ON Tuesday, my country celebrates another milestone. Guyana will have commemorated 54 years as a sovereign nation, and I contend that this provides us all with the perfect opportunity to think about where our country is right now.

Some things are indicative of our independent status. We have our symbols of nationhood, and well, we do govern ourselves. Importantly, over the past few months the fact that we are a sovereign nation has been voiced many, many times over, particularly vis-a-vis foreign interference. Stemming from that conversation on sovereignty and foreign interference, came another conversation: neocolonialism, that would cause little Vishani to think more about this concept of sovereignty.

Essentially, neocolonialism is a contemporary way of ‘influencing’ countries through the use of economic, political, cultural, or other pressures. Of course, in the globalised world in which we live, replete with the global powerhouses who have a significant influence.

And in the context of neocolonialism, the contravention for me was, on one hand, we were continuously asserting our sovereignty and our capability of managing our affairs; but on the other hand, we are dependent upon the economic aid that lies in the ambit of these powerhouses, to contend with the COVID-19 epidemic.

It is no secret that Guyana’s political history has been heavily influenced by foreign powers. I mean, do we need to revisit our country’s journey in becoming independent? But at the same time, is it a case of convenient sovereignty? I’m not sure how this works, you know.

While I was putting together my thoughts for this week’s column, I also remembered an encounter I had earlier this year. In February, I interviewed a Grenadian friend as part of an article I was putting together for UWI’s newspaper on the independence celebrations of Grenada and St. Lucia, and the Republic anniversary of Guyana, which are all celebrated in February.

More than anything else he said to me, what resonated with me was his asseveration: “I personally don’t think that Grenadians have even really scratched the surface of what it really means to be independent.”

This was a complete shock to me. On my UWI campus, Grenadians are among the most vibrantly patriotic and proud regional students. And underpinning much of their pride and patriotism, from what I’ve seen, is their cognisance of the post-independence Grenadian revolution and the effect that had on the Grenadian society.

Back then, while we had our conversation on the bench, I didn’t think too much about this statement. Admittedly, I was focused on finishing my interview and wrapping my piece for the newspaper. It is only until now, months after when I’m trying to find ways of understanding the dynamics of what is happening in Guyana, that I find my mind resurrecting these thoughts and sentiments.

So now, the question to myself is: “Has Guyana scratched the surface of what it means to really be independent?” And my instant answer to that is a resounding: “Not necessarily.”

Guyana being a sovereign nation means that Guyanese manage the affairs of Guyana. But in my humble opinion, at no point in time has Guyana been governed by a government that did not leave a large portion of the population (about half or so) feeling disillusioned, even if the government intended to work towards the best interest of all Guyanese.

The events of the past few months — at least for me — have spotlighted the need for Guyana to reconsider our “winner- -takes-all electoral system for our governance model, and to continue our efforts on the devolution of decision-making to the local communities (you know, let’s continue with the strides in local governance!)

The current reality with which we have to contend is that independent Guyana consists of distinct ethnic groups, sharing the same geographic space; but intrinsically, those “six peoples” aren’t always the united “One Guyanese.” And perhaps, every five years or so, we remind ourselves why our independent Guyana has much more talking and understanding, and healing and reconciling to do among ourselves before we can realise the vision underpinning our national motto.

This past week, I was pleased to see President Granger himself tout the idea of an inclusionary governance model. His sentiments complement those being floated by the newer, smaller political parties, and if we take a look at history, his rival PPP/C party had once proposed a “National Patriotic Front Government.” This means that there has been recognition, at some point or the other, that this system we’ve been using may not be the best one. So that is some food for thought.

It’s been about two and a half years now since I’ve been writing this column, and this year illustrates a marked difference from my previous columns in observance of our independence anniversary. I’m ending this week’s column a bit more dreary than I intended it to be, but I didn’t want to be facetious or even buoyant in any way. I want us to recognise that we can make our country a better place for us all.

Happy independence, Guyana!