We are more enslaved now than ever before

Mar 12, 2009 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
It was Jean Jacques Rousseau in his book Social Contract who once said “man is born free but everywhere he is in chains”.
Today, in Guyana, we are all in chains. After 400 years of slavery and indentureship, 132 years of colonialism, Independence in 1966 and Republicanism in 1970, we are more enslaved than ever before.
Sadly, we have enslaved ourselves through prisms of racism, indifference to each other and by an anti human rights Westminster constitution.

We in Guyana, like everywhere else on the planet, live by a “social contract”. This social contract is defined by our Constitution. It is also defined by the laws and institutions (e.g. the Judiciary) by which we intend to live in racial harmony, justice, peace and prosperity. Unfortunately, in Guyana, this social contract has been hijacked by a cavalcade of   political gymnastics, authoritarian mayhem, propagandistic untruths, cultivated deceptions, delusions of omnipotence, and personal immorality.

Democracy in Guyana has come to mean ‘then mocking we”. Witness for example, the unmitigated gall and constitutional disrespect shown to the Parliament and the people of Guyana, by the President’s refusal to assent to over 10 bills that have been unanimously passed in Parliament.
Nowhere is this undemocratic abuse captured better, than in an article by the brilliant Arif Bulkan who lectures in the Faculty of Law at the University of the West Indies. On evaluating the Constitution he writes in an article entitled: On petty tyrannies.

“The failure to assent to Bills is yet another unwelcome piece of evidence of Guyana’s unending saga of constitutional manipulation and subversion. The serial manifestations of petty tyranny are all the more disappointing because they are being perpetrated by a political party, which used to pride itself on opposing the absolute power of the British overlords and proclaimed its adherence to the Leninist doctrine of “democratic centralism”.
Today, in Guyana, our social contract, our Constitution and our democracy have no integrity, no substance, no legal bearing, and no meaning to the lives of ordinary Guyanese. We have an illusionary contract and a delusionary King.

There is a benign savagery in the way the country is ruled. Unthinkable excesses occur. Systematic evasion of constitutional checks and balances have become the new modus operandi. Today in Guyana, illegality and immorality have become the norm. Decency…whether moral, civil, commercial, religious or political, has long been discarded…Indecency has become the new currency of daily life in Guyana.
Guyana is the new global poster boy for Executive constitutional lawlessness. The inmates are in charge of the prison.

The primary deformity in our social contract lies in the anti human rights Executive Presidency Westminster Constitution that has been imposed on us by a “ruling minority”. The essence of this deformity is that we have been brained washed to believe that democracy means the “rule of the majority”.
But what is democracy? And why have we been so brainwashed to believe that majority rights are more important than minority rights in a democracy?

In its most basic sense, democracy as articulated by Abraham Lincoln implies a “government of the people, by the people, and for the people.” Unlike other types of government, democracy claims to allow the people themselves to rule, to make the decisions that govern their lives. The people are to decide their own destiny through their participation in the political process.
There are two models of democracy that have been debated for quite some time: the majoritarian model and the consensus model of democracy.

The majoritarian interpretation of democracy argues that majorities should govern and minorities should oppose. This model gives very little credence to the concept of “the consent of the governed”, especially if a large minority exists. This concept is incompatible with the daily reality that most governments are elected by a minority and that most governments are influenced by the” rich” minority. Today, it is the minority who possess immense wealth and money who rule the so-called democratic world. Majority rule is simply a myth and an illusion.

Many leaders and great thinkers have had their say about majoritarian democracy.
Socrates, the great Greek philosopher, criticised “rule by might” democracy (majority rule) and was put in prison. He was ordered to drink a mixture containing poison hemlock, thus killing himself, which he did. Plato resented democracy so much that he designed a utopia ruled by a philosopher king. Prime Minister Winston Churchill once said, “democracy may be the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried throughout human history.” Bertrand Russell was equally un-thrilled by majority rule democracy but in the final analysis he preferred it “because there is nothing better.”

The fundamental issue for most whom oppose majority rule is that it is unfair because the majority can legalize what they want no matter how unfair it is to others. The majority can also criminalize what they don’t want no matter how unfair it might be to minorities. For Socrates, Plato, Bertrand Russell, M.P Follett and others, democracy has nothing positive in itself other than it helps to prevent certain evils.
Strangely enough, in Guyana, we have the morally indecent and ludicrous situation of an Executive Presidency that is a “majority of one”. This peculiar governance deformity has led us down the path of elected and un-elected dictatorships of a “minority” majority of one.

The PPP claims Guyana has one of the most inclusive constitutions in the world. This global immoral propaganda has made a Guyana a diplomatic laughing stock. We have an Executive President who is the Minister of Communications, Minister of Finance (1998-2006); Minister of the Environment, Minister of Energy, and Minister of Foreign Affairs when he chooses to…but this Minister does not sit in Parliament where all Ministers are constitutionally dictated to be and is immune from prosecution but not removal. Guyana is a thus a jokers wild constitutional hocus pocus paradise.
Our constitution has reduced most Guyanese, with the exception of a minority, to what David Hinds once termed “political slavery”. Others who are not in slavery are in political indentured servitude.
Not even in South Africa where the ANC won over 70 % of the vote could President Mbeki override the Judiciary.

A great West Indian and Noble Peace Prize-winning economist Sir Arthur Lewis has been foremost in challenging the majoritarian interpretation of democracy. Sir Arthur championed the consensus model of democracy by arguing, majority rule and the government- versus-opposition pattern of government that it implies, may be interpreted as undemocratic because they are principles of exclusion.

Sir Arthur Lewis stated that the primary meaning of democracy is that “all who are affected by a decision should have the chance to participate in making that decision, either directly or through chosen representatives.” According to him, “democracy’s secondary meaning is that the will of the majority shall prevail.” If this means that the winning parties may make all the governmental decisions and that the losers may only criticise but not govern, Lewis argued, the two meanings are incompatible: to exclude the losing groups from participation in decision-making clearly violates the primary meaning of democracy. He, therefore, argues, instead, for a consensus democracy:

Sir Arthur’s consensus view of democracy is especially important in countries like Guyana. He argued “especially in plural societies that are sharply divided along religious, ideological, linguistic, cultural, ethnic, or racial lines into virtually separate sub societies with their own political parties, interest groups, and media of communication the flexibility necessary for majoritarian democracy is absent. Under these conditions, majority rule is not only undemocratic but also dangerous, because minorities that are continuously denied access to power will feel excluded and discriminated against and will lose their allegiance to the regime. In plural societies, therefore, majority rule spells majority dictatorship and civil strife rather than democracy. What these societies need is a democratic regime that emphasises consensus instead of opposition, that includes rather than excludes, and that tries to maximize the size of the ruling majority instead of being satisfied with a bare majority: consensus democracy.”

Majoritarian democracy as practiced through the Executive Presidency Westminster model in Guyana is the worst form of governance for a multicultural Guyana because where all groups are racial minorities.
The situation in Guyana is even worse. The last election saw the PPP gaining power with just over 180,000 votes…which has allowed total control of Guyana’s destiny and its population of 750,000. Because of the number of voters who participated in the elections, the PPP has won with a 56 % majority. This has allowed the PPP to have the Executive Presidency as well as full control of the Cabinet, Parliament and the Judiciary. Through President Jagdeo being the Minister of Communications, the PPP also has total control over the Fourth Estate, the Media.

In Guyana, we have long forgotten the words of the Great Martin Luther King, Jr.: “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly”. Our electoral system is an injustice.
Democracy in Guyana has taken a lash on its head by successive Executive Presidents and there is a gaping wound in its head. Democracy in Guyana is on life-support systems and in critical care.

Will Guyanese continue to have this injustice continue? What legacy are we leaving for our children?
It is time to stop this anti-democracy in Guyana masquerading as a Republic. It is time for Civil Society and all caring Guyanese to demand a stop to this façade, this illusion, this magnificent masquerade we call the Executive Presidency. At the next elections, citizens must demand a legally binding contract among all political parties to get rid of this indecency, this gross monstrosity.
Are Guyanese a People of suicidal maniacs?
Eric Phillips

---

---