I AM currently teaching a course on Caribbean Politics and Political Economy. The students seem to be into the subject, especially as I am using Globalization, a construct with which they are familiar, as the frame for the course. Once the students got the drift of the course, they began to ask some very piercing questions. At the conclusion of our discussion of Michael Manley’s Democratic Socialism, one student asked why, given its success of social reforms in the 1970s in favour of the poor, the concept is not being applied as a solution to the social problems Caribbean societies currently face.

As a teacher, you don’t only teach, you also learn; the students’ questions and insights often force you to think anew about old subjects, and renew your own insights and perspectives. I answered the student’s question, but I have been thinking about it for the last few days. One of the things I said in my answer was the implementation of democratic socialism requires democratic socialists, and we do not produce those in the Caribbean anymore. The political conditions that gave rise to those early post-independence ideas and policies are not now present in the contemporary Caribbean.

The Caribbean has moved on, as it must; but, sadly, it has not taken much of its collective creative imagination and intellect with it. It is one of our greatest failings as a society and a civilization. Because we are generally devoid of historical memory, the present generation of political, cultural and academic leadership has scant knowledge and consciousness of even the recent history of our countries and regions. They therefore behave like Columbus —always acting as if they invented something, and making in the public sphere declarations that are grounded in a warped presentism.

My student’s question also set me thinking about Guyana in particular, where we hear lots of references to the greatness of Burnham, Jagan and Rodney from their followers, but very little informed discussion of their ideas and their praxis. We reduce them to ammunition for our political wars, and props for our political theatres, when their birth or death anniversaries come around. Sadly, our political discussions are confined to who did what and when, often without context and rationality. So we live in a moment of emptiness and nothingness.

The current Government includes Jaganites, Burnhamites and Rodneyites, but where in its policies are the uplifting ideas of these leaders reflected? For example, there have been some discussion on the role of the government and state in the economy, but all the declarations — from job creation to workers’ wages — have come straight out of the IMF-World Bank Structural Adjustment manual. Whatever you say about Jagan, Burnham and Rodney, one thing about their praxis was constant — they never lost sight of the central role of Government in transforming the colonial political economy to one in which the victims of slavery and colonialism are guaranteed some degree of socio-economic security. They knew that, until we develop an economy that allows space for the poor to fend for themselves, it is the duty of the state to guarantee their security. And what better way to guarantee their security than to adequately compensate them for their labour?

The role of the state in the economy cannot be the same for Guyana as it is in the USA or Europe — our societies have developed differently, and have arisen out of different historical circumstances. When the foreign and local consultants and IMF officials offer prescriptions for our countries, they never take into consideration what 400 years of economic and political bondage have done to the economies of the Caribbean in terms of their capacity for competitiveness. They are less concerned about the consequences of decreased government spending on wages, such as poverty; and its attendant ills, such as hunger, crime, school-dropouts, and child prostitution, to name a few. That’s not their business.

I say all of the above to make the point that, in terms of macro-economic policies, not much has changed under this new Government. Some of us expected something now and fresh that would at least give some hope for a better future. I totally disagree with the learned Minister of Finance that paying the workers better wages is not sustainable. It may not be sustainable under the IMF model of sustainability, but is that model beneficial for the overall health of Guyana? The absence of adequate wages leads to all kinds of negative spin-offs that have negative impacts on the country. The Honourable Minister must know that unemployment, underemployment, poor wages, and all that accompany them are at the heart of our chronic poverty. Is poverty sustainable?

The central plank of the post-independence agenda in Guyana and the Caribbean is still the decolonization of labour. I have made the point elsewhere that Government can afford what it prioritises. If the priority of the Government is the well-being of the poor and their liberation from poverty, then its policies must reflect that. While we wait on the Government to put in place architecture for the transition from dependency on Government to entrepreneurship, the workers have to live; their labour has to be properly compensated.

More of Dr. Hinds’ writings and commentaries can be found on his YouTube Channel Hinds’ Sight: Dr. David Hinds’ Guyana-Caribbean Politics and on his website www.guyanacaribbeanpolitics.com. Send comments to dhinds6106@aol.com