Dear Editor,

I write today with a pressing concern: the ever-so-bewildering yet remarkably entertaining spectacle unfolding in our political landscape, where the notion of endorsement has become synonymous with engrossment—at least when it comes to members of one party dancing into the arms of the other. It seems we are witnessing a new political waltz in Guyana, one where endorsement isn’t quite enough. No, these days, it’s all about engrossment, or perhaps the more appropriate term—convenient conversion.

I can no longer sit idly by while we watch this high-stakes game of political musical chairs, where the seats are filled by those who simply endorse one another one moment, only to be engrossed in the other party’s policies (or lack thereof) the next. Perhaps this is the latest form of bipartisanship—endorse the other side to grow your own popularity, then engross yourself in their agenda to ensure that you, too, can become a beloved figure for all the wrong reasons.

Consider, for example, the recent shifts in allegiance within the major political factions. The People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) and the A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance for Change (APNU+AFC) have become accustomed to the art of endorsement—occasionally praising each other’s accomplishments to keep up appearances. However, what is more troubling is the engrossment that follows, as certain figures from both sides slide seamlessly into roles that would’ve been unimaginable only a few years ago. The rapidity with which individuals from APNU+AFC have found themselves in positions of power under the PPP/C is one of the most glaring examples. These same individuals, who once decried the very policies they now enthusiastically promote, seem more engrossed in securing their political futures than staying true to the values they once espoused.

Even the smaller parties have not been immune to this trend. The Guyana Action Party (GAP), a minor but once somewhat vocal force, has demonstrated how quickly a party can go from endorsing opposition policies to becoming engrossed in power-sharing deals when it suits them. The contradictions are glaring: What was once staunch criticism becomes the polished rhetoric of endorsement, followed by full-blown engrossment in the political system they once critiqued. Meanwhile, the Working People’s Alliance (WPA), which has not shown any inclination to endorse the PPP/C despite occasional alliances, seems to be stuck in a position where it must continually navigate between a desire for independence and the pressing need to remain relevant in a polarized system. They have yet to endorse the PPP/C, and their position is as complex as it is fractured.

It appears the boundary between principles and opportunism has become so blurry that even the most seasoned politicians can no longer distinguish between a heartfelt endorsement and a full-fledged political love affair. One day, it’s a mild expression of support for a party’s good policies; the next, it’s a public display of political fondness, bordering on the kind of engrossment that would make even a seasoned soap opera writer blush. Perhaps it’s time we, the voters, started endorsing the idea of genuine engagement over short-term political flirtations. Let’s hope that future political endorsements will stand for something more than just a temporary passport to a bigger paycheck. After all, we deserve a government that is focused on principle rather than one that simply indulges in political engrossment as its new form of governance.

Sincerely, Keith Bernard