Guyana’s National Identity in Comparative Perspective: Lessons from Switzerland and Turkey

Guyana’s National Identity in Comparative Perspective: Lessons from Switzerland and Turkey

by

Terrence Richard Blackman, Ph.D.

📢 Please Support the Guyana Business Journal and Magazine.

Lessons from Switzerland and Turkey for Guyana’s National Identity

National identity is a unifying narrative of who “we” are as a people—shaped by history, politics, and shared experiences. Guyana, a young nation of under a million people, is still forging its national identity amidst ethnic divisions and newfound oil wealth. In contrast, Switzerland and Turkey boast well-developed national identities built over centuries, each offering distinct lessons in nation-building.

Recently, the Guyana Business Journal visited Zurich and Istanbul, two cities that embody their respective countries’ national spirit and historical trajectory. Walking through Zurich’s orderly streets, shaped by centuries of political stability and direct democracy, and experiencing Istanbul’s rich layers of history, where Ottoman legacies meet modern Turkish nationalism, illuminated how deeply identity is intertwined with governance, economy, and culture. These visits reinforced a fundamental question for Guyana: How does a nation transform its diversity into strength, history into progress, and economic growth into a cohesive national future?

Switzerland’s identity is anchored in a multiethnic “nation of will,” united by inclusive institutions that foster a sense of belonging across linguistic and cultural divides. On the other hand, Turkey’s identity was forged through revolutionary state-building and powerful historical narratives, embedding national pride and resilience.

This reflection explores how Guyana’s national identity can be strengthened by examining each country’s recent political, economic, and cultural developments. It draws insights from Switzerland’s model of multiethnic unity (decentralized governance, direct democracy) and Turkey’s use of historical and cultural narratives (Atatürk’s reforms and state-driven nationalism). It also considers how elements of each might be adapted to Guyana’s unique context, where colonial legacies, ethnic politics, and the rapid influx of oil wealth shape national consciousness.

Finally, this analysis highlights potential “wild cards”—from the Guyanese diaspora to youth movements and global economic trends—that could significantly influence Guyana’s national identity trajectory. The lessons from Zurich and Istanbul remind us that national identity is not static; it is an evolving story that Guyana has the power to shape in the decades ahead.

Context and Recent Developments Shaping National Identity

Guyana: Diversity, Colonial Legacies, and an Oil Boom

Guyana’s national identity has been profoundly influenced by its history as a plantation colony and ethnically diverse society. The population of ~780,000 reflects the legacy of African enslavement and Indian indentureship: about 40% are of Indo-Guyanese (South Asian) origin and 29–30% Afro-Guyanese (African ancestry), alongside a mixed-heritage group (~20%) and Indigenous Amerindians (~10%). British divide-and-rule policies deliberately pitted Indo- and Afro-Guyanese against each other, entrenching political animosity along ethnic lines. This colonial legacy means post-independence politics often became a zero-sum competition between ethnic blocs, undermining a cohesive national identity. Guyana’s motto, “One People, One Nation, One Destiny,” speaks to aspirational unity, but the country has struggled to turn this idea into reality.

Recent developments have raised the stakes – and opportunities – for national identity. Since 2015, massive offshore oil discoveries have transformed Guyana into the world’s newest petro-state. Production began in 2019–2020, catapulting the economy from a reliance on sugar, rice, bauxite, and gold exports to petroleum. The International Monetary Fund projected that oil would quadruple Guyana’s GDP between 2019 and 2024. Indeed, Guyana’s GDP surged by an astonishing 57% in 2020 alone. Per capita income is on track to triple in a few years, potentially becoming the highest in the region. This sudden wealth “has staggering political implications”: citizens hope for prosperity, but there are fears of a “resource curse” and intensifying ethnic competition over oil revenues. The March 2020 general election – coinciding with the first oil – was fiercely contested, leading to a five-month standoff before the results were resolved. The dispute and allegations of fraud underscored how high the stakes had become. As one analyst noted, in an oil-rich Guyana, “the cost of losing an election is higher” since the winning party controls patronage of booming revenues. Historically, the Indo-Guyanese dominated People’s Progressive Party (PPP) and the Afro-Guyanese aligned PNC (now in a coalition) have alternated in power, each side fearing exclusion by the other. Oil windfalls risk entrenching these divisions, as each community worries the other will capture the gains.

Since taking office in 2020, President Irfaan Ali’s administration has promoted a “One Guyana” initiative explicitly aimed at healing ethnic rifts and fostering national cohesion. Officials describe the slogan – now printed on passports and currency – as “a unifying concept… a rallying cry to bring the diverse cultures and races of our country together,” reflecting the national objective of “one people, one nation, one common destiny.” This state-driven narrative of unity, coupled with policies for inclusive development, attempts to turn Guyana’s diversity from a source of fragmentation into a source of strength. Fueled by oil revenues, the coming years will test whether Guyana can channel economic gains into shared national pride and social cohesion or whether old ethnic fault lines deepen.

Switzerland: Stability, Diversity, and Evolving Unity

Switzerland’s national identity today is often held up as a model of a successful multiethnic nation. A federal republic of 8.7 million people in the heart of Europe, Switzerland famously has four national languages (German, French, Italian, Romansh) and a religious mix of Catholic and Protestant communities. Despite – or rather, because of – this diversity, the Swiss have crafted a strong civic identity transcending linguistic and religious lines. Swiss national identity is “rooted in a common historical background” and shared political values such as federalism and direct democracy. Indeed, Switzerland is described as a “Willensnation” – a “nation of will” – held together by the deliberate choice of its people rather than by a single ethnicity or language. Over centuries, the Swiss developed a “common appreciation of political values such as direct democracy, federalism and neutrality, and acceptance of the multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, and multi-cultural nature of Swiss nationhood.” It is a source of pride that “four different language groups managed to live side-by-side peacefully under one political system.” In short, Switzerland’s identity is fundamentally civic and institutional, not ethnic – an identity built on unity in diversity.

Recent political and social developments in Switzerland continue to shape (and occasionally test) this national identity. The country’s tradition of decentralized governance – with 26 cantons enjoying extensive autonomy – and its system of frequent referendums have allowed regional cultures to thrive while keeping the nation united. Citizens regularly vote on national and local issues, with turnout ranging from 30% to 70%, ensuring that all voices (from various linguistic and cultural groups) are heard in decision-making. This participatory ethos reinforces citizens’ loyalty to the Swiss state regardless of ethnic background. Modern Switzerland also grapples with being a “country of immigration”: about 25% of its residents are foreign nationals, one of the highest proportions in Europe. This influx has sparked debates about integration and identity – for example, a 2009 referendum banned the construction of new minarets, indicating some nativist backlash – but overall, Swiss identity has proven adaptable. Even as the population changes, the core idea of Switzerland as a multilingual, pluralistic democracy endures. The government and civil society emphasize integration and shared civic values; naturalization and education policies promote a sense of Swiss civic belonging among newcomers. Switzerland’s long-standing neutrality in world affairs (no foreign wars since 1815) is another stabilizing pillar of national identity, giving the Swiss a distinct role and pride on the global stage. In sum, contemporary Swiss identity remains strong due to robust institutions and an ethos of unity through diversity, even as it evolves to include new immigrant communities.

Turkey: A Century of Nation-Building and Resurgent Narratives

Turkey’s national identity was revolutionary and continues to be reshaped by current developments. The Republic of Turkey emerged in 1923 from the ruins of the multi-ethnic Ottoman Empire under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Atatürk undertook an ambitious nation-building project to create a modern, secular, and unitary Turkish identity where none had existed in the same form. His reforms in the 1920s and 1930s aggressively Westernized and centralized the new nation: the caliphate was abolished, Islam’s formal role in state affairs was removed, and sweeping cultural changes were imposed to break with the Ottoman-Islamic past. Atatürk’s principles – encapsulated in “Kemalism” – included nationalism, secularism, populism, statism, republicanism, and reformism. Turkish nationalism, in particular, was fostered through state policies: school curricula were changed, and history books were rewritten to “glorify the Turkish past,” the Turkish language was “purified” of many Arabic and Persian loanwords. An implicit narrative took hold that citizens should identify first and foremost as “Turks.” All traces of pan-Islamic or pan-Ottoman identity were officially renounced. A famous motto of Atatürk’s era was “Ne mutlu Türküm diyene” – “How happy is the one who says ‘I am a Turk’” – urging all inhabitants to embrace Turkishness as their primary identity. Through these efforts, Turkey rapidly fashioned a strong national consciousness centered on the Turkish language and a proud narrative of independence (fueled by the victory in the War of Independence 1919–1922).

This state-driven forging of identity had lasting effects. It succeeded in instilling loyalty to the Turkish nation-state and a sense of shared destiny among many disparate groups – but it also involved suppressing minority identities that didn’t fit the new mold. Most notably, the sizable Kurdish population (15–20% of Turkey’s people) was long denied recognition; for decades, Kurds were officially termed “Mountain Turks,” and their language and cultural expressions were banned or discouraged. Such policies aimed to enforce a singular national identity, though at the cost of alienating the Kurds and other minorities (Armenians, Greeks, etc.), a tension that persists in Turkish society.

In recent years, Turkey’s national identity narrative has undergone a resurgence of religious and historical themes under the leadership of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. While Atatürk’s legacy was staunchly secular and oriented toward Europe, Erdoğan and his party (AKP) have increasingly emphasized Turkey’s Ottoman and Islamic heritage as central to its identity. As one observer noted, Erdoğan “views himself as the father of a new Turkish identity, one aligned more closely with its Ottoman past [and] Islamic heritage.” His government has, for instance, promoted the celebration of Ottoman sultans and Islamic historical figures, reintroduced religious education in public schools, and, in a symbolic move, reconverted Istanbul’s Hagia Sophia from a museum back into a mosque. This neo-Ottoman, Islamist-infused nationalism represents a shift from Kemalist norms, appealing to the conservative Anatolian heartland. It has energized a sense of national pride among Erdoğan’s supporters, framing Turkey as a unique bridge between East and West with a grand imperial legacy. However, it also deepens the secular-religious divide in Turkish society and complicates relations with minorities (e.g., Kurdish aspirations are still met with Turkish nationalist resistance).

Despite these internal shifts, the overarching strength of Turkish national identity is evident. Turks generally share a fierce pride in their nation’s sovereignty and unity, whether under a secular banner or a religious-nationalist one. The republic’s centennial in 2023 saw competing narratives – Kemalist vs. Erdoğanist – but both sides celebrated the endurance of the Turkish state. Turkey demonstrates how leaders and historical context can actively reshape national identity, from Atatürk’s top-down secular nation-building to Erdoğan’s revival of cultural-religious narratives. Both approaches leverage history and symbolism to solidify the idea of a singular Turkish nation. This dynamic evolution offers lessons in state-driven identity construction’s power (and risks).

The Swiss Model: Multiethnic Unity through Institutions

Switzerland’s experience provides valuable insights into how a country divided by ethnicity, language, or religion can forge a stable and cohesive national identity. Key elements of the Swiss model include decentralization, power-sharing, and direct democracy, all of which help bind together a multiethnic society under one national roof. These institutional arrangements ensure that diverse groups feel represented and invested in the state, reducing the sense of “us vs. them” and nurturing an overarching Swiss identity.

• Federalism and Decentralized Governance: Switzerland is a confederation that grants significant autonomy to its constituent cantons (states). Local self-governance is not just administrative but cultural: each canton can set its official language(s), manage education, and handle many public services. For example, school curricula and social policies are primarily decided at the cantonal or communal level, allowing policies to reflect local linguistic and cultural preferences. This means Swiss Germans, French, Swiss Italians, etc., can maintain their unique heritage and feel “at home” in their region while still being loyal to the Swiss nation. Importantly, no single group can dominate nationally because power is diffuse – the federal government’s powers are deliberately limited to prevent over-centralization. As political scientist Wolf Linder observes, this system prevents “any uncontrolled growth in the power of the federation,” striking a balance between unity and regional diversity. For Guyana, which has distinct ethnic and geographic concentrations (e.g., Indo-Guyanese in certain regions, Afro-Guyanese in others, and Indigenous communities in the interior), a degree of devolved governance or autonomy in local affairs could help each community feel respected within an inclusive national framework. Decentralization could mitigate the winner-takes-all mentality that fuels ethnic insecurity in a unitary system by ensuring that even if a group is out of power nationally, it retains control over local matters important to its identity and development.
• Inclusive Power-Sharing at the Center: Switzerland practices an unwritten rule of broad coalition governance at the federal level. The Federal Council (executive) is a seven-member collective presidency, traditionally composed of the main parties from the German, French, and Italian-speaking areas. This “magic formula” coalition (in place since 1959) means all major political factions and linguistic groups share executive power, and decisions are made by consensus. No single party or ethnic group “wins” or “loses” outright. Such consociational practices have kept Switzerland remarkably stable – there have been no violent internal conflicts since the 19th century. The sense that everyone has a seat at the table in Bern reinforces national unity. According to Freedom House’s assessment, Switzerland is typically governed by a “broad coalition,” which reflects its diverse society. The Swiss example suggests exploring formal power-sharing mechanisms for Guyana, which has been plagued by the polarization of having one-party (and one-ethnic-group) dominance at a time. Guyanese scholars and civil society have proposed multi-ethnic unity governments or rotating presidencies to ensure that Indo- and Afro-Guyanese feel represented in leadership. Though political will is needed – as both major parties in Guyana have been reluctant to embrace power-sharing when in office – adopting a consociational approach could be transformational. It would institutionalize inclusion so that no ethnic community perpetually feels like the “outsider” to power.
• Direct Democracy and Civic Participation: Another pillar of Swiss national cohesion is the high level of direct citizen participation in governance. Swiss citizens can propose or veto laws through referendums and popular initiatives; votes are held several times a year on issues big and small. This practice, which has been embedded since the 19th century, means that people from all regions and backgrounds engage directly with national decisions. It fosters a strong sense of ownership over public life and trust in the political system. Referendums have sometimes exposed cultural fault lines (e.g., urban vs. rural or nativist vs. liberal views on immigration), but voting and debating as one nation reinforces a shared civic culture. As one analyst put it, the regular referenda enable input “from all sides,” ensuring that minority opinions are heard in a way a centralized system might overlook. Turnout can range widely, but controversial identity-related issues (like the 2009 minaret ban or a 2014 immigration cap) saw high engagement, signaling how direct democracy allows identity debates to play out peacefully at the ballot box rather than in unrest. For Guyana, implementing elements of direct democracy – for instance, referenda on key national policies or local referenda on community issues – could engage citizens beyond the divisive election cycle. It might also help circumvent the ethnic patronage gridlock by letting the people directly decide on reforms (such as constitutional changes for power-sharing or resource revenue management). Of course, direct democracy works best in a literate, politically educated society. It must be coupled with strong civic institutions – goals Guyana can strive for as its education and connectivity improve with oil wealth.
• Civic Nationalism and “Nation of Will”: Underpinning all these Swiss institutional features is an ethos of civic nationalism. The Swiss often describe their country not in ethnic terms but as a conscious union: “unus pro omnibus, omnes pro uno” (“One for all, all for one”) is inscribed in the Federal Palace. The idea that the nation exists by the will of its people (Willensnation) encourages citizens to place civic identity above narrower loyalties. Notably, this identity had to be actively cultivated – in the 19th century, amid rising ethnic nationalism across Europe, Swiss leaders explicitly promoted a common Swiss identity to preempt internal fractures. They emphasized shared history (like the legendary pact of 1291 uniting the original cantons) and shared values of freedom and democracy rather than blood or language. This holds a lesson for Guyana: a cohesive national narrative that all ethnic groups can buy into is crucial. Switzerland’s narrative highlights unity in diversity and collective will. Guyana could similarly celebrate a narrative of coming together, for instance, highlighting the joint struggle of all Guyanese peoples against colonial rule or the collaborative building of the nation post-independence. If citizens start to see “Guyanese” as a primary identity – one that does not erase their ethnic heritage but rises above it in civic matters – the nation will be stronger.

The Swiss model shows that inclusive institutions and participatory governance can unite a fragmented society. Rather than suppressing differences, Switzerland’s approach accommodates them within a larger framework. Guyana, with its roughly equal ethnic blocs and history of mistrust, stands to gain from adopting a similar mentality of unity through diversity. Constitutional reforms to introduce federal elements or guaranteed multi-ethnic coalitions, along with grassroots democratic engagement, could, over time, foster a Guyanese identity where people feel “we decide our future together” – akin to the Swiss. Of course, Swiss history and size differ from Guyana’s, but the core principle is transferable: when all groups feel they have a stake and a say, national unity deepens.

The Turkish Model: Nation-Building through Narrative and Reform

Turkey’s experience offers different insights – how a strong central vision and cultural narrative can shape national identity. While Switzerland relied on bottom-up inclusion, Turkey exemplified a top-down nation-building project. Under Atatürk’s leadership, a cohesive Turkish identity was rapidly constructed using state power, sweeping reforms, and persuasive symbolism. Key aspects of this model include the deliberate crafting of a unifying historical narrative, the use of education and language policy to instill national consciousness, and the cultivation of state institutions (army, bureaucracy) as carriers of national ideology. Guyana’s context differs significantly, yet aspects of Turkey’s approach to forging identity could be thoughtfully adapted – particularly in creating a compelling national story and modernizing society in ways that bind people together.

• Forging a Unifying Historical Narrative: Atatürk’s Turkey demonstrates the potency of a unifying national story. After centuries of Ottoman rule where loyalty was to dynasty and faith, Atatürk introduced a new narrative: the Turks as a modern nation-state, heirs to neither Sultan nor Caliph but to a secular republic. History was repackaged to serve this vision. Textbooks glorified pre-Ottoman Turkic and Anatolian civilizations, thereby giving Turks a deep-rooted pride unconnected to the recently lost empire. The message was that Turks have always been a great nation, now reborn in republican form. The narrative framed the republic as the triumphant culmination of Turkish destiny by celebrating victories like the Battle of Gallipoli (where Atatürk himself heroically fought) and the War of Independence. In speeches, Atatürk extolled the virtues of Turkishness and unity – encapsulated in slogans like “Ne mutlu Türküm diyene” – encouraging citizens of all backgrounds (from Rumelian Muslims to Anatolian peasants) to identify simply as “Turks.” This cohesive myth-making helped weld a new national identity in a short span, fostering loyalty and sacrifice (as when Atatürk told soldiers at Gallipoli, “I am not ordering you to fight, I am ordering you to die” – illustrating the expected selflessness for the nation ).

For Guyana, which lacks a single dominant ethnic majority or a straightforward precolonial national narrative, the challenge is different – but a shared narrative can still be constructed. It would need to include the country’s various “peoples.” One approach might be to emphasize the common struggle against colonial oppression: Afro- and Indo-Guyanese initially had different historical traumas (slavery vs. indentureship), yet both suffered under colonial exploitation, and both fought for independence in the 20th century. Guyana’s independence heroes like Cheddi Jagan (an Indo-Guyanese) and Forbes Burnham (an Afro-Guyanese) could be jointly lionized as the nation’s founding fathers, transcending ethnicity. A narrative highlighting the contributions of all ethnic groups – Africans, Indians, Indigenous, Europeans, Chinese, Portuguese – to building Guyana (often dubbed the “Land of Six Peoples”) can instill pride in the country’s plural heritage. School curricula and public ceremonies might commemorate events like the 1763 Berbice slave rebellion (early anti-colonial revolt) alongside the arrival of Indian laborers – weaving a tapestry of shared experiences. The goal is a collective memory that all Guyanese feel part of. Turkey’s example shows the value of a bold national story: it can galvanize patriotism and a sense of unity. But it also warns that excluding or whitewashing certain groups (as Turkey did with Kurds and Armenians) undermines long-term unity. Therefore, any Guyanese narrative must be carefully crafted to include its diversity rather than impose a fictitious homogeneity.

• Cultural Reforms and National Symbols: Hand in hand with narrative, Atatürk implemented cultural and social reforms that became pillars of Turkish national identity. Changing the alphabet from Arabic to Latin script, enforcing Western dress (banning the traditional fez), promoting the Turkish language, and granting women unprecedented rights – these reforms aimed to break societal divisions (religious, tribal, gender) and forge a single modern Turkish culture. They also created visible symbols of the new identity, such as adopting national holidays like Republic Day and instituting the national anthem and flag rituals in schools. Over time, such symbols and practices deeply ingrained a sense of nationhood in citizens’ daily lives. In Turkey, even today, portraits of Atatürk adorn classrooms and public offices, and his maxims are memorized by students, reinforcing the founding ethos. The Turkish state thus actively shaped the cultural landscape to support its identity project.

Guyana could consider the role of cultural policy in national identity. Since independence in 1966, Guyana has retained many British colonial traditions (English language, Westminster political system) and Caribbean cultural ties, but it could cultivate symbols that resonate with its unique identity. Some steps have already been taken – for example, Mashramani (Republic Day) is celebrated with carnival-like festivities, and the Golden Arrowhead flag is a cherished national symbol. To further strengthen identity, Guyana might introduce more nationwide observances that celebrate unity across ethnic lines (perhaps a “Heritage Day” honoring all ethnic groups jointly). Educational reforms could ensure that history and social studies curricula emphasize national unity and respect for all cultures (similar to how Turkey rewrote textbooks, though in Guyana’s case, it would be to acknowledge diversity rather than erase it). Language policy in Guyana is less contentious since English (and Guyanese Creole) is the lingua franca for all. Still, there could be efforts to preserve and honor minority languages (like indigenous languages) as part of the national heritage – analogous to how Switzerland honors Romansh even though few speak it.

Investing in national institutions that cut across ethnic lines – for instance, multi-ethnic youth service programs, national sports teams, or cultural festivals – can build shared pride. (Notably, Guyana’s cricket team in the West Indies league and its Olympic athletes already serve as unifying figures, as sports often do for national identity). Turkey’s top-down modernization provides a blueprint for how deliberate state actions can shape identity: Guyana’s government could use its growing resources to sponsor cultural programs, media, and infrastructure that promote a sense of one nation. The important caveat is to do this democratically and inclusively – unlike early Turkey’s one-party authoritarianism – so that all communities feel ownership of the changes.

• Patriotic Education and Civic Institutions: Atatürk believed that to create Turks, one must educate them as Turks. Under his regime, schools became factories of nationalism – teaching the Turkish language, national history, and loyalty to the secular republic. The military and civil service were other key institutions where a uniform national identity was instilled (the army styled itself as the guardian of Turkish nationhood). This shows the impact of civic institutions on identity formation: consistent messaging and representation in state institutions can solidify the idea of the nation. In Guyana, there has historically been a problem of ethnic imbalance in institutions (e.g., the military, police, and civil service have had Afro-Guyanese predominance, while the business community had more Indo-Guyanese ). This can lead to perceptions that the state “belongs” more to one group than another. Learning from Turkey’s emphasis on inclusive civic identity (at least among those recognized as Turks), Guyana could strive to make its institutions reflect the nation’s diversity. For example, recruitment and promotion in the army, police, and public sector could be done with an eye to ethnic balance or affirmative outreach so that all groups see “faces like ours” in positions of national authority. Much like Atatürk did in his speeches, public leaders should continually emphasize that the laws and rights apply equally to every Guyanese and that loyalty is to the nation, not one’s ethnic group. If youth from all communities go through similar civic experiences (school curricula, national service, or simply fair treatment by state institutions), they are more likely to identify with the nation.
• State-Driven Modernization and Unity of Purpose: A final lesson from Turkey is the use of national development goals to unite people. Atatürk framed his reforms as elevating Turkey to the “level of contemporary civilization,” giving Turks a collective mission of progress. In today’s Turkey, Erdoğan often invokes grand projects (new bridges, airports, space program aspirations) as points of national pride to rally the public. On the cusp of an oil-rich transformation, Guyana has an opportunity to define a common national project: building a prosperous, modern Guyana for all. If the government can channel oil revenues into visible improvements – infrastructure, healthcare, education – and communicate these as part of a national renaissance, it may inspire a greater sense of belonging and optimism. Citizens who see tangible development might feel “we are rising together” rather than fighting over spoils. For instance, becoming a regional energy leader or an “oil-financed green economy” could be cast as a proud Guyanese endeavor transcending ethnic divides. The key will be equitable distribution: state-driven development must benefit all communities to reinforce unity. If only one segment feels the progress, it could backfire and increase resentment. In this, Turkey’s pitfall with its Kurdish southeast (which lagged in development for decades) is instructive – neglecting a region or group undermines identity-building. Guyana must avoid such disparities by ensuring its development narrative and investments are inclusive (e.g., improving infrastructure in Indo-Guyanese farming villages, Afro-Guyanese urban neighborhoods, and remote Indigenous areas).
• Turkey’s model underscores the role of intentional narrative and reform in nation-building. A strong, cohesive identity can be engineered through shared stories, symbols, and modernization that capture the public imagination. Guyana can adopt a gentler version: crafting a narrative of unity and progress (perhaps encapsulated in the “One Guyana” concept) and visibly promoting it through education, culture, and development policies. Unlike Turkey’s early republic, Guyana must do this while cherishing its pluralism – its narrative should not demand any group to erase their heritage but rather weave those heritages into a broader national mosaic. A state-backed push for unity could substantially strengthen Guyanese national identity to match the country’s new economic might.

Toward a “One Guyana”: Adapting Lessons to Guyana’s Reality

Guyana stands at a crossroads where it can deliberately shape its national identity, drawing on both the Swiss and Turkish lessons – inclusive institutions combined with a unifying narrative. However, any adaptation must reckon with Guyana’s history of colonialism, racial division, and its small size and population. What works in Switzerland or Turkey may need to be tailored to Guyana’s context. Here, we outline strategies for Guyana to deepen its national identity, blending relevant elements from the two models:

• Constitutional Reform for Inclusive Governance: Guyana’s current Westminster-style system, with a presidency won by plurality and a polarized parliament, has long aggravated ethnic tensions. Adopting Swiss-style power-sharing mechanisms could be game-changing. For example, Guyana might introduce an arrangement where the cabinet must include members of major parties (and, by extension, ethnic groups) in proportion to their vote share – creating a de facto national unity government regardless of election outcomes. This would echo Switzerland’s multi-party Federal Council and ensure no group is permanently excluded from power. Alternatively, the presidency (a powerful office in Guyana) could be alternated or rotated between representatives of different communities, or a ceremonial presidency could be separated from an executive prime minister to dilute winner-take-all stakes. Federalism on the Swiss model may be less straightforward in a small country. However, strengthening regional and local government could give ethnic communities more say over local affairs, reducing fears of domination from the center. Critically, such reforms would require buy-in from Guyana’s politicians, who have historically resisted changes that dilute their party’s control. However, as oil wealth raises the cost of conflict, there is growing pressure from civil society and even some leaders to rethink the system. As one commentary urged, “Guyana’s winner-takes-all political system clearly must be reformed to a model in which power is shared” to address ethnic discontents. By learning from Switzerland’s inclusive governance, Guyana can move toward a political framework where “One Guyana” is not just a slogan but a structural reality.
• Rule of Law and Minority Rights Protection: Part of building national identity is ensuring every citizen feels equally protected by the law and constitution. Switzerland’s long stability owes much to a strong rule of law that applies to all regions and groups. Turkey’s identity was solidified by enshrining secular citizenship in law (albeit imperfectly applied). Guyana could consider formal minority rights protections – for instance, constitutional clauses that guarantee representation of minority groups in particular institutions or a charter of equality that explicitly forbids discrimination and promises equitable resource distribution. Some have suggested a tribunal or commission to address ethnic grievances (similar to a truth and reconciliation commission), which could help clear historical mistrust. The mere recognition of past injustices and commitment to non-repetition can psychologically unite a nation. If Afro- and Indo-Guyanese (and others) feel the state acknowledges their concerns and guarantees fairness, their identification with the country will likely increase.
• Direct Public Engagement in Decision-Making: Guyana might also experiment with direct democracy at local levels, borrowing from the Swiss practice. With improved digital connectivity, even participatory budgeting or community referendums on using certain development funds could empower ordinary Guyanese. This could weaken the patronage networks that link identity to party politics – if villagers of all ethnicities jointly decide on a new school or clinic for their area, that builds a shared local pride and cross-cultural cooperation. Additionally, involving citizens in oversight of the new oil wealth (say, through public committees or transparent online portals) can foster a sense of collective ownership of “our national patrimony.” A fascinating idea would be a national referendum on key identity issues – for example, if at some point Guyana considers a constitutional overhaul or a national unity accord, putting it to a referendum could legitimize it in the eyes of all groups (provided the campaign for it emphasizes unity). While referendums in divided societies carry risks, a carefully managed one, preceded by dialogues and education (like Switzerland’s public discourse before votes), could cement a new social contract in Guyana by directly obtaining multi-ethnic public consent.
• Building a Shared Economic Future: Swiss and Turkish models show that when people see the nation as the vehicle for prosperity, they rally behind it. Guyana’s oil boom offers a chance to define a shared economic vision. For instance, the government could establish something akin to a sovereign wealth fund or a national development plan that explicitly distributes benefits nationwide – funding jobs, infrastructure, and social services in a balanced way. If every community sees visible improvements (roads, schools, electricity, internet, healthcare) due to oil income, the narrative of “One Guyana” gains credibility. A transparent formula for revenue sharing (perhaps weighted by population and need of regions) could be institutionalized to avoid perceptions of favoritism. In effect, Guyana can aim to turn the resource curse into a resource blessing that unites: oil wealth lifting all boats. Imagine a scenario where, in five years, a young Afro-Guyanese entrepreneur and an Indo-Guyanese farmer both feel that new government grants or facilities have enabled them to succeed – both are likely to attribute that success to being part of the Guyanese nation, reinforcing common identity. This requires diligent anti-corruption measures and inclusive economic planning (the Swiss are known for prudent financial management and broad-based wealth; Turkey under Atatürk also heavily invested in state-led development to create national industry ). Guyana could even incorporate traditional practices like cooperatives (officially the “Co‑operative Republic of Guyana”) to encourage cross-ethnic economic collaboration at the community level.
• Inclusive National Narrative and Symbols: Adapting Turkey’s narrative-building, Guyana should propagate an inspirational yet authentic national story. Though contested, the “One Guyana” theme is a good start, and leaders from both government and opposition should amplify messages of unity. National symbols must be inclusive: For instance, Guyana could celebrate both Hindu Diwali and Muslim Eid as national holidays—as it already does—highlighting religious pluralism and reinforcing the idea that every culture has a place in the nation.
  The arts, media, and sports can all be leveraged. A state-sponsored history project might document the contributions of each ethnic group to Guyana’s development – from the African slaves who built the early sugar economy and fought for emancipation to the Indian indentured workers who sustained plantations after emancipation to the Indigenous peoples who stewarded the land and now help protect Guyana’s vast rainforests. Such narratives can be disseminated through documentaries, school plays, museum exhibits, etc. Additionally, national service or exchange programs that mix youths from different regions (akin to Turkey’s practice of posting civil servants in diverse provinces) could be introduced: imagine a program where urban and rural youth, Indo- and Afro-Guyanese, spend a year working together on community projects or in the army/police – the bonds formed could break down stereotypes and build camaraderie in the “melting pot” of service. The ultimate aim is to have more Guyanese think of themselves not in hyphenated terms (Indo-Guyanese, Afro-Guyanese) but simply as Guyanese, proud of a heritage enriched by many roots but united in destiny.

Guyana must navigate these adaptations carefully when implementing them. The Swiss model warns that change is gradual and consensus-driven – Swiss identity took decades of political evolution, and institutions cannot be transplanted overnight. The Turkish model warns that overly forceful assimilation can backfire – identity forged by fiat can breed resentment if groups feel erased. Therefore, Guyana’s path should be one of inclusive innovation: involve community leaders from all sides in designing reforms, pilot new approaches at small scales, and ensure that moves toward unity are perceived as fair and equitable. International partners and scholars can offer technical help. Still, the drive must come from within Guyana – a national dialogue on what kind of country Guyanese want to be in the 21st century.

Wild Cards: Dynamic Factors That Could Shape Guyanese Identity

Beyond planned reforms and policies, several unpredictable or external factors – “wild cards” – could influence Guyana’s national identity trajectory in the coming years. These factors may either bolster a shared identity or pose new challenges, and policymakers should be mindful of their impact:

• Diaspora Influence: Guyana has a large diaspora relative to its population, with an estimated 600,000 Guyanese living abroad (particularly in the US, Canada, and the UK). This diaspora often maintains strong emotional ties to the homeland and could play a pivotal role in identity formation. Diaspora communities tend to wave the Guyanese flag and celebrate national culture (e.g., through Guyanese festivals in New York or Toronto), potentially strengthening a sense of national pride. They also serve as bridges to global networks, bringing in remittances, investments, and new ideas. Recently, efforts have been organized to engage the diaspora – such as the Guyana Diaspora Conferences in 2017 and 2023 – viewing expatriates as “enormous human capital for nation-building.” Returnees and second-generation diaspora could infuse a more cosmopolitan, multi-ethnic outlook (having seen Guyana from afar as one country). On the other hand, diaspora politics can sometimes exacerbate divisions – expatriates may support their ethnic party from abroad or engage in internet echo chambers. Overall, if harnessed positively, the diaspora’s skills and investment can aid development, and their more distant perspective can push Guyana toward a post-ethnic national identity (since abroad, Guyanese often stick together regardless of ethnicity). The government’s task is to keep the diaspora engaged in inclusive initiatives – for example, inviting all diaspora to contribute to projects like building schools or tech hubs back home that benefit everyone.
• Religious Pluralism and Harmony: Guyana is a multireligious society – according to the last census, about 64% of the population is Christian, 25% Hindu, 7% Muslim, with small minorities of other faiths and about 3% non-religious. Unlike in many countries, these religious divisions in Guyana cut across ethnic lines to some extent (many Afro-Guyanese are Christian, Indo-Guyanese may be Hindu or Muslim or Christian, etc.), offering another layer of potential unity. So far, Guyana has a commendable record of religious tolerance: the state accommodates significant holidays in each faith, and interfaith events are held daily. Religious leaders often preach messages of peace and unity; for instance, joint Hindu-Muslim-Christian services are held on national days. This pluralism can be a binding factor – citizens take pride in the country’s diversity of worship and that mosques, mandirs, and churches exist side by side. However, religion could become a wildcard if politicized. For example, shifting the balance between secular and religious identity significantly impacted Turkey. In Guyana, if economic stress or external influences (like radical preachers or sectarian politics) entered the fray, it could strain the harmony. Conversely, a continued trend of interfaith respect will strengthen national identity, which celebrates unity under God in many forms. Youth in Guyana increasingly attend each other’s religious festivals (e.g., Phagwah, Eid, Christmas) as national celebrations rather than sectarian ones – a very healthy sign. Maintaining secular governance (per the constitution) while allowing free religious expression will help ensure religion remains a unifier, not a divider in Guyanese identity.
• Youth Demographics and Movements: Guyana’s population is extremely young – about 70% of citizens are under 35. This youth bulge is both a challenge and an opportunity for national identity. On the one hand, younger Guyanese did not personally experience the worst ethnic conflicts of the 1960s or the dictatorship era; many came of age in the more globalized 2000s, exposed to international ideas of multiculturalism and human rights. There is anecdotal evidence that urban youth mix more freely across ethnic lines, bonded by music, sports, and social media. If this generation can be mobilized with a forward-looking vision (for example, making Guyana an innovation hub or an environmental leader), they might put national interest above old grievances. Indeed, youth-led initiatives – such as volunteer groups, startup incubators, or art collectives – often proudly label themselves “Guyanese” and include members of all backgrounds. The UN and NGOs actively support youth leadership training in Guyana, recognizing young people as “positive change agents.” However, the wildcard is whether youth become disillusioned or empowered. High unemployment or inequality could drive youth into ethnic political camps or even gangs, reinforcing divisions. Alternatively, if the youth feel heard (for instance, through youth parliaments or consultations) and see a future in their country, they could break the cycle of ethnic voting and form new multiethnic political movements. Already, some commentators have called for the “youth population to form a new political movement” transcending the primitive politics of the past. The attitudes and activism of Guyanese youth in the next decade will significantly shape what national identity looks like in the mid-century – whether it’s united and modern or fragmented and frustrated.
• Global Economic and Geopolitical Trends: Guyana’s identity will not evolve in isolation; global currents will interact with it. The oil boom ties Guyana to the volatile global energy market. A prolonged period of high oil prices could flood the country with wealth, accelerating modernization and perhaps boosting nationalism (“resource nationalism” where Guyanese feel proud of controlling their oil). Conversely, a crash or rapid global shift to renewable energy (aligned with climate change goals) could leave Guyana in economic shock, fueling internal blame games or eroding confidence in the state. Additionally, global actors are now more interested in Guyana – the United States, China, and other powers are courting it for influence and investment. How Guyana manages these relationships could affect national identity: for instance, aligning closely with one big power might create internal dissent if seen as neo-colonial, whereas a more neutral, Switzerland-like posture of balancing ties could become part of an identity of independence. Another wildcard is the long-standing border controversy with Venezuela over the Essequibo region (about two-thirds of Guyana’s territory). In late 2023, Venezuela’s government even held a referendum asserting claim to Essequibo, which spiked tensions. If Venezuela’s provocations continue, it might ironically unify Guyana through nationalism – facing an external threat, Guyanese of all ethnic groups have rallied together to defend their sovereign territory, as seen in protests and a firm stance by President Ali. A conflict or crisis (while undesirable) often consolidates national identity sharply.
• On the other hand, if global diplomacy resolves this dispute favorably for Guyana, it can also boost confidence and national pride. Finally, climate change poses a global trend that could affect identity: Guyana is a low-lying country and also the custodian of vast rainforests; as the world highlights climate action, Guyana might brand itself as an eco-nation (especially given its paradoxical dual role as an oil producer and a carbon sink via forests). Embracing a green national identity could become a unifying mission that appeals mainly to youth and indigenous communities who have long protected nature. In short, shifts in the global landscape – economic booms or busts, significant power interests, security threats, and climate challenges – are wild cards that can either fracture society or galvanize it. Proactive leadership will be needed to navigate these in a way that strengthens the Guyanese national project.

Guyanese national identity is a work in progress – a delicate tapestry woven from the threads of its six peoples, colonial past, and aspirations for the future. The comparative lenses of Switzerland and Turkey shine light on different pathways to forge unity from diversity. Switzerland teaches the importance of inclusive governance and respecting pluralism through institutional design; it shows that when citizens of varied backgrounds genuinely share power and participate equally, a stable overarching identity can emerge without erasing local identities. Turkey illustrates the power of a compelling national narrative and bold reforms to bind a nation together; it underscores that identity can be deliberately shaped by visionary leadership and common purpose, though not without risks if taken to extremes.

For Guyana, the priority is to blend these lessons into a uniquely Guyanese solution: building strong, fair institutions that all groups trust (so that being “Guyanese” means being an equal stakeholder) and simultaneously cultivating a unifying narrative of “One Guyana” that celebrates the country’s diversity as a singular strength rather than a weakness. Recent developments – from oil wealth to the One Guyana initiative – offer a critical window to push these changes. There is momentum to improve infrastructure, reform politics, and elevate Guyana’s international profile; if channeled wisely, this can cement a more cohesive national identity. Academic studies and historical data support the notion that national identity is not static – it deepens when people have shared successes, shared values, and inclusive symbols to rally around. As Guyana navigates its newfound prosperity, it must ensure those successes are shared by all ethnic groups, thereby creating new standard reference points for national pride (a world-class university built with oil funds, a victory in cricket or science achieved together, etc.).

Political leaders and scholars often note that Guyana’s diversity need not be a curse; rather, it can be the foundation of a rich and resilient national culture if welded by good governance and mutual respect. One former Caribbean statesman examining Guyana remarked that the search for national unity has been “underlying” and ongoing but not impossible. Indeed, Guyana’s very name (derived from an indigenous word meaning “Land of Many Waters”) could metaphorically represent its identity – many currents (ethnicities, religions) coming together into one flow.

Going forward, attention should also remain on the wild cards: engaging the diaspora’s patriotism, maintaining interreligious harmony, empowering the youth as ambassadors of a new mindset, and positioning Guyana thoughtfully amid global forces. Any of these factors could accelerate or derail identity-building. But with prudent policy and an inclusive ethos, Guyana can navigate them.

In a sense, Guyana in the 2020s is embarking on a journey akin to what Switzerland managed in the 1800s and Turkey in the early 1900s – defining itself anew. The comparative reflection here suggests cautious optimism. Guyana has the benefit of learning from those historical experiences. By avoiding their pitfalls (ethnic exclusion or authoritarian imposition) and emulating their successes (institutional unity and inspiring narrative), Guyana may well achieve the “One People, One Nation, One Destiny” its founders dreamed of. A Guyanese national identity strengthened in this way would heal internal divisions and serve as a bedrock for stability and development in the coming decades. As the country transforms economically, so too can it transform socially – into a truly united nation, proud of its diversity yet fundamentally one Guyana.

 

📢 Please Support the Guyana Business Journal and Magazine.

📢 Stay informed. Engage in the conversation. Support independent reporting.

Dr. Terrence Richard Blackman, associate professor of mathematics and a founding member of the Undergraduate Program in Mathematics at Medgar Evers College, is a member of the Guyanese diaspora. He is a former Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Visiting Professor at MIT and a Visitor to The School of Mathematics at The Institute for Advanced Study. Dr. Blackman is Chair of the Mathematics Department and former Dean of the School of Science, Health, and Technology at Medgar Evers College, where he has worked for almost thirty years. He graduated from Queen’s College, Guyana, Brooklyn College, CUNY, and the City University of New York Graduate School. He is the Founder of the Guyana Business Journal & Magazine.

📩 terrence.blackman@guyanabusinessjournal.com

 

Sources:

• Gomes, P. I. (2023). Mobilizing Guyana’s Diaspora Beyond Remittances. IDN-InDepthNews – Notes colonial divide-and-rule policies embedding ethnic animosity; provides Guyana’s ethnic composition (Indo 40%, Afro 29%, Mixed 20%, Indigenous 10%) and diaspora size ~600,000.
• Thorne, K. (2020). Guyana: Oil, Politics, and Great Expectations. CSIS Brief – Discusses Guyana’s 2020 election dispute and the impact of oil revenues on ethnic divisions. Notes IMF forecast of quadrupled GDP 2019–2024.
• Persaud, A. (2020). In Resource-Cursed Guyana, Ethnic Conflict Threatens Democracy. Foreign Policy—Analyzes how oil discovery intensifies ethnic competition. Explains Indo-vs. Afro-Guyanese party alignment and fears of exclusion. References Guyana as “Land of Six Peoples” and desire to be just Guyanese.
• Identity Hunters (2017). The Swiss: an ethnically homogenous people? – Explores Swiss identity’s foundations as a Willensnation. Emphasizes shared political values (direct democracy, federalism, neutrality) and pride in peaceful multi-lingual coexistence.
• Wikipedia. Switzerland (accessed 2025) confirms that Swiss national identity “transcends language, ethnicity, and religion,” rooted in a common historical background and values.
• Freedom House (2021). Freedom in the World – Switzerland – Notes that Switzerland’s multilingual state is typically governed by a broad coalition, reflecting decentralization and consensus.
• Britannica. Kemalist Policies (Turkey) – Details Atatürk’s nation-building reforms. Describes encouragement of nationalism via rewritten history and language purification and the renunciation of Ottoman/Islamic identities.
• Wikipedia. Student Oath (Turkey) – Documents Atatürk’s famous motto, “Ne mutlu Türküm diyene” (“How happy is the one who says ‘I am a Turk’”), used in 1933 speeches to promote a civic Turkish identity.
• Ackerman, E. (2016). Atatürk Versus Erdoğan: Turkey’s Long Struggle. The New Yorker – Observes that President Erdoğan seeks a new Turkish identity aligned with Ottoman-Islamic heritage, contrasting with Atatürk’s secular nation.
• U.S. State Dept. International Religious Freedom Report (Guyana, 2016) – Provides Guyana’s religious demographics: 64% Christian, 25% Hindu, 7% Muslim, and notes broad interfaith inclusion.
• IFES (2021). Guyana – Highlights that ~70% of Guyana’s population is under 35, underlining the role of youth in the electorate and future identity formation.
• The Guardian (2024). Tensions rise in Guyana as Maduro uses border dispute… – Describes how Venezuela’s claim to Essequibo (contested region comprising 2/3 of Guyana) has sparked nationalist sentiment in Guyana. Notes Essequibo’s population (~120,000 of 800,000) and resources, and international responses.
• News Room Guyana (2025). ‘One Guyana’ slogan on national documents – Quotes Guyanese Attorney General Anil Nandlall defending “One Guyana” as a non-partisan unifying principle: “one people, one nation, one common destiny… a rallying cry to bring diverse cultures together.”
• Georgetown J. of Int’l Affairs (2020). Oil, Ethnic Conflict, and Reforms – Argues that losing elections becomes costlier with oil, and ethnically charged voting makes power-sharing reforms essential. Describes how current voting patterns lead to perceptions of patronage and past inter-ethnic violence.