I AM an eternal progressive who emerged from the bowels of the University of Guyana students politics. My first meaningful engagement with Guyanese politics came in 2003 when I led the students’ fight for justice for Yohance Douglas. At that time, we were all naïve and over-zealous students dreaming of a progressive society where laws and due process would trump power and entrenched institutional privilege. Sadly, the realities of intractable Guyanese politics hit us like a ton of bricks.

We never received the justice we marched for under the diabolic rule of the PPP cabal. Most of us were disheartened and withdrew from public activism. We were resigned in the defeatist fate that the People’s Progressive Party would rule forever as long as ethnic politics prevailed. Friends made contact with me and encouraged me to return to public activism, I consistently declined. I made it known that I do not believe anything would make sense. I was encouraged with the arguments of the ‘shared governance’ chattering classes, but I remained subdued.

THE EMERGENCE OF A PROGRESSIVE CANDIDATE
My interest in the Guyanese politics was rekindled in 2011 when Robert Corbin announced that he will not return as the presidential candidate of the People’s National Congress and there would be national debates between their presidential candidates. Disbelief was my sentiment over what I was reading in the Stabroek News, this development was tantamount to the primaries that are part of American politics. The candidates went directly to the membership of the party in each region and presented their arguments. During these debates for the top spot of the party, Faith Harding, James Bond, Basil Williams, Carl Greenidge and David Granger exchanged ideas. Candidate David Granger’s knowledge of Guyana and willingness to embrace new ideas and accept constructive critique on the debate stage gave me a clear indication that he was a progressive at heart. He earned the position of presidential candidate through this very progressive and democratic process. We were encouraged and joined the movement to save Guyana from destruction by the PPP.

THE TRIUMPH OF COALITION POLITICS
In 2011, progressive politics continued its march forward under the aegis of Mr Granger when the Guyana Action Party, the Guyana Association of Local Authorities, the Guyana National Congress, the Guyana People’s Partnership, the Guyana Youth Congress, the Justice for All Party, the National Democratic Front, the National Front Alliance, the People’s National Congress (PNC) and the Working People’s Alliance joined the with the PNC and formed A Partnership for National Unity (APNU). This big tent idea with a diverse ideas and membership could not have been possible without someone at the helm who was thinking beyond the mundane vicissitudes of Guyanese politics. After the 2011 elections, the results showed that APNU received 139, 678 votes, the People’s Progressive Party attained 166, 340 votes and the Alliance For Change (AFC) acquired 35, 333 votes. This translated into 32 seats of the PPP, 26 seats for APNU and 7 seats for the AFC. A light bulb went off in the heads of progressives. They calculated that if there is the combination of the two opposition parties, the PPP could be defeated. Understandably, the joining of forces that stood at the opposite side of the Guyanese political spectrum for decades was an impossibility for some. I was optimistic because I knew once Mr Granger was leading the negotiations, it would happen and rightly so, it did. The rest is recent Guyanese history.

The Complaints
At the beginning of 2019, in the post-NCM period, some opportunistic men who proclaimed to be progressive forces began a clarion call for a third force. They argued that the AFC was dead and Guyanese had been betrayed by the promise of change in the 2015 elections. For me, the call against the movement was harried and unjustified after just four years. In addition, they pointed to the lack of progress on issues such as LGBT rights, the decriminalisation of marijuana and constitutional reform. I don’t think they fully grasp the fact that Mr Granger is the first President to exercise political leadership over a coalition of 10 parties in a rapidly transforming society. There is a difference between being a progressive and a reactionary. The point was made that gradualism is best in certain political contexts and political leadership requires careful stewardship. The leadership displayed by President Granger over the last four years in the most difficult of circumstances has made this eternal progressive anxious to vote for him on Monday.