Dear Sir,
I HAVE to begin by saying that this letter is neither an attempt to criticise any individual, group or organization, nor an effort to dumb down the valuable contributions, or cancel out the earned respect of those seeking political office in Guyana. Rather, it is an approach to deeply observe the unfolding political architecture of Guyana, and offer comments on its ever changing never changing nature. It is really important, because such comments can serve as markers on our political landscape as we move forward as a young fledgling democracy.

In a democracy, every citizen has certain basic rights and obligations including: political and other freedoms, access to information, equality, participation, and compliance with the rule of law. However, I shall comment on just one of those rights: Participation. This includes the right to vote, run for office and participate in political discourse. Under this right, I will pay attention to the right to run for office, because it is the pentacle and most scrutinised of all political rights. I suppose one reason for that is the fact that political office has the power not only to influence the personal development of citizens but also the progress and advancement of an entire nation. It is about power, control and the allocation of vast national resources.

It is true that within recent times, this right seems to have caught the attention of new political aspirants. As a result, there has been the emergence of not a few new political parties. There could be others before general and regional elections in March 2020. This is testimony to the health of our democracy. More importantly, it is good when individuals want to, and offer themselves to serve in the interest of the State. It is also good when individuals challenge the status quo. It is said that people who are crazy enough to believe that they can change the world usually do. History is replete with examples of such persons.

Whilst citizens have the right to run for office, those who are being asked to elect them also have the equal right to ask searching questions of the political process. Let us consider three such questions that are likely to be on the minds of citizens: What is driving the formation and rise of new political parties? What are the implications for the two main political parties [PNCR and PPP/C] in Guyana? What are the implications for our wider political landscape?

So what is driving the appearance of new political parties? There are a number of drivers that are motivating individuals to vie for political leadership. These include: Political ambition, unfulfilled expectations, perceived inequality, perceived prospect of electoral success, and the Internet. Since communication and information are central to all other drivers, I would like to look at the thing that facilitates these processes: The Internet. Two points here: 1. It is dis- centered, inexpensive, fast and navigable.

These qualities of the Internet have levelled the playing field for all political actors of big and small parties. This allows them leverage to the same audiences across time and space with their messaging and messages with minimum financial and administrative resources. There are numerous case studies on the use of the Internet by political parties and organisations and how it has aided in the political process.

It encourages social networking and social blogging. This can be done by the use of a mobile phone. The number of mobile cellular subscriptions in Guyana is about 650, 000. This demonstrates the potential available to small parties to reach vast and various audiences. This facility can also shape and reshape groups with specific issues and interests associated with parties. Second, what are the implications for the two main parties?

Understanding the historical political context of Guyana, one would recognise that the main parties are not only well established but have proven track records with their bases. More, in addition to the Internet and its tools, they have available to them substantial resources to reach out to local communities. They have the advantage of working and grounding with citizens in all ten administrative regions of Guyana; they can contest in all of the regions. It is important to note that one of the critical elements that is absent from technological-mediated communication is the human touch. However, the two main parties keep this within their portfolios through interpersonal communication with activities such as door- to-door campaigns, outreaches and other public-relations strategies.

Statistics would reveal that with the two- party system, the PNCR and PPP/C have been dominating the political scene since the 50s. This has left very little space for the survival of third parties. Even when they manage to rally on, third parties continue to attract residue votes, which tamper with hopes of any such party acting as a strong and challenging force to the two main political rivals.

Again, PNCR and PPP/C benefited and continue to benefit immensity from decades of information on various aspects of the state, knowledge of the nuances of local cultures and indispensable experience in government and governance. These are necessary qualities that come with time and maturity; they cannot be inculcated in the collective consciousness of political parties overnight or in one or even two political seasons. It is these very qualities that facilitate reciprocal, but most times asymmetrical, relationships between parties and their members, and keep them afloat and accord leader’s prospects of electoral success.

In addition, there are entrenched political attitudes, views, and voting behaviours of citizens that are influenced by patterns of ethnic and generational thinking. These are shaped by certain cultural elements, belief systems, stories passed on by elders to younger generations, fears, benefits and realities as experienced by citizens under the rule of one of either of the two political parties or both. These all conspire to condition otherwise inexplicable traditional voting patterns.

Over the years, with new young Guyanese voters and the move towards coalition government these patterns appear to be changing but not fast enough or sufficient in substance to affect the political cultures and therefore bases of the two main political parties. It is therefore not unthinkable that when the rallying cries are heard from the city to the far flung remote villages of this country by the leaders of the PNCR and the PPP/C, party faithfuls will rush to their bases to cast their votes. It is my studied view that unless there is a collective paradigm shift caused by some sudden seismic event in our Guyanese society traditional voting patterns will be perpetually sustained.

Therefore, the implication of the rise of the new array of small parties on the two main political giants are twofold: it can serve as a strong motivating force for the guardians of the two established parties to be on high alert, to discourage dissenting voices from within and encourage loyalty and commitment to core values and principles of parties. Also, it can work as a solidifying force for the strong bases of PNCR and PPP/C, raises greater awareness of individual and collective roles of members in helping those political organizations to achieve goals.

On the wider political landscape new parties would refashion the outlook of the scene. It also provides scope for new ideas and thinking; more options and wider variety of choices; and opportunity for new political alliances. Also, it would bolster our democratic credentials as a nation. Parties are formed and reformed at the instant of their leaders without let or hinderance by anyone. They express themselves freely and enjoy all the rights available in a democratic society.

Regards
Royston King