese community.
At the same time, he stopped short of prescribing a specific strategy, saying his intention was not to offer a blueprint for resistance but to encourage public discussion and action.
“There is no need for me to provide an exhaustive catalogue of how fear operates in Guyana,” he wrote. “Most citizens encounter it in everyday life.”
He cited examples including public servants who avoid criticising government policies for fear of jeopardizing their jobs, citizens reluctant to attend opposition meetings because they fear victimization, and community leaders who remain silent on public issues to avoid losing access to state contracts, resources or opportunities.
According to Ogunseye, these are manifestations of a broader political culture in which self-censorship has become normalized.
“The big challenge is therefore not understanding how fear works but building the confidence, solidarity, and organization necessary to overcome it and ask the enduring question: What is to be done?” he wrote.
In concluding his letter, Ogunseye said he hopes to contribute to a broader national conversation about confronting fear before its consequences become more severe.
“The choice before us is clear,” he wrote. “Either we confront and defeat political fear, thereby restoring our freedom, or we continue to facilitate our own domination.”
