I don’t give a damn who is Indian, African, White, etc.

Jul 08, 2020 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

---

The more David Hinds write, the more he exposes a one-dimensional psyche in which the obsession with Guyanese of African ethnicity becomes almost psychotic. David seems mentally incapable of writing a sociological or political analysis without mentioning that he is African, that Guyanese Africans emerged from slavery, that African Guyanese need to have their due share. And it goes on and on.
In his letter yesterday on me, it is the expected banal repetition – race, slavery, African Guyanese, etc. It has become sad and tragic that an analyst can see only one dimension of Guyana‘s sociology. Of course you cannot win once you are non-African because the fall back position is inevitable. It is saturated in people like David Hinds. Here it is – we, non-African Guyanese will never understand how African Guyanese feel, because we don’t have the background of slavery. Unfortunately that cannot explain all the modern dilemmas of Guyana. And the reason is simple – others will contend that they came too and demand their share and want respect.
As David writes, the cobwebs are extending their tentacles and sadly he cannot see that. Here is a titanic contradiction. Let’s quote him; “African Guyanese embraced and protected Freddie when his newfound heroes wanted him expired.” By newfound heroes he means the PPP. So he should ask himself why the PPP wanted me killed and not him, Eric Phillips, Barrington Braithwaite, Tacuma Ogunseye, James Bond, etc.
I must have done something terrible for the PPP to want to kill me. But if my memory serves me right, the PPP is Indian, I am Indian, who did not proclaim my Indianess and join my Indian brethren in the Indian led-PPP government the identical way David, Bond, Philips, Braithwaite, Ogunseye are sticking together with their African brethren in the PNC. Could it be that the PPP wanted me expired because I betrayed my Indian government and criticize my Indian brethren in power? Or could it also be that I am just not interested in the ethnic composition of my government but their human rights record.
I did not know that my African brethren protected me when my “new found heroes” wanted to kill me. The Kaieteur News owned by an Indian man did not succumb to the threats of the Indian government and stopped me from writing. Maybe that Indian owner also betrayed his Indian government by retaining me.
As to my newfound heroes; this is where the moral bankruptcy of David can be found. I have “newfound heroes” all because I assert my right to vote for Lenox Shuman and want to have that vote counted. Because I want Guyanese to vote and to have free and fair elections in my country, the PPP is my newfound heroes.
In his letter, David proclaims Kwayana is his hero. Nothing wrong with that. The world will see nothing wrong with that. What the world will see as wrong is when you imposed your icons on others. Kwayana is someone I have immense respect for, but he is not among my collection of heroes.
The 2020 election drama has shown me a side to Kwayana that has compelled me to examine the methodologies he has used to depict Guyanese contemporary political history the past 70 years. I am saying most unambiguously that I no longer see Kwayana the same way because his attitude on the election impasse tells me he does not analyze situations objectively.
I get the pellucid impression that Kwayana selects facts that suit his purpose, intentions and agendas. I believe he has used those questionable methodologies to obscure facts that if not, the recording of Guyanese history would be richer. Here is a man who has more than a dozen publications on Guyanese historical events and when you look at his interpretations of the 2020 rigged election, it has to cause you to question the contents of those publications.
He leaves independent media houses like Stabroek News and Kaieteur News and quotes from the Chronicle. He quotes from an APNU+AFC candidate, Ganesh Mahipaul but is deliberately oblivious to many opposition candidates some of whom have admirable integrity. He tells us that he cannot comment on Claudette Singh because he doesn’t have the facts. But he has the facts to know that campaign money was spent without it being accounted for. He knows there was post-election violence. How did he know about these things when he doesn’t live in Guyana? It is this same lop-sided approach to fact-gathering that should cause us to question his objective analyses in his publications. Finally, David, I have no ethnic eye when I criticize people, something you wouldn’t understand.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

---

---