Timing, focus and the fate of Guyana

Jul 22, 2009 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

Nigel Westmaas has replied to my criticism (“We are not captive to Freddie Kissoon’s timing or focus”- KN, July 18) of the Stabroek page, “In the Diaspora” in which I focused on the patent lack of criticism of elected dictatorship here in Georgetown by the Guyanese writers who contribute to that feature.
I made pointed reference to Andaiye and Alissa Trotz’s concern about the implications for democracy in the Caribbean, of the recent military coup in Honduras and Alissa Trotz and Nigel’s reporting on the Guyana-Barbados immigration quarrel.
My point was and still is – “In the Diaspora” shies away from discourse of Guyana’s frightening descent into authoritarian forms that are worse than Burnham’s deformities.
I have absolutely no disagreement with Nigel’s contention. Andaiye and Alissa may genuinely feel in both heart and mind that the coup in Honduras has more consequences for social stability in the Caribbean than what is taking place in Guyana. I do not share the same view.
On the contrary, in any debate of the two issues, my argument would be that as a Guyanese living in what I refer to a polity that has gone beyond the political pathologies of anything seen in Burnham’s Guyana or Gairy’s Grenada, I believe the consequences of what is taking place in Guyana would have more shattering reverberations in the English-speaking Caribbean than the coup in Honduras.
To complicate matters, I do not share the casual reasons for the coup as adumbrated by Andaiye and Alissa and the third writer, Dr. Norman Girvan. I believe Ron Sanders has a perspective that differs substantially from the canvas painted by the three writers in their article on Honduras. I would suggest to Andaiye and Alissa that they read Sanders’s column in this newspaper (July 11)
Let’s return to Nigel’s observation that his writings and those of Andaiye and Alissa “are not captive to “Kissoon’s timing and focus.” These are bad choice of words. If you deconstruct the sentence, there may be more epistemological meanings than what appears in Nigel’s letter.
At least his words at a surface level appear quarrelsome and acrimonious. This is disappointing in that my advocacy was about speaking out on the descent into political abomination in a country that both Nigel and Andaiye have contributed immeasurably to, particularly in the struggle for free elections.
The inheritors of Guyana post-Burnham world should include Andaiye and Nigel.
Human psychology is intricate. I didn’t mean to insinuate that Andaiye and Nigel are fearful of advocacy against an offending government that currently rules Guyana. I respect and admire what these two persons along with thousands from the WPA have done for this country.
Andaiye may justifiably argue that she has made her contribution and it is for the younger generation to take up the mantle from her. As I said, human psychology is complex. I don’t know if that is her outlook but if it is, I will not reject or insult it. And I fully understand it if it exists.
I have a close relationship with the UG students’ leader, Jason Benjamin, and I constantly bombard him with the demand that he has to take over from us because he is younger and the future belongs to people like him.
As for Nigel, he, like Andaiye, is getting on in age. He made his sacrifice for Guyana. He is living abroad and has his family commitments. I cannot assume that it is right for these two persons to continue to struggle for a better Guyana. Surely, it is time for the Jason Benjamins to come forward. I hold the same perspective on Dr. Clive Thomas. His journey has been a prodigious one. I have often criticized him for not confronting elected dictatorship in his weekly column in the Stabroek News.
I repeat for the third time, human nature is not an easy thing to comprehend.
Maybe Clive sees the journey as being over for him. His role in fighting for democracy has been huge, really huge.
I do believe as people get on in age, they feel they had tried and others must come forward. You cannot ask a Roopnarine, a Bhagwan, a Thomas, a Kwayana to just pick up where they left off in 1980. That would be a large moral imposition on them. These are Guyanese freedom fighters whose record is impeccable. The PPP has betrayed them. That is clear for me.
The PPP has washed away all the priceless values of revolutionary struggle that these great freedom fighters fought for. It is for others to save Guyana. The dream is still alive.

Latest News

Timing, focus and the fate of Guyana

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 10th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Khalil, Pollard and Barker reign supreme as BCQS Int’l Masters...

Cricket West Indies passes historic governance...

Archery Guyana hosts thrilling 2024 National...

Prashad claims victory at the recently concluded...

West Indies & Sri Lanka top their respective...

Allicock, Amsterdam named in GBA training squad...

Features/Columnists

Are we better off today than we were before first oil?

OAS Secretary General Election and renewed OAS Consensus

Jagdeo on contract awards

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

Timing, focus and the fate of Guyana

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 10th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]