Guyana needs to place much greater emphasis on civic and political education

Dear Editor,

I have often reflected on the relationship between education, political awareness, and the strength of democracy. My conclusion is that a country’s democratic maturity depends not simply on the electorate’s ability to read and write, but on its willingness and ability to think critically, question authority, examine political promises, and hold elected officials accountable.

I believe one of the greatest weaknesses in democratic societies is the tendency of voters to become so attached to political parties that they lose their willingness to question the very people they elect. A person may possess impressive academic qualifications and still be politically uninformed. Political literacy goes beyond formal education; it requires an understanding of public policies, government finances, national priorities, and the responsibilities of elected officials.

I see this challenge in Guyana, the United States, and India. Although their political histories and circumstances differ, all three countries experience varying degrees of political polarisation, identity politics, misinformation, and partisan loyalty. Too often, voters place race, religion, ideology, and party affiliation above competence, integrity, and actual performance. When political loyalty becomes unconditional, accountability suffers.

I am particularly concerned about Guyana because the country is at a defining moment in its history. The discovery of substantial offshore oil reserves has created unprecedented economic opportunities. However, I believe we must distinguish between impressive economic growth and genuine national development. Large government budgets, infrastructure projects, and rising GDP figures do not automatically mean that every Guyanese is benefiting from the country’s newfound wealth.

As a citizen concerned about Guyana’s future, I believe we should be asking difficult questions. How effectively are our oil revenues being managed? Are government contracts being awarded transparently? Are procurement procedures sufficiently scrutinised? Is the country receiving fair value for its natural resources? Are the benefits of this newfound wealth reaching ordinary citizens, regardless of race, political affiliation, or geographical location?

The real measure of Guyana’s progress should be reflected in the quality of life of its people: affordable housing, accessible healthcare, quality education, employment opportunities, reliable infrastructure, and a reasonable cost of living. Our oil wealth should create lasting prosperity, not simply impressive economic statistics.

I am equally concerned about the extent to which ethnic and political divisions continue to influence Guyana’s democratic culture. Political allegiance should never require anyone to defend wrongdoing, overlook poor performance, or remain silent when questions of transparency arise. Criticising a government is not an act of disloyalty to one’s race or country. It is an essential responsibility of citizenship. The opposition, too, must offer credible alternatives and demonstrate that it is prepared to put national interests above political ambitions.

The United States and India face comparable challenges in their own political environments. In the United States, partisan and ideological divisions can sometimes overshadow meaningful discussions about public policy and government performance. In India, religious, caste, regional, and political identities can influence electoral choices. In all three countries, I believe citizens must look beyond political personalities and party loyalties and examine the actual consequences of government decisions.

Finland offers an interesting global example. Its strong literacy performance, educational system, and emphasis on media literacy demonstrate the importance of developing citizens who can evaluate information, recognise misinformation, and think independently. The lesson I draw from Finland is that education should not merely teach people to read and write; it should equip them to question, analyse, and make informed decisions.

I would like to see Guyana place much greater emphasis on civic and political education. Citizens should understand how government works, how national budgets are developed, how oil revenues are managed, and what responsibilities elected officials have. An electorate that understands these issues is better equipped to protect its democratic institutions and demand responsible leadership.

Ultimately, I believe the greatest danger to democracy is not political disagreement, but the abandonment of independent thinking in favour of unquestioning political loyalty. No political party deserves unconditional support. Parties must continuously earn the confidence of the electorate through integrity, transparency, competence, and measurable results.

My message is simple: I would much rather have an electorate that questions its leaders than one that applauds everything they say. I would rather see citizens challenge political promises than accept them without examination. Democracy is about much more than casting a ballot every seven years; it is about having the knowledge, independence, and courage to hold those in power accountable.

An informed electorate is democracy’s greatest safeguard. A politically uninformed electorate, regardless of its formal educational qualifications, risks becoming its greatest vulnerability.

Guyana has been given an extraordinary opportunity through its natural resources. Whether that opportunity becomes lasting national prosperity will depend not only on the quality of its leadership, but also on the political awareness, vigilance, and expectations of its people.