The Coalition was oblivious to the framing process of social movement and mobilisation

TWO years ago, Guyanese went to the polls to vote for the political party they want to lead them for at least five years, after a long and protracted period emanating from the No-Confidence Vote. It was a pivotal election, dubbed as the mother of elections. The feeling was that whichever political party won the general election it would, most likely, retain power for decades to come.  The rationale was those revenues emerging from the nascent oil and gas industry would give the sitting government the liberty to invest and showcase itself, placing it in a favourable position to be re-elected. The understanding was basic and straightforward. Any government that controlled the wealth from natural resources would promote some level of growth and development for the people, and therefore be well-placed to keep power.

In this laced environment of promise, the voters went to the polls and played their part, and all and sundry were pleased with the voting process, describing it as being one of the fairest in Guyana. So pleasant was the voting process that within hours after the election international agencies moved Guyana up a few points in the democracy rating scale. The rigging of elections was seen as outdated. Then came the stunner.

The then sitting Coalition Government upon seeing the results of the election a few hours after the polls closed cried foul that the election was not fair and booked and took Guyana on a five-month journey reminiscent of the days of dictatorship and despotism. The only difference was that the practitioners of rigging were working and collaborating behind the scenes, but they were clumsy.  The Coalition, through its sidekicks in GECOM, set out to twist the results claiming that it won the election through a series of bizarre explanations and court cases, undermining democracy and countering any evidence that it had indeed lost the election. The Coalition’s problem was that too many individuals within its rank and file were speaking from too many angles, undermining its own claim of winning the election. Do you remember the claim that the Russians were involved in Guyana’s general election? This is not the place to giggle.

Nevertheless, Guyanese of all stripes wondered if the mud land would slip back into dictatorship since those who were pulling the strings of electoral victory were still loyal to the long-gone Kabaka. The Guyanese were hoping for a political Florence Nightingale to appear, and boy, a light of lamp did appear from overseas to Guyana, to the tents outside where the ballot boxes were kept, and to the judicial system.  Guyana was saved.

There was also something else going on. The cracks and weaknesses of the Coalition were exposed. The claims of winning the election tested the sureness of stability and solidarity of the Coalition. What surfaced was a decidedly fragile Coalition brought about by its too quick political marriage on Valentine’s Day, three months before May 2015 general election. Not much time and thought were invested to forge common ground made worse by the lack of skills and competence. Subsequently, something had to be formed to hold on to power. The Coalition spun a leadership style that revolved around the thought that if the leaders look like leaders Guyanese would treat them like leaders. This was a big bluff that worked well as long as this illusion could be maintained. For most of its five-year existence in power, the Coalition was for itself married to self-sufficiency while divorced from the majority of the people. The Coalition extended its grip on the people and stripped them of their daily existence. The sugar workers, the vendors, and the working class are prime examples. Fired by suppression, Guyanese went to the polls and shook the Coalition. Their message was: your time is up.

By the fourth of the five-month-long impasse, the Coalition was holding on to power by the skin of its teeth, thinking it would at least hold on to power for another two years in which time it would conjure up a plan. The Coalition, however, underestimated the power of social movements which had become increasingly global and effective. It was oblivious to the framing process of social movement and mobilisation that embraces and draws from a mutual understanding of common bonds, common identities, and the garnering of support to demobilise regimes such as the APNU+AFC Coalition hell-bent on stealing an election to stay in power. The Guyana Spring of resistance and revolution eventually emerged, and in this process, two main forces surfaced. Those who joined with the PPP for a better Guyana and opportunities for themselves and those who sided with the Coalition in open and closed doors. While this was expected, the latter group (65) has slimed out of its cocoon since the PPP entered office swinging in the name of justice in the dailies and over social media. There are consequences, however, when governments are fixated on the false flag idea of holding on to power against the will of their citizens. The semantics and fate of the Coalition were sealed by the pronouncements of the then US Secretary of State which in effect installed the Coalition in the opposition and saved democracy in Guyana. (lomarsh.roopnarine@jsums.edu).

SHARE THIS ARTICLE :
Facebook
Twitter
WhatsApp
All our printed editions are available online
emblem3
Subscribe to the Guyana Chronicle.
Sign up to receive news and updates.
We respect your privacy.