MY daily offering since the day of Tuesday, March 3, 2020 when the general and regional elections were being derailed to erase the legal results, has had a number of underlying themes.
One of these is that those who want to save Guyana’s democracy from political and intellectual assault, from class forces embedded in the privately owned media and civil society groups, must offer counter narratives.

If we fail to offer counter narratives, then false constructs of these groups seep into people’s head and they become accepted. I will devote an entire column to rebutting the editorial of the Stabroek News (SN) of Sunday, September 3 in which the meaning of democracy was corrupted.
For now, it is important to note that a government can undermine democracy. A political biased media landscape can do terrible damage to democracy. The judiciary, if not neutral, can weaken democracy. The business class can set about hurting democratic foundations.

State security, opposed to the government, can shake the foundations on which democracy rests. My published research into the Buxton mayhem – 2002-2006- can testify to that.
Do not be fooled if you are a young mind that it is only the government that can ruin things in a country. The mainstream media and now social media are powerful tools that can endanger social stability.

In this country, the privately owned mainstream media and their cohorts in civil society pose a clear and present danger to democracy. A recent poll by credible and eminent institutions in the US reveal that American democracy is threatened by the changing nature of the media, a sentiment repeated by Barack Obama in an interview with CBS.
If we did not offer counter-narratives, democracy in this country since 2020 would have died already. Here is an impeccable example of the need to have counter narratives.
The anti-government organisation, Red Thread (RT) published a statement through SN that a well-known businessman and his son sent a hit man, who was paid 10 million dollars, to harm them and that it was Mikhail Rodrigues, alias, Guyanese Critic that informed them of the impending attack.

This story had all the makings of a publicity conspiracy to attract attention to a faded, jaded superstar of yesteryear. Examination of the story made no sense, and Rodrigues is suing RT since he denies informing RT of any such imminent attack.

When analysis was put to the exclamation of RT, it fell flat on its face; the story died immediately. No one in his/her right mind believes RT or no one in this country believes anyone wants to attack RT because no one knows what RT does to warrant a businessman and his son paying someone 10 million dollars to harm the group.
How counter-narratives are important can be seen in the fact that SN and civil society groups dropped the story and not one opposition party followed up on RT’s claim. Counter-narratives exposed the comicality in RT’s outcry. It is in this context I will soon apply my mind to the last Sunday editorial of SN.

For now, the question must be answered as to why Joel Bhagwandin cannot get one, not even one, letter published in the Kaieteur News (KN) and why SN informed Professor Randy Persaud that his letters cannot be carried because they attack civil society organisations. SN specifically mentioned, the entity named Article 13.
What is the explanation for these two decisions? Glen Lall, owner of KN, knew he was entering politics and selected criticising the oil industry as his platform. Lall has a number of individuals, the likes of which include Janet Bulkan and Melinda Janki, to enhance his claims. But Bhagwandin, a fine, astute mind that is excellent in financial studies, stands in his way.
Bhagwandin offers brilliant counter-narratives about the oil industry that if Lall allows his paper to carry Bhagwandin, it would destroy Lall’s credibility. Lall, of course, is unable to comprehend the reality that Bhagwandin has other avenues to succeed in his analyses and he does.

Across to SN, that newspaper works closely in hand with civil society groups that have a frenetic anti-government agenda (for the latest take on such groups, the column by Ralph Ramkarran in last Sunday edition of SN).

Professor Randy Persaud provides a strong intellectual counter-weight to these civil society groups. He writes with strong intellectual incisiveness. He literally exposes the hypocrisy and hidden anti-government agenda of these people.

In other words, his counter-narratives demolish the credibility of these so called neutral civil society entities. SN decides it would be better to lock him out rather than have him exposing its acolytes in the Mulatto/Creole class.