Too often in this mud land, the solution to the problem becomes the problem to the solution. Too often in this water land, Government’s policy to regulate foreign investors results in foreign investors regulating Government. Too often in this multicultural land, social activism becomes a league of its own, inconsistent with the entire notion of what social activism ought to be: fair; honest; balanced; placing pressure through protest demonstrations on governments to achieve some particular goals, rather than being one-dimensional and selectively laconic.
Since this regime slipped into power some two years ago, some so-called activists have continued to use this activist label rather loosely, to satisfy desired goals in the tabloids and state media. You may want to dismiss their motive, but I think that if this sort of mislabelling ad misrepresentation of social activism is not addressed, then their repeated folly may turn out to be deviously pro-social and persistent.
An estimated four percent of individuals at any time in any place and in any society live this way; and contrary to common thought, they are not serial killers and murderers. They can be government personnel, they can be writers, they can be among you, and they can be your next door neighbour. They can be people who are writing to support this regime.
To understand Guyana-style social activism, I researched the literature of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to see if the above described behaviour of activism falls into the category of anti-social personality disorder. The APA suggests that if someone has three of seven characteristics: manipulativeness, consistent irresponsibility, and the lack of remorse, that person is said to have an anti-social personality disorder or sociopathy. People who have this disorder are generally reckless and careless about other people’s right, and how they think and feel. There are some in the current regime, and there are some who write for the dailies, who have declared repeatedly they do not care what others think about what they say and do. Are these individuals’ behaviour cocksure or sociopathic?
If I were to apply the APA guidelines and my own ethno-graphic observations, I would say an estimated 50 percent of Guyanese have some sort of anti-social personality disorder. What is even sadder is that there is no attempt to address this social ill. The University of Guyana, which is a community college by any measurement, does not have a psychology programme, or any significant program to deal with social ills. While we wait for intervention, it is not common to see, hear, and read rancorous statements, unsubstantiated claims, spurious reasoning, and finger-pointing; accompanied with little remorse from all sections of society.
What is worse, however, is when the above comes from the so-called upper crust of society.
Some of the social activists will defend this regime to the end, even when the evidence indicates that this regime has gas-lighted this nation and catapulted an estimated 50 percent of Guyanese into a cataclysmic state of survival. The national motto seems now to sound like this: my oil is your oil and Guyana oil will oil Guyanese. If you were to ask these activists one thing that they need, they would most likely say they want all PPP politicians jailed, and they never want to see the PPP return to power. I have no beef with their positions. But is this really activism?
Activism, as I know it, is when people engage in events that bring justice and fairness, not pick and choose to meet self-centred interests. But, most of all, in the process, activists question themselves, weigh their actions, consider what they say and write. They have constraints. They are not loose cannons. Rarely do they believe they are absolutely right. Put simply, activism is geared towards correcting a problem, not creating another one. The above approach to activism does not exist in Guyana, only in fairy tale books.
The problem here is that when social activists are shaped by an elaborate toolbox of hate, revenge, and remorseless ways, any possibility of positive activism becomes an uphill challenge. What we can hope for, so that all can benefit, is that individuals do change to the positive direction.
I will share a story how that can happen. Two individuals (Tom and Jones) from two different directions meet perchance in a neutral place for the first time. Tom asks Jones what he has in the bag, because he is hungry. Jones opens the bag and Tom grabs a sandwich, but Tom sees a gold band in the bag and asks for it. Jones says no, but Tom insists on asking for the band. Jones softens up and gives Tom the band. Two days later, the men meet up again. Tom says to Jones, “Here is your gold band back.” Jones asks “Why?” Toms says, “I do not want your gold band. What I want from you is for you to tell me what is in you that made you give that gold band to me. I rather have that than the gold band. ([email protected])
