The nature of ‘Fear’ – then and now

Oct 04, 2009 Letters

Dear Editor,
I lived through the entire Burnhamite era (1965-85) and, without a doubt, it was largely authoritarian.
It was characterized for the most part, as I had written then, by political despotism.
Fraud, Fear and Food (the triple F policy) were weapons of political rule.
Elections were routinely rigged; attacks on civil liberties including press freedom and freedom to dissent, complemented by use of goon squads/thugs against opponents, the prevalence of choke-and-rob/kick-down-the-door banditry had cast a pall of fear and uncertainty over the land; and the banning of essential foods, (we had sarcastically dubbed that LFSB – lines for soup and bread), even rationing of newsprint for my newspaper, were sordid features of that time.
But that time is different from now: Today we enjoy electoral democracy; free, not necessarily fair, but plural media; qualitatively better infrastructural facilities and social benefits (primarily in education, health, housing/water, sports and care for children/women/elderly).
In short, life is better now than then. However, the kind and intensity of fear we experience today did not exist then. The narco-criminal enterprise, phantom gangs and deportees were not yet born.
Never did we witness the brutality and barbarism that seized our collective lives and psyche such as the slaughter of Minister Sawh and his family; shooting of five pressmen; discovery of headless and guts-less bodies; car-jacking/kidnap-murder of taxi drivers; mindless slaying of innocent occupants and torching of homes; bestiality and terror of Lusignan and Bartica, etc.
The daily headlines and sensationalism of crime have a chilling effect on our lives.
It makes matters worse when members of our security forces became, and still are, both criminals and victims.
Several of them have been identified amongst extortionists, drugs traffickers/enforcers, bandits, pirates, ruthless and cold-blooded killers and rapists.
I have received so many reports of villagers who go to report crimes at police stations, only to see the criminals in uniform.
Berbicians were and continue to be afraid of reporting incidents of rape on their women and girls out of fear of reprisal. The dispatch of the so-called Blackclothes ranks there has eased the disquiet. On one occasion, when they protested vigorously as they ought to, villagers were tear-gassed and a protester was killed by police bullets.
The fear I see today, even amongst media practitioners, cannot be compared to that I have seen or experienced in the Burnham era. This is a truism. I was therefore taken back when I read Friday Musings in which Sharief Khan blind-folded himself and said, “I am sorry friend Moses – but I just don’t see the media (sic) fear you see.”
Without checking, Sharief fell victim of the newspaper headline, which was, to say the least, misleading. He repeated and relied on the rubric: “…that there is greater fear in Guyana today than during the Burnham reign”.
What I actually said, dear pal, was: “I have seen fear in this land that I have not seen even in the worse days of what I call the Burnhamite rule.”
I admit that what I said lent itself to misinterpretation and, perhaps, just perhaps, was over-stated. But I did not say that the fear is greater. It is different. It has a new and specific context.
And I cannot recall pronouncing clinically about “large doses of fear” by the media in reporting stories that could be deemed offensive to the administration.
What I said is this: “People are exercising much more self-censorship today than in the past, and we can’t in seven minutes analyse the reasons for this. What I want to say is that we can help to shed the fear if we become bolder, if we speak up. It is our inalienable right to say how we feel and why we see things the way we see them…” Even if this means that we must “censure those who govern us”.
I recalled that I was a victim of authoritarian rule. Then access to the media was denied. My newspaper was closed down.
I had prefaced that by saying that “Guyana is not a landscape where journalists are routinely jailed.” I referred to mild sanctions against journalists from time to time by government officials but these, I said, were not a policy, but behaviour that shows intolerance for criticism.
Moses Nagamootoo

Latest News

The nature of ‘Fear’ – then and now

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| March, 17th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

NSC, Office of the DPP to host Criminal Law and Sexual Offences Act...

Lucas Chung maintains strong standing at 2nd...

Farm Supplies Ltd. supports Bartica Regatta 2025

Legislation and Investment: Trinidad to Brazil,...

Three more matches billed for this weekend

CM Khan rules at 2025 National Blitz Chess...

Features/Columnists

“One Guyana” is no less a national slogan than “Green Guyana”

If Guyana’s President Ali is the “Zelensky of the Caribbean”, who is the Putin?

Partner v. investor

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

The nature of ‘Fear’ – then and now

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| March, 17th, 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 […]