Dear editor,
I DO wonder if Sigmund Freud, the Austrian neurologist and founder of psychoanalysis, were alive and tasked with undertaking a psychoanalysis of the PPP, how would he have fared? I would very much suspect, based on evidence available to us thus far, that he, with his in-depth knowledge of the subject matter, would have likely struggled. For, in psychoanalysis, there must be consistency of established patterns, which, in recent days, based on our layman’s observation, have been foreign to the PPP.

Psychoanalysis, as a field of psychology, is an invaluable tool in the armoury of modern-day criminology, used to establish a character and physical DNA of an unknown criminal who might have committed a heinous crime, e.g. a serial murder. As a science, psychoanalysis has evolved and developed as a tool to solve some of the world’s most despicable crimes, but there has been a notable failure in the case of Jack the Ripper. For today, nearly 150 years after those reprehensible killings, we are still clueless as to the name, physical and psychological characteristics of this murderer who roamed the streets of London with his singular paraphernalia of his crime: A sharp blade. In this the 21st Century, we are facing a major challenge in Guyana that has highlighted the limitation of Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalysis. I am referring to none other than the infamous PPP.

Guyana, on the whole, struggled to comprehend the PPP’s post-elections psychology, since it has been a model of inconsistencies, contradictions and ironies. The minute the lights were out and the polling stations were closed, PPP’s behaviours could be best described as pendular; fluctuating between victory, cheated, victory, and then victory. It was difficult to the untrained eye to establish a pattern to the PPP’s behaviour model. I would posit that Sigmund Freud, the Father of Psychoanalysis, would have found this challenging, hence likely find any attempt at establishing a psychopathology, if ever there was one, well nigh impossible. This difficulty in establishing a diagnosis, which would have informed remedial steps necessary to reintegrate the PPP back into Guyana’s political fold, would likely leave the PPP in the political wilderness for an indefinite period. And even as we grappled with the psychoanalysis of the PPP’s bizarre behaviour, we struggled to determine what may be the driving force propelling it. Many argued, with some conviction, that oil may have been a factor, a theory that is supported by George Bush Jr’s curious auditory hallucination of God’s voice instructing him to invade and liberate Iraq. And worldwide, we have more than a scattering of evidence to support this hypothesis. For how else can we explain the PPP’s actions of accusing an innocent man, Region 4’s RO, Clairmont Mingo of rigging the elections, when there is absolutely no evidence to support same? How can one explain the argumentum, ad hominem attacks on GECOM CEO, Keith Lowenfield; the universally-respected Chairwoman, Ret Judge Claudette Singh, and DCEO Roxanne Myers? How else can we explain their actions after labelling these innocent GECOM staff as cheats, when provided with the solitary pre-election chance of proving their case, they arrived after the stipulated legal times? How else can one explain their irrational actions of guarding ballot boxes that have more locks than the Bank of Guyana’s money vault, while COVID-19 is knocking people down like flies around the world?

And even before I proceed on this all too familiar and difficult journey, I do have an obligation to clarify what I mean by the PPP, for there are two PPPs: Jagan’s PPP and Jagdeo’s PPP. I ventured on this digressed path, for I do believe that most of Guyana would deem it an unforgivable transgression, and rightly so, if they concluded that this missive is about Jagan’s PPP. I can assure you, it is not. Rather, this missive is about Jagdeo’s PPP, which today has become an amalgamation of strange, shady companions. There is the PPP proper, or rather, improper; then there is the business arm of the PPP, better known as the PSC. Their role, which is championed by the Cheerleader Gerry Gouveia, is the practise of the science of human echolalia. Then there are the smaller political parties who are essentially the blood- sucking bed bugs that annoy most of us. They are championed by the naturist exhibitionist and COVID-19 Facebook propagandist. It is this group that shelters under the umbrella of modern-day PPP that this psychoanalysis is for.

Now relieved of this Atlas-type weight of clarification off our shoulders, but yet to comprehend the aforementioned contradictory behaviours of the PPP, we are now faced with many more. First, the PPP cried about spreadsheets, and demanded Statements of Poll. When obliged and provided with Statements of Poll, they still were unhappy, and in their paranoia, made accusations of confabulation of the numbers by Region 4 RO.

To pacify them, the Statements of Poll were projected on to a screen, but now they complained that they cannot see the minute serial numbers, and that the polling numbers were still fake. They demanded a recount; they were offered a recount of all the regions, and everyone assumed that tht would be enough to satisfy the insatiable demands of the PPP. That appeared to be the case, until just out of the blue, they deemed the recount of all ten regions “an entire waste of time,” and insisted that only a recount of Regions 4 is required. Further, they argued that a recount with an audit is illegal, hence they should literally go into the boxes and count papers, even if the boxes were stuffed after the elections. One of their supporters argued, in the local media, that if one area of a roof is leaking, one would not remove the entire roof. While I agree with him to an extent, I am tempted to add that if one area of the roof has a leak, it is unlikely that only that one area would have a fault. As a result, any contractor worth his salt would check the entire roof. Also. as a doctor, if a patient presents with chest pain, it would be remiss of me to just examine the chest and not examine the patient as a whole. The fact is that the findings in other areas may help in clinching the diagnosis. Finally, in medical school, where we witnessed many emotionally-painful postmortems being done by renowned pathologist Dr. Leslie Mootoo, there was an aspect of his practise I remember until a day like today. An American gentleman was stabbed to death during an altercation involving road rage. From the surface anatomy of the wound, it was evident he was stabbed in his heart. We all expected that when the body was opened by Dr. Mootoo’s assistant, that he would delve straight to the heart. He never did. My point, Mr. editor, is that if the PPP is claiming electoral fraud by GECOM, assuming that it is true, then it is likely that it would have occurred in all ten regions and not only Region 4. Any party making such an accusation would welcome a thorough investigation, and not a rush in the box and do a paper-counting excercise. For how else would we know if the ballot boxes were stuffed or not? How else would we know if dead people voted? How else would we know if people from as far as Russia voted? How else would we know if there was multiple voting? Rushing into the boxes and simply counting is a recipe for disaster.

And as I spoke of the pathologist, Dr. Mootoo, a thought came to me: Those boxes may very well have dead people. That may very well be the reason why the PPP rather they RIP. Surely, we can’t! Let the exhumation begin!

Regards,
Dr. Mark Devonish