This is a dictatorial party whose leaders were never elected

Jun 15, 2017 Letters

Dear Editor,
The continuous attempt by some members of the Working People’s Alliance (WPA) to ascribe sainthood to Dr. Walter Rodney, given honest reading of the man, it begs the question if he would have been comfortable being profiled in such a manner. Dr. Rodney was no saint and never pretended to be; he was a Marxist revolutionary who believed in violent overthrow of government/political power. Debasing what he believed in and stood for politically is hypocritical and downright dishonest. Let’s have conversations on the aspect of Rodney’s political life in context of the era, what he stood for, and tried to achieve.
The WPA revels in talking about Rodney’s efforts to remove a dictatorial government, which it claims the PNC was, given what is says that that government was not elected by the people. If dictatorship is so defined, the WPA is the epitome of dictatorship. In 2017 it remains the longest and only party in Guyana to hold this record. From Rodney’s leadership in the 1970s to present, none of the WPA leaders was ever elected by the members. This dictatorial party rotates its co-leadership between two persons, and one of whom, because of his race, is always assured the title if he wants it. Guyana has at least six races yet the so-called acclaimed WPA anoints only Africans and Indians to its leadership.
Making logical deduction of the WPA’s actions would lead to conclusion that at the nation level once the party would have gotten into government the votes of the electorate would have been ignored and it would have imposed a rotating leadership on the society. What the WPA expects from and calls for of political parties and at the national it does not practice at the party level.
The society continues to be ‘reminded’ what Rodney would have wanted. But if what is being said Rodney stood for and same is being practiced by the WPA, the actions and in-actions of some in its leadership leave much to be desired. Outside of some few instances as in the work of Dr. Clive Thomas in his writings on the State and the State Asset Recovery Unit which he heads; there are many minuses in the party. The working class activist Rodney is always projected as is not being practiced in this government where the WPA has a voice and notably in the Ministry of Education, where his colleague is the Minister.
Looking at communist countries around the world it is a clique who leads and rotates leadership. Observe China, Cuba and Russia. A Walter Rodney government, given his communist belief, and going by the example he and other leaders set in the Party, Guyana would have been governed likewise. In 2017 the WPA wants the agreement on oil to be released on the date of Rodney’s death anniversary in homage to him. Dr. David Hinds is now asking that the University of Guyana (UG) be named after him. Carrying the ridiculous to conclusion it is only a matter of time before the WPA asks for a national holiday in his honour or Guyana be renamed Rodney. The U.G should not be renamed after Rodney.
Distinguished a scholar some may think he was, he does not have the body of work and ground breaking intellectual thoughts like the late internationally renowned Guyanese, Dr. Ivan Van Sertima. There may be more out there of similar stature. If the renaming is because of his foray into national politics, U.G should be renamed in honour of Dr. Cheddi Jagan and Linden Forbes Sampson Burnham. The former is the realisation of the idea and the latter the expansion of it. There is a chair at U.G in honour of Rodney. The WPA should work to make it meaningful or create a school in honour of him. An intellectual giant he is being impressed on the society to be, it should not be difficult for those who claim they are walking in his footsteps or thrive on claimed association, to be able to achieve.
The yearly sanitising and rewriting of Rodney’s history were he alive he would not even know himself nor be proud of the pearly white robe his followers are sewing for him. Dr. Rodney was no saint and from his politics he never attempted to be. Let’s be honest about who he was and respect what he stood for. Some of his praxis is relevant today and some not, but it is dishonest to paint an image of what he was not or ascribe to him what he does not deserve.
Minette Bacchus

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News