Cheddi was honest, democratic and non-violent

Aug 10, 2021 Letters

Dear Editor,

I agree with Freddie (Aug. 8) that Cheddi Jagan would not have victimised or harm him or anyone for that matter on account of political differences or media criticism. He would not have unleashed violence on critics, as Burnham and Hoyte did.
Cheddi was a very progressive political leader, the like of who was hardly replicated in politics. He was a non-violent Gandhian, incorruptibly honest and decent. I had the opportunity to interview him several times in Guyana and New York for newspaper and magazine articles. It was always pleasant to listen to him although I did not embrace his political rhetoric or socialist ideas.
Jagan had a very colourful tenure in public life – one in which he faced off frequently with the business community and the racist Burnham. I heard him railed against big business in Guyana and at conferences in America. But he was held in high esteem by the business community although they did not support him politically till the 1990s. Cheddi encouraged political exchange and tried to convince others to accept his viewpoint and reading of politics and economics. They praised his honesty.
Cheddi encouraged political exchange and tried to convince others to accept his viewpoint and reading of politics and economics. He did not shut out others but listened to all points of view before making a decision. At times, he changed his mind on issues if one makes a strong case for a workable position.
Jagan tried hard to prevail with his socialist views that got him in political troubles. Had he been pragmatic, as Bharrat Jagdeo has been of late, Guyana would have avoided cold war politics and social and political problems would have been minimal.
Jagan was indisputably the most dynamic politician of Guyana. But his most glaring shortcoming was his failure to create a truly “free” people in which the population is not trapped in political or racial prison. He did not dump the Burnham constitution or carry out much needed constitutional reform, which he long promised when he was in opposition. He could have reformed the constitution to give people real, meaningful power given his passionate advocacy for the rights and empowerment of the working class. Nevertheless, we are grateful that he began institutionalising democracy in 1992 when he became President.

Yours truly,
Vishnu Bisram

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News