Posted December 29th. 2002. - Special Feature by David Hinds

Desmond Hoyte in Perspective:
He was Guyana's most important governmental Leader

This is by no means an attempt at a comprehensive analysis of Mr. Hoyte's political career. Rather, it's recognition of the importance of a leader with whom I disagreed most of the time. I am acknowledging Desmond Hoyte from outside the "official box"--neither as comrade-in-arms or toe-to-toe adversary. Our culture allows little room for us to acknowledge the significance of those with whom we vehemently disagree. In this regard I am glad that the essence of what I am saying today I said in an abbreviated form when Mr. Hoyte was alive.

Political leaders such as Hoyte are problematic for those of us who consider ourselves the watchdogs of the society's interests. In Hoyte one confronted not a simple megalomaniac, but a complex convergence of the fledgling Caribbean nation's strengths, weaknesses, and fears.Desmond Hoyte, the politician, was very much a product of his political time. He embodied the contradictions that are central to modern Caribbean political culture. Any attempt to discuss his political stances in isolation from the political environment in which he was nurtured, and for which he provided nourishment, would invariably lead to simplistic and unhelpful conclusions. And mis-assessment of the contributions and importance of such a pivotal force could excite unnecessary rancor.

Mr. Hoyte was by training, socialization, and ideological instinct a colonial product. But as a product of the decolonialization process, he embodied the tension between conservative Westminster values and postcolonial radicalism. For most of his career he was a reformer, preferring the liberal authoritarian status quo or at best cautious change to radical transformation. This has been the way of most Caribbean governmental leaders partly the result of political socialization and partly a result of the convergence of national and global circumstances.

But despite being entrenched in this dominant tendency, Desmond Hoyte dared at a crucial moment to venture outside of it and in effect separate himself from his peers. Only Michael Manley one of the region's reformist leaders shares that distinction with Hoyte. They have been the only two reformist leaders who have used the powers of their office to effect positive socio-political transformation. I have said elsewhere that Mr. Hoyte's pivotal role in turning Guyana in the direction away from dictatorial rule has earned him the title of the most important governmental leader by a wide margin. His was an act that required courage, patriotism, and vision, for he defied not simply the hardliners of his party, but more importantly he defied the very culture that made it possible for him to be president. This is remarkable in Caribbean terms.

Yet is was this very remarkable act that would trigger Mr. Hoyte's descent to perhaps the most controversial, and some may say demeaning, phase of his career. When half of the country completely ignored his heroic acts in the 1985-1992 period, and most of the other half chastised him for putting country over party and race, he responded with venom. Had he left active party politics in 1992, he could well have become Guyana's Mandela. The decision to remain in the fray considerably compromised his enormous standing.

He won back that part of his constituency that had in 1994 followed his rival and in the process he became an even more popular African Guyanese leader than Forbes Burnham was. But the cost was tremendous. For me the overriding lesson of the Desmond Hoyte of last 10 years is the extent to which Guyana is inhospitable to political morality. Hoyte was punished by both major races for turning the country in a progressive direction. And it is this circumstance that bred the bitterness that was very much part of the Hoyte make-up in the last decade.

But in the midst of it all there are a couple of things about Hoyte that were missed. First in agreeing to enter into the dialogue with President Jagdeo in 2001, he initiated a model of governance that is now being utilized by the major leaders in Jamaica with much more success than Guyana. Second, when he realized that the dialogue model was counter productive to Guyana's situation he surprisingly moved to embrace power sharing. I am contending that had he lived to spearhead negotiations on power sharing he would have for the second time contributed heavily to giving Guyana another chance to breathe.

Arriving at power sharing must have taken lots of guts on Mr. Hoyte's part. He was forthright in his initial dismissal of the idea. Many of us power sharers bristled at his stubbornness. Yet his August 2002 Congress speech was the most ringing endorsement of power sharing.

I have left Mr. Hoyte's pre-1985 phase for last because I wanted to show in the beginning where our politics could go if leaders have the necessary will and courage. As part of Mr. Burnham's supporting cast, Mr. Hoyte was a loyal soldier. He was harsh and uncompromising in the perpetuation of party over state and party-state vs. society. For this he was rewarded with the presidency that he then used to dismantle important planks of the system that produced him.

Some will remember Hoyte as a Burnhamist hardliner. Others will remember him as the racialist African Guyanese leader. Still others will remember him as the man who returned Guyana to the bosom of the non-authoritarian community of countries. Each memory will be correct, but only partly so. To understand Desmond Hoyte one must understand the convergence of all three strands within the context of a Guyana bedeviled by an authoritarian political culture, racial polarization, and ideological vulnerability.

Two weeks ago at a Guyana Diaspora conference in Washington DC, I said, to the surprise of many present, that I would not support power sharing negotiations in the prevailing circumstances of chaos, fear, mistrust, and mayhem. Nothing positive could be achieved in such circumstances. Although the situation remains the same, Hoyte's passing has caused me to change my mind. As was the case with Cheddi Jagan's passing in 1997, a breathing space for unity and compromise has imposed itself on Guyana. We blew it in 1997 and we have seen hell since then. Let us not repeat our silly history. I urge that as a fitting tribute to Hoyte the PPP, PNC, and other opposition parties in consort other stakeholders begin negotiations for a power sharing government. This may be our last chance. To Mr. Hoyte's supporters and admirers I urge that your greatest tribute to your leader should be intense pressure on your party to ensure that his last political initiative be taken to its logical conclusion.

To Mr. Hoyte's wife, relatives and comrades I extend my condolences.

Dr Hinds is a University Lecturer and Political Commentator and Activist. He currently teaches Political Science at Glendale College and Mt San Antonio College in California. Please send your comments on this article to dhinds6106@aol.com.

For more information about and analysis of Guyanese and Caribbean politics click here at guyanacaribbeanpolitics.com.