When is a political system ethically unacceptable?

OPINION BY: Hem Kumar October 2026

Guyana Cannot Afford the Politics of Cynicism

There is a dangerous idea gaining ground in Guyana and across the world: that every politician is corrupt, every political party is the same, every election is stolen, every institution has failed, and all politics is inherently dirty. It is an idea that can sound convincing, particularly in a society where citizens have seen disappointment, division, broken promises, weak accountability, and the abuse of public trust. But it is also an idea that can become profoundly destructive.

When people conclude that nothing can be improved, that participation is pointless, and that democracy is merely a fraud, they do not strengthen the country. They surrender it—to the most cynical, the most unscrupulous, and often the most authoritarian voices among us.

Guyana, especially at this defining stage of its development, cannot afford that surrender.

We are no longer a country speaking only about potential. We are a resource-rich state receiving unprecedented revenues and attracting international attention. Decisions being made today about petroleum wealth, public spending, infrastructure, environmental protection, constitutional reform, education, health care, local government, procurement, and national unity will shape the lives of generations yet unborn.

That reality places a greater responsibility on every Guyanese citizen. It demands not blind loyalty to any party, leader, ethnicity, ideology, or slogan. It demands informed citizenship.

Yes, politicians can be corrupt. But corruption is not unique to politics. There are corrupt businesspeople, lawyers, contractors, public officials, religious leaders, professionals, and journalists. Corruption is a moral failure: a failure of ethics, responsibility, conscience, and shame.

We do not abandon medicine because there are unethical doctors. We do not reject education because some teachers fail their calling. We do not discard the justice system because some officials may abuse their authority. In the same way, we must not reject democratic politics because some politicians betray the public trust.

The appropriate response to political misconduct is not political withdrawal. It is stronger scrutiny, better laws, independent institutions, free media, active civil society, transparent public procurement, credible elections, and citizens who know both their rights and their responsibilities.

Guyana’s democracy is imperfect. Its institutions require constant strengthening. Its electoral history has left deep wounds, including the traumatic attempts to subvert the will of the electorate in 2020. Those events should never be minimized or forgotten. But their lesson cannot be that elections do not matter.

The lesson must be that credible elections matter even more; that electoral safeguards matter; that independent courts, observers, journalists, public servants, and vigilant citizens matter.

To say that all elections are fraudulent is to dismiss the struggles of those who defend the ballot. To say that all parties are identical is to give parties permission to avoid doing better. To say that every public institution is useless is to leave the public defenseless against the very forces that would capture those institutions for private or partisan ends.

Democracy is not sustained by cynicism. It is sustained by participation, vigilance, evidence, and civic courage.

The Danger of the “Savior”

A society that loses faith in democratic improvement can become vulnerable to a dangerous kind of politics: the politics of the savior.

This is the leader who claims that only he—or only his party—can rescue the nation; that criticism is disloyalty; that institutions are obstacles; that the media are enemies; that opponents are traitors; and that citizens should trade scrutiny for unquestioning obedience.

For a young, fast-developing, oil-producing democracy such as Guyana, this temptation must be resisted.

No leader should be above the law. No party should be treated as synonymous with the nation. No government should be beyond questioning. No citizen should feel compelled to choose between patriotism and accountability.

Guyana belongs to all Guyanese—not to a party, not to a government of the day, not to a small circle of political or economic elites, and not to those who seek to profit from division.

Patriotism is not silence in the face of wrongdoing. Patriotism is insisting that national wealth is managed honestly, that public contracts withstand scrutiny, that communities benefit fairly, that the environment is protected, that constitutional rights are respected, and that every citizen—regardless of race, religion, class, region, or political allegiance—can live with dignity and opportunity.

What Makes a System Ethically Unacceptable?

Every political system has flaws and every democracy can be improved. But not everything is morally equivalent. There are clear warning signs when a political system becomes ethically unacceptable.

A system becomes dangerous when it acts against human dignity and fundamental rights; when it seeks to control every area of citizens’ lives; when it reduces independent institutions to extensions of political power; when it weakens the courts, Parliament, the media, and oversight bodies; when it turns education into indoctrination; when it suppresses independent enterprise, civic organizations, trade unions, or community voices.

It becomes morally bankrupt when dissent is criminalized, when peaceful criticism is treated as treason, when propaganda replaces truth, and when lies become an accepted method of governing

It is equally dangerous when a government or party deliberately creates the impression that the country is under permanent siege—always facing enemies, saboteurs, traitors, foreign plots, or internal threats—in order to demand blind loyalty and silence legitimate questions.

And it is unacceptable when party loyalty is confused with love of country; when culture is reduced to ideology; when public institutions are made subordinate to partisan interests; or when a political organization behaves as though it stands above the Constitution, the law, and the people.

These are not abstract concerns. They are the warning signs citizens must recognize before democratic erosion becomes democratic collapse.

Civic Education Is a National Necessity

Guyana’s future will not be secured by oil revenues alone. Wealth without civic maturity can deepen inequality, fuel corruption, intensify political competition, and leave citizens alienated from decisions that affect their own lives.

A more resilient democracy requires civic and socio-political education at every level: in homes, schools, religious institutions, workplaces, community groups, trade unions, youth organizations, political parties, and the media.

Citizens must understand how government works, what the Constitution protects, what Parliament is supposed to do, how public funds should be managed, why local government matters, what freedom of expression requires, and how to distinguish fact from propaganda.

They must also learn that citizenship is not exhausted by voting every five years. It includes monitoring public policy, attending community meetings, reading budgets, questioning contracts, supporting investigative journalism, demanding access to information, engaging respectfully across political and ethnic lines, and holding every administration accountable by the same standard.

A politically literate citizen is harder to deceive, harder to manipulate, and less likely to exchange democratic rights for comforting slogans.

Guyana needs citizens who can distinguish between criticism and sabotage; between patriotism and party worship; between legitimate political disagreement and ethnic hostility; between development that benefits the people and development that merely enriches a connected few.

Our country is at a historic crossroads. The question is not whether Guyana will change—we already are changing. The question is what kind of country we will become.

Will we become a society where public wealth strengthens education, health care, infrastructure, productive enterprise, social protection, environmental stewardship, and equal opportunity? Or will we allow wealth to feed patronage, secrecy, waste, inequality, and political dependence?

The answer will depend not only on those who hold office. It will depend on whether Guyanese refuse the false comfort of political cynicism and embrace the harder, more necessary work of informed democratic citizenship.

Guyana does not need citizens who believe everything is rotten and therefore abandon the public square. It needs citizens prepared to defend truth, demand accountability, reject extremism, protect democratic institutions, and participate in building a republic worthy of its immense promise.