Reflections on October 1953

THE month of October is a very important one in the annals of Guyanese and Caribbean modern political history. It was this month 63 years ago that the British colonial government landed troops in the then British Guiana to topple the first democratically elected government in the soon-to-be-independent country.Thirty years later the American government landed troops in Grenada to topple what was left of the first revolutionary government in the Anglophone Caribbean. In both instances, ideological considerations in pursuit of hegemony propelled the actions of the invaders. Conversely, in both instances, the independence of the Caribbean was questioned and assaulted. Guyana never recovered from that 1953 action and Grenada and the Caribbean have since 1983 lost part of its collective soul.

In Guyana, the landing of British troops have had lasting consequences. The tenuous nationalist political unity disintegrated and despite efforts at repair work over the years, it has remained in a state of disrepair. The country’s politics since then has been perhaps the most acrimonious in the Anglophone Caribbean. Since the split of the nationalist movement along ethnic lines in 1955, the country has never regained a sense of shared nationhood which appeared possible with the victory of the original PPP at the first election under universal adult suffrage in 1953.

The PPP of that time was a coalition of multi-ethnic elites who were able to construct a similar electoral support base among the mainly working people of the two major ethnic groups. Despite ethnic concerns, the party was able to win a majority of the popular votes and the parliamentary seats with the ethnic masses in some instances supporting candidates of the opposite ethnic group. It was a moment of hope that independence would be achieved against the background of a shared nationalism, but by 1955 that hope was dealt a fatal blow.

The disintegration of the movement has its roots in the very historical evolution of the country—a history that is grounded in complexity. Since the arrival of Chinese, Portuguese and East Indians as indentured labourers in the wake of African Emancipation, there has been a dual praxis in Guyana. On the one hand, there has been the praxis of suspicion, discord and insecurity by the various groups born of the time and manner in which they arrived in Guyana. This praxis was quickly and firmly planted and naturally promoted and exploited by the colonial regime in the first years of the arrival of the so-called indentured labourers. On the other hand, there developed a praxis of solidarity and common resistance in the face of the viciousness of Crown Colony colonialism. As Walter Rodney’s History of the Guyanese Working People testifies, the groups found ways to overcome their insecurities.

Since 1955, the two ethnic groups both at the level of the elites and the masses have displayed insecurities and fears. Except for a brief moment when Walter Rodney and his Working People’s Alliance (WPA) succeeded in crafting a multi-ethnic activist resistance against the Forbes Burnham government of that time, there has been a disinclination to embrace a common nationalism. The outcome has been disheartening.

Unaccountable government, persistent economic stagnation and visceral ethnic discourses and narratives have been the norm.

Yet both the idealists and the active politicians in our midst have continued to hold out hope that the country can rise above its ailment.

The current government came to power as a result of a more ethnically diverse electoral base, but that has not spared it the mono-ethnic tag.

The Leader of the Opposition has been outspoken about the ethnic base of its party’s support and the implications of that for the shaping of the party’s interpretation of government’s action and policies. Similarly, African-Guyanese interest groups have been persistent in highlighting the group’s victimhood during the tenure of the PPP government.

All of the parties have expressed some degree of commitment to genuine inclusive governance, but none has been able to move the process beyond rhetoric. Recently, the President in his address to Parliament put the issue once again on the table, but no sooner had the words left his mouth,than the Opposition Leader questioned his sincerity.

Such retort is a code for disinterest. Similarly, the government has created a Ministry of Social Cohesion, but its work is hampered by the disinterest of the political opposition and the ministry’s own ambivalence about its mandate.

In the meantime, Guyana continues to drift from moments of optimism to long seasons of alienation. The legacy of slavery and colonialism continue to take their toll on the country, which like others of a similar history has had to constantly withstand the challenges of a global order that still maintains the praxis of domination by the mighty. And the doom is heightened when the burden of ethnic discord is added to that reality.