Engendering trust

It is not hard to discern that trust is a commodity that is in very short supply among our people, after almost three years under the PNC-led APNU/AFC coalition. While one could not speak of a “groundswell”, there was certainly enough trust engendered to have squeaked past the PPPC, even though the long incumbency of the latter might have been the overriding factor. However, since then, the trust has evaporated like fine mist exposed to sunshine, after a series of unfortunate actions, ranging from their immediate 50 per cent raise for ministers to the unilateral closure of half of the sugar industry, which threw 7000 workers onto the breadlines.
The lack of trust between the people and Government was most recently manifested when the long-feuding branches of the labour movement, FITUG and TUC, took a common position to resist hints that control of GuySuCo may revert to the Minister of Agriculture. With such personalisation of mistrust, we are in danger of it becoming ingrained in our national psyche after the dyspeptic and dystopian policies practised by the Government. But this eventuality does not bode well for the development of a more secure and harmonious society all Guyanese so strongly desire. Trust is the cement that holds together any agglomeration of humanity. The very notion of “social” implies a recognition of predictability in the actions of people that has to be undergirded by trust. Absent this crucial element, we revert to the law of the jungle.
The Swedish-born philosopher and ethicist Sissela Bok wrote, “Trust is a social good to be protected just as much as the air we breathe or the water we drink. When it is damaged, the community as a whole suffers; and when it is destroyed, societies falter and collapse.”
As far as the life of nations go, ours is still in its infancy. But surely we must, as a people, recognise it is not only our interests, but our fates that are interwoven and intertwined. Whatever we may value – be it material, cultural or spiritual goods – we inevitably have to fall back on others to secure it, or at least not to frustrate its acquisition. And this is where trust comes into the picture.
This is not to acknowledge there is a certain element of risk in the matter of trust, defined as: “an individual’s belief in, and willingness to act on the basis of, the words, actions, and decisions of another.”
As people go through life, a history of previous social interactions would have alerted them to the extent to which others can be relied on to keep their word, and which experience may guide them in new, ambiguous situations.
All of which leads to the formation of heuristics that facilitate dealing with the reality in front of us without having to go through convoluted analyses, which most of us are incapable of, to begin with. In Guyana today, the Government has eroded the “benefit of the doubt” given to them initially, and which is de rigueur in the realm of the public arena.
Today, a wide swathe of Guyanese automatically assume the Government is prevaricating. We expect the worst and take pre-emptive, “defensive” steps. Quite frequently, and not too surprisingly, our expectations have a self-fulfilling effect, as the others respond in kind. And the trust deficit increases.
What we are suggesting is that while this dour (and sour) attitude is certainly not good for our health – by making us more frustrated in the Hobbesian, dog-eat-dog world – it is up to the Government to change this condition by keeping its campaign promises. The PNC can begin by treating its coalition partners – first within APNU and then with the AFC — with greater fidelity to what was negotiated explicitly and implicitly. By now, most Guyanese accept that there has to be a rapprochement between the two major political forces, which can only become reality if greater trust is engendered first and foremost by the actions of the incumbent PNC.