The long history of colour prejudice in human society

Dec 17, 2015 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
I write in relation to Freddie Kissoon’s article “Coca-Cola withdraws advertisement that Guyanese would find acceptable” in the Kaieteur News of December 13, 2015. Once again, Mr Kissoon is on his hobby horse of misrepresenting Hinduism in general and especially in Guyana.
In his article he writes “One can say that the Hindu caste system has won in Guyana”. Apparently, he came to this conclusion after seeing an advertisement for carpenters, etc. in one of the local papers which featured “a Whiteman in a three-piece suit”. Now, is Mr Kissoon’s statement supported by the facts provided by Guyanese history? Let us compare his statement with the writings of the late Professor Emeritus Raymond Smith, an Englishman, one of the world’s foremost social anthropologists, an expert on Guyana’s history and politics, and someone whose works Mr. Kissoon claimed, in a previous column, to have studied at the University of Guyana.
In his book British Guiana, published by Oxford University Press in 1962, Professor Smith wrote that in the West Indies (Guyana included) there is “ a whole range of categories such as ‘fair’, ‘dark’, ‘red-skin’, ‘good hair’ (i.e. straight), ‘bad hair’ (i.e. kinky), and many more which serve as criteria for placing individuals on a long scale from black to white” This was exactly the situation that existed when all Indians, not just Hindus, were brought as indentured immigrants to then British Guiana. Specifically in relation to Guyana, Professor Smith wrote “If the Negroes strove towards ‘whiteness’ in word and deed and devalued whatever they felt to be peculiarly their own, they looked down even more upon the Indian immigrants who were brought in to replace them as cheap labour on the plantations.”
The writings of Professor Smith as well as Guyanese historians and sociologists clearly indicate that all Indian immigrants, despite of the Hindu caste system, started out at the bottom of the social hierarchy upon arrival in Guyana and then adapted to the existing environment. With this history where a social hierarchy based on skin colour predates Indian immigration, is it that “the Hindu caste system has won in Guyana” or simply the continuation of a practice that was already in existence before the arrival of Hindus in Guyana?
Kissoon continues “Since its birth, the Hindu film industry never had even a light-brown leading actor. Only the thieves, villains and drunkards in Hindi films are dark-skinned”. In the first place, Mr. Kissoon seems to be deliberately provocative. I am sure that he knows there is no such entity as a “Hindu film industry”. Secondly, what is the relevance when Guyanese Hindus have nothing to do with the casting and producing of Indian films? Yes, Guyanese Indians (Hindus, Muslims and Christians) like to see Indian films. But, so do Russians, Germans, Middle Easterners and Far Easterners. And even in the USA, Britain and Canada, Indian films are gaining popularity among non-Indians. Does this mean that the Hindu caste system has taken over in these countries?
The Indian film industry, now popularly referred to as Bollywood, was pioneered by Hindus, Muslims and Christians. Even after the partitioning of India, Muslims continued to be prominent in the industry. Some of the most popular Indian films seen in Guyana were produced and/or directed by Muslims such as A.R. Kardar, Mehboob Khan, Nasir Hussain, Amir Khan, and Shah Rukh Khan. In fact, two (Mother India in 1957 and Lagaan in 2001) of the only three Indian films ever nominated for a Hollywood Oscar in the foreign film category were produced and directed by Muslims. Currently, and for many years now, the three top actors, Salman Khan, Shah Rukh Khan, and Amir Khan, are Muslims. So, the selection of white-skinned actors in Indian movies is not a matter of the Hindu caste system but more of what Kissoon has himself acknowledged: “Colour has a long history in the psyche of the human race. It is part of civilization. It will not go away”.
Again, Kissoon writes “On the question of skin colour, the argument that it arose out of the slave trade and colonial domination is utter nonsense. Ancient Hindu texts are punctuated with disdain for things that were black”. I am not a brahmin nor a scholar of ancient Hindu texts. However, based on my limited knowledge of Hinduism, I am not aware of any ancient Hindu texts “that are punctuated with disdain for things that were black”. I am aware of certain disdainful statements against some groups of Hindus (referred to as low castes) but the texts make no reference to skin colour.
What I know for sure is that when the meaning of the word ‘krishna’ is checked on Google, the result shows the meaning as ‘black’ in Sanskrit, the language of ancient India and of ancient Indian texts. Likewise, Lord Krishna is depicted in black. Those familiar with Hinduism know that Lord Krishna of the ancient texts, the Bhagavad Gita and the Mahabharata, is recorded and worshipped by Hindus as an incarnation of God. It is difficult then to imagine that ancient Hindu texts would consider black to be disdainful when a Hindu God is black. And in the Ramayana, contrary to popular belief, the villain Ravana is not black or low caste. His father was a brahmin. I hope Mr Kissoon will now help to educate us by informing us of the ancient Hindu texts and quotes that are disdainful of things black.
Harry Hergash

---

---