THE public awoke to read another bitter and petty political editorial published by the Stabroek News newspaper on Saturday, January 4, 2025. This biased, weird, uninspiring, uninformed, and disingenuous political commentary was aimed at making the grand point of criticising the manner in which the current government and the People’s Progressive Party have responded to questions about its track record in office since August 2020.
This piece of political garbage disguised as an editorial was headlined, “What about ism” and sought to say that there was political “deflection” happening during the “silly season” by the PPP, and it cited what it said was examples. It made the point that the PPP was referring to the past and too dependent on its history to contextualise the development and problems that exist today. It poured cold water on this strategy, saying, for instance, that “A cycle of endless what about-ism fails to tackle the pressing issues we are facing. Whether related to systemic challenges impacting law enforcement, governance, or public services, shifting blame does not lead to solutions. Instead, it reveals a political class that refuses to accept responsibility for failures.”
Finally, this funny but dangerous editorial attempted to make the point that the young people were disinterested and delinked from the past eras of what had occurred under the presidencies of Forbes Burnham and Cheddi Jagan, as they hadn’t experienced them or lived through them, so there was little relevance in constantly referencing them as opposed to dealing condignly with today’s issues.
The editorial appeared to sound intelligent by calling on our national leaders, more so the PPP, to stop this political behaviour in this election year, and address the ‘here and now’ issue of public criticisms and concerns.
Any right-thinking and objective Guyanese would throw this issue of the Stabroek News editorial in the garbage bin where it belongs. This is not the first time that the newspaper has offered up its skewered political narrative in the form of an editorial to attempt to shape the minds of Guyanese voters about politics, and the government’s strategy on information and dealing with criticism. It is duplicitous, hypocritical, and dangerous for the newspaper to seek to downplay the importance of the role of political history when dealing with public criticisms, questions, and public information.
This is not the writing of objective journalists or journalistic management staff. These are writings of a hopeless political hand hired clandestinely by the PNC or AFC opposition or the civil society phantom group, who is hiding behind the security of the publisher’s veil with an interest and score to settle with the PPP/C or the Mohamed Irfaan Ali Administration.
All Guyanese must now see this editorial as a misuse of the journalistic privilege given to the media to write about issues how they see them in a fair, independent and objective manner. This editorial was not fair, objective, or independent. It is nasty and objectionable.
Firstly, to pick it apart, everyone who is anyone knows the role of history in politics. It goes without saying that a nation that forgets its history is bound to repeat it over and over again in different forms, experiences and dilemmas.
So, that is what the government is doing while it is answering the tough questions daily about its track record. On one hand, it is seeking to take the public down memory lane to a period of governance in Guyana’s history when the political opposition did and said certain things that stalled and jeopardised development. On the other hand, it turns to the development or progress that has been made by the government in a number of areas now, taking into constant consideration the challenges it faces and continues to face with the implementation and execution of public projects and policies.
This is how public officials and PPP/C politicians work. They take accountability and make tough decisions about the socioeconomic fabric of society. This is called transparency, not political deflection or offering “what isms” according to the Stabroek News editorial.
Nothing stops the other side of the political divide from referring to their historical record of development, or stating the missteps of the successive PPP/C Governments on a particular front, as they are prone to do at many of their public and private events. So, why is it that the editorial appears to be calling out the PPP government for doing this, and the opposition is notorious for doing the same if not worst?
The Vice-President, Ministers of Agriculture, Sports, Health, Public Works, Education, and all other ministers have a right to speak about history, historical developments, and historical information when they are answering questions and giving solutions to the problems facing the various sectors.
Who is the Stabroek News or wider media to suggest otherwise? The truth hurts, and the ministers must not let themselves be lectured by the writers of this spurious editorial. They must continue to keep the political fight up, because many of the people in the public have short and sometimes bad memories or suffer a bout of selective amnesia like the Stabroek News editorial writers.
Secondly, it was rich for the editorial to mention the eras of Burnham and Jagan, and political relevance in the process of answering questions.
Does it not reference developments and movement that its founder, the late David DeCaires was a part of during his struggle to have a free press in Guyana when talking about media freedom and development in Guyana?
So, why does it pain Stabroek News to see the very same referencing made by politicians here who use the experience of their founders to make political assessments about the past and present? Be fair; this editorial article has no sound basis and is clutching at straws.
Both leaders, their legacies and experiences are relevant, and will be relevant for the future in explaining the past, present, and future story of Guyana. It’s disingenuous to suggest, therefore, that young voters do not want to know or simply do not care much about the legacies of these political powerhouses, and the political instances they went through now. It is petulant to say young voters from the 18 to 35 age bracket are tired or unconcerned about the historical explanations of what occurred on the way to having development or facing a particular problem currently.
This information is both relevant and crucial to creating a lasting impression on the minds of the young people who inevitably understand current governance and developmental problems faced by the government. The PPP/C believes in giving a holistic education to young people as opposed to dealing with the problems of the present in a vacuum without context, substance, and form.
From the looks of it, this editorial woefully missed the point. Young Guyanese need to know about Jagan and Burnham to appreciate the development they are currently experiencing, because many of them take it for granted. They are not used as examples every time government officials are purportedly called to account for a deficiency. This simply does not happen, and is a stretch from reality. Shortcomings, challenges and problems are addressed forthrightly at the press encounters with the media. They might not be how the media wants or is hoping they will be addressed, but they are addressed.
For example, **GPL and GuySuCo issues are taking significant time and government resources to address, and yet still one gets the unfair impression that this government is doing nothing. The problem started decades ago, and was seemingly not being addressed during the APNU+AFC regime’s time in office, but no, to say that would be a crime for this government to explain the issues.
Burnham and Jagan will only sleep comfortably knowing that Guyanese learned from their mistakes, and are actively correcting their shortcomings in the process of development. Period.
Thirdly, accountability and transparency are not for the PPP or ministers alone. It is for the APNU+AFC and PNC as well. What is good for the goose must be good for the gander too.
The problem is the powers that be in media and sections of society do not want to hold the opposition politicians to the same standards that they like to hold the PPP. They do not care whenever they hear absurd, stupid untruths about the members of APNU+AFC and PNC time in office or the governance of our country. They do not like having the truth told about their scandal-ridden and spotted records in office, and outside of office.
The media is guilty of letting them get away with many of the things they did to Guyanese while in office. They should be quizzed as hard as Jagdeo and President Ali about their positions, and past and current misdemeanours politically and while in office. No era should be left out when painting the picture of Guyana. We must talk facts and truths about our political past, regardless of when or where we are speaking, or whether we are answering questions.
The media must use its editorials more responsibly to benefit the public. Their positions have to be fair and more consistent with the truth, and not flights of fantasy about the use of tools of political deflection in an election year. We must not accept this sort of lazy journalism and seek to pass it off as commentary. It is not.
While there is no burden to be factual when writing the commentary in the sections of the public media, there is an expectation that one stays close to it and expresses an informed view to stir the minds of its audience and evoke thoughts. After all, this piece of commentary said a lot about nothing and made a mountain out of a molehill. It unduly criticised the government and sought to undermine the effectiveness of its messaging. It played a trick on our minds by getting our attention off what the government ministers were saying about the APNU+AFC and PNC track records in and out of power, to simply thinking about problems facing us now without understanding that we must have a complete picture to solve the problem.
It downplayed the role of our political history and its place in solving the current government and political challenges. It questioned the government and politicians use of historical information and experiences of Jagan and Burnham in getting the government’s narrative of development across to the citizenry.
Finally, this editorial weaponised the term “what about ‘ism” at this stage in our political history when we are merely seeking accountability and transparency for both sides, and both political establishments.
So, does this editorial mean we should forget historical information, blunders and transgressions committed by any government, and just move forward without any closure? Is it suggesting that the media does not ask difficult questions about the issues of national importance of the opposition and government of the day?
Is it suggesting forgetting our history, however uncomfortable and perplexing it may be, in search of answers and justice? Is it saying to suddenly deny hundreds of thousands of young people the benefit of an informal and perfectly practical political education because they did not live through a period of our history and have no recollection?
No. The PPP/C Government and party are like elephants and dinosaurs of the past. They have lived through every phase of political and economic development and underdevelopment in this country. It has a story worth telling the young and adults about the Guyana we live in now and the Guyana it was many years ago. It seems history will be told by the PPP/C now and in the future about politics in Guyana to make certain it is never repeated in modern times.
The same monotonous cycle, forever asking, “What about…?” will uncover many solutions, and keep exposing the hypocrisy, duplicity, and double standards of the opposition. It is not deflection at its best by government, it is however telling the truth with a sense of duty and responsibility to the public. It isn’t merely done to perpetuate a cycle of blame and avoidance but to tell the whole story.
There is a danger of telling one side of the story of Guyana’s development without referencing the past and historical information. It seems like the PPP will not let themselves fall into the trap set by the politicians in the Stabroek News.