Changing the name of CARIFESTA AVENUE

Jun 18, 2016 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

I cannot say that I am one of those academics, political activists and citizens that hold the founding fathers of local political activism in great esteem. Unless one is a fundamental fool, only then can one ignore the literal mountains of evidence of grave political flaws of those leaders, particularly Forbes Burnham, Cheddi and Janet Jagan. The evidence that can be pulled from out of the skies at any time is simply too overwhelming.
This is not to say that these founding fathers and mothers of modern politics did not have their moments of glory. Forbes Burnham stands out in this context. It is because of these moments of glory that Burnham’s admirers have shut out from their psychology the egregious mistakes he made during his reign between 1964 and 1985 (that is a long period). There was an interesting thing that happened during the death anniversary of Walter Rodney held at Moray House on June 13, last Monday.
Sara Bharrat, a young academic who was part of the panel, came up to me after the event. She was bewildered at the thought of educated Guyanese who lived through the period of President Burnham’s domination who cannot see some of the bad things he did.
She mentioned one particular prominent citizen whom I will not name. I told Sara that Forbes Burnham was a very complex person who was possessed of learning and vision.
What Burnham’s protégés (who are all now either entering their sixties or are in their sixties or are going on to their seventies) saw over the years of intimate dialogues with Burnham are the learning and the vision. Those two motifs they carry deep in their psychology and this psychology shuts out any thought that their great leader would have committed political and legal violations of a grave nature.
Sara and I agreed that the time at Moray House was too short to discuss Walter Rodney, Forbes Burnham and the seventies. We agreed a future meeting was necessary.
This has been a long digression from the topic of this column which is the plan by Government to change the name of Carifesta Avenue. But it was a necessary digression because the context of Burnham, who he was and what he stood for, has to come into play if one is going to accept the name change.
The difficulty in contextualizing Burnham is that you cannot deny his positive contributions. And one of Burnham’s seminal inputs into Caribbean life that will last a lifetime is CARIFESTA.
It is doubtful that CARIFESTA will ever die. Economic slumps may cause interruptions, meaning some years, it may not be held, but CARIFESTA has become part of the reality and culture of the Caribbean. Carifesta Avenue in Guyana is intricately bound up with Burnham and his vision. If you are going to change the name, you have to agree that you are erasing a part of Burnham’s legacy and a part of Guyana’s history.
The roadway itself was landscaped to facilitate the events at the National Park. If you change the name, then you are removing a part of the history of that part of the seawall.
We come now to logics. Why change the name? There has been no official statement from the Government why it plans to do so. Secondly, why the new designation – Avenue of the Caribbean? This is the dimension of the plan that is bizarre. Why the Caribbean? Guyana is not even physically part of the Caribbean Sea. Culturally and sociologically, we evolved as an integral part of the islands of the British West Indies. But even here, Guyana had significant departures from Caribbean sociology and politics.
Most, if not all, CARICOM islands see Guyana through lenses that are different from the ones they use to view their island neighbours. Trinidad really does not care for CARICOM. And Jamaica sees itself more as a neighbour of the US rather than an integral part of the family of islands. Interesting to note that only two CARICOM countries have a national CARICOM holiday – St. Vincent and Guyana. What has been going on in the relationship between Guyana and CARICOM and the wider Caribbean group of countries for Guyana to switch from the designation of Carifesta Avenue to Avenue of the Caribbean?
I don’t think one should ever contemplate changing the appellation of Carifesta Avenue. But life is a dynamic process. There could be a sound philosophical reason for doing so, and it would be intriguing for all Guyanese to hear the logic behind it. But surely, not Avenue of the Caribbean. Somebody is playing a silly joke.

4 thoughts on “Changing the name of CARIFESTA AVENUE”

stabruk June 18, 2016 at 10:21 am

Lol…Avenue of the Caribbean????…that’s so hilarious…now I know why Guyanese are the laughing stock of the Caribbean, opps I meant Avenue of the Caribbean.
1. CliRey June 19, 2016 at 2:48 pm
  
  I disagree, ‘Avenue of the CARIBBEAN’ has a ring to it,sort of
  original, don’t you think?..
CliRey June 19, 2016 at 2:43 pm

I have wondered over the years, why is Jamaica the onlyCaricom member, that have so many of it’s streets named after all Caricom members..
Some examples, Tobago Ave,Barbados Ave, Trinidad Ave, St Luisa ,St Vincent Rd,
and of course Carifta Ave , some more than one street named after the Island..
To the best of my knowledge, no other Caricom members have named any street, after any place in Jamaica..
CliRey June 19, 2016 at 2:52 pm

….????Guyana is an integral part of Caricom ,gosh , it is headquartered there for goodness sake ..