Latest update April 19th, 2024 12:59 AM
Oct 04, 2012 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon
One of the fundamental differences between journalism and political theory is, depending on the culture and country you are operating in, political theory has to undergo modification. Not so with journalism. No two nations are alike, therefore when you apply a sociological or political theory to a particular country you have to take into consideration, the peculiar strands of that territory.
Perhaps the most graphic example is Trinidad and Guyana. They appear similar in sociological and cultural structures, but there are profound differences that would render difficult the general application of the theory of pluralism to both nations. Trinidad has not lost its Westminster culture in which inhere a set of core democratic principles that prevent party domination of State institutions. In Guyana, we threw that away decades ago.
Trinidad has not lost its influential middle class. There is a large non-propertied, intellectual middle class in Trinidad, around which political narratives revolve. Thirdly, State behaviour has never ever, not even under Eric Williams, reached the levels of depravity as we see in Guyana from 1980 to the present time in Guyana.
Finally, there are a not-so-small percentage of Africans and East Indians in Trinidad that have always voted politically rather than ethnically. One’s research is bound to be unproductive if one sees Trinidad and Guyana as similar societies and attempts to study them using the plural model, without modifications.
Journalism does not have this flexibility. There are fundamental approaches to journalistic functions that go over and beyond the peculiar nature of the country you are operating in. But you do find some strange things in some lands that at least columnists need to be aware of. Guyanese are people, because of the history of mistrust the past sixty years, tend to be suspicious of certain types of reporting and commentaries, if they are not backed by specific details.
If you say that you saw a parliamentarian behave rudely to a shop attendant without citing the witnesses, you run the risk of being accused of journalistic embellishment. This is the way Guyanese think. To preserve the integrity of your reporting, it is best to identify the prominent lawyer or doctor or businessman who was present in the store and saw the incident. It is for this reason I am fully prepared to cite names and faces so I would not be accused of propaganda. And this has been my approach since I became a columnist in 1988.
A very prominent Guyanese who is known for pro-democracy activities asked me not to name him. He also insists that I do not identify the equally prominent APNU personality in question. All I can say is that when he told me what I am about write here, there were others present, including a well-known activist of the AFC who sits in the AFC’s executive and a young lawyer who is certainly not of unknown quality
This pro-democracy citizen told me how over the past week, one of the most influential leaders in APNU’s hierarchy revealed to him that APNU and the PPP are in bilateral talks and the issues are not specific, but very general and broad. He then said that he takes it to mean that at some point the power-sharing possibility will be featured.
I know after this publication, I will be asked to name the two persons. What I may consider is to identify the AFC activist and the lawyer who were present, but for ethical reasons I can’t name the person who gave me the information and the APNU politician.
I have asked one of the constituent parts of APNU if his party knows about this and was told that he is not aware. The PNC or APNU may want to keep the talks secret, because if the dialogue fails, then the PNC or APNU may face political devastation. There are endless problems with an APNU engagement with PPP leaders at this particular juncture in Guyana’s political development.
First, why would APNU choose that route rather than try to resuscitate the original tripartite formula? This is a superior avenue, because the original tripartite mechanism has sub-committees that involve members of civil society. Secondly, how can APNU enter talks with the PPP Government without first requesting some cessation of power domination? This is simple logic. If you are in confabulation with the Government, then as an opposition party you look bad in the eyes of your supporters if the Government keeps misbehaving. Thirdly, why keep it secret? Why not seek preliminary advice from civil society and the other parliamentary party, the AFC. APNU needs to issue a statement.
Please share this to every Guyanese including your house cats.
Apr 19, 2024
SportsMax – West Indies Women’s captain Hayley Matthews delivered a stellar all-round performance to lead her team to a commanding 113-run victory over Pakistan Women in the first One Day...Kaieteur News – For years, the disciples of Bharrat Jagdeo have woven a narrative of economic success during his tenure... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Waterfalls Magazine – On April 10, the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]