WHEN I entered the University of Guyana as a freshman in the history programme, one of the books sweeping the world and the UG campus was E. F. Schumacher’s “Small is Beautiful.”
Marxist thinkers and socialist governments in the post-colonial world saw Schumacher’s opus magnum as the essential guide to building a sustainable future.
Briefly, Schumacher argued that industrial production, infrastructural projects, urban development and nation-building in general should avoid the hugeness of projects. When you have large industrial cities, culture and the environment become casualties.
Socialist thinkers argued, based on Schumacher’s book, that the future of an unpolluted world lies in small countries with small populations. As I settled down as a student at UG and began to be taught by left-wing professors and read more Marxist literature, I came to see that small is dangerous too.
Using not economic theory or environmental theory but political theory, I came to see that in the post-colonial world, small is dangerous. I left UG and the other universities I attended many moons ago, and now I am an old man, but the theory that small is dangerous is a valid polemic in the study of the Caribbean, particularly small island states with small populations.
Small is disastrous in two broad outlines in the post-colonial world. If the economy is state socialist, as was the case in Guyana under Burnham; Ethiopia under Mengistu, Cuba under Castro, Zaire under Mobutu, Suriname under Bouterse, Grenada under Bishop, Libya under Gaddafi, North Korea under Kim-il-Sung, Yugoslavia under Tito and the Arab monarchies, among others, then the government and its leaders have total power.
If the economy is capitalist, then the billionaires have total power because in tiny populations, the bourgeoisie controls both economic society and political society (including security forces, government, judiciary, the media and civil society). Even in large populations, the extraordinarily wealthy capitalist class controls the state
Several biographies of media tycoon Rupert Murdoch revealed that during national elections in the UK, prime ministerial candidates, without exception, lined up outside his house waiting for him to put them in government through the influence of his media empire. If that could happen in a population of 60 million, think of how dangerous small is in countries that have sparse populations. In Antigua, Allen Stanford, a super-wealthy entrepreneur, was a controlling hand in the country.
In Guyana, Azruddin Mohamed’s penetration was deeper than Stanford’s. Vice President, Bharrat Jagdeo, has spoken of the reach of Mohamed into the state, judiciary and the police. Here are the words of Mr. Jagdeo: “So, it’s not just media, not just executive bodies, not just the judiciary they go after. They buy political parties, and I believe they bought APNU… that’s why APNU did not put up a resistance in the election.”
The Mohamed enterprise is a trillion-dollar world, and so are a few others in Guyana. Next to them are a number of multi-billionaires. The power of these people in tiny populated post-colonial societies is enormous. Their tentacles reach into every corner of the country, graphically demonstrating that small is dangerous. Let us take one example. In the money-laundering investigation of a senior police officer, it was revealed that he got a wedding gift of $10M from a businessman.
Do the logical deduction. If the businessman could give $10M, what would he give if he were facing an investigation for a serious criminal offence? The bourgeoisie, particularly Azruddin Mohamed, has extensive contacts within the police force. Use your imagination and think of what $20M is to a police officer, and that sum is a drop in the ocean to a trillionaire.
The society knows about the little boy who was shot and killed when a certain wealthy young man was having fun shooting across the Demerara River from Friendship on the East Bank. The society knows that nothing came out of a vehicular death on the road on Mandela Avenue. The society knows that nothing came out of a Main Street murder. What was savage about this murder was that it was over a triangular love affair involving a woman.
I have had 38 years of social activism, and I am in my 37th year of a media career. I know how dangerous small is. I know how money has bought people in this country. And by people, I mean in the security sector, governmental realm, and the judiciary. I shudder to think that if Azruddin’s power had not been cut, how much deeper his penetration would have become.
The 2025 national elections and the type of money that was put into it by WIN and the sectors of sycophancy that surrendered to the temptation of cash show how dangerous small is. It is not only dangerous but frightening. Don’t forget there are more Azruddin Mohameds in Guyana.
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Guyana National Newspapers Limited.