Racially insensitive – our position

Oct 23, 2021 Editorial

---

Kaieteur News – Former Ethnic Relations Commissioner (ERC), Pandit Deodat Persaud, had said that what we should do to penalise offending Guyanese and deter them from uttering racially insensitive remarks has its place and its merits. We take what Commissioner Persaud held out as his position, and now leverage it in other places and register where we stand on this very challenging issue of racial sensitivity.
He is of the mind that “Stricter penalties are needed for public officials making racially insensitive remarks -ERC Commissioner” (KN May 01). We agree, but that is only a start, and again, only goes so far. To be sure, it pinches where such is felt sharply, meaning, in the pocketbook. But we can only penalise and legislate so far. We can only expose and embarrass to an extent. Sooner than later, potential offenders are going to find ways to make themselves inaudible and undetectable, or invisible and unaccountable, or insignificant and impotent. In other words, relative to the latter, the potential and actual racial offenders would be savvy enough to claim that they are harmless, mean no ill-will, and are innocent of malice aforethought. And since Guyanese are so slick in the racially hostile and racially insensitive departments, they may actually get away with breaches, unless they get reckless and daring.
We think that “stiffer penalties” are a start, but they are only the final fallback part of a comprehensive programme aimed at addressing where we are, and minimising the blatant excesses. We must be realistic and come to an appreciation, as undesirable as it is, that unreconstructed bigots and rank racial partisans will find ways to have their way, and deliver the battering and the piercing. But without a doubt, any such programme, with the objective of better managing Guyana’s horrendous racial environment and climate, must incorporate certain compulsory pillars.
There must a sturdy pillar related to education and awareness. There must be one dedicated to conditioning and sensitising. There has to be another then another that together must be about contemporary conscience as fused to timeless standards, and the pressure and condemnations of contemporaries, who will have no part of any such conduct, or those responsible for them, be it as initiators or deliverers. We cover some more ground, where no one has gone before, and none wants to go today: leaders must hold their supporters to the test of honesty where racial sensitivities are concerned. Leaders must demand a non-negotiable commitment (one strike and out) from followers in toeing the racial line. This must be openly understood as the genuine leadership line and the settled party line. If these are not done, we are wasting time, and all of us are spinning our wheels futilely.
In essence, we are about the charade of a cascade of words and postures that mean nothing, other than ‘go ahead and push the racial envelope’ and ‘see what can be had with raising hackles and attracting attention without sanction’ and ‘don’t worry, if push comes to shove, and the roof fall in on head, then we will be there to protect and back.’ We take this stance: this is what we have had, and especially during heated elections times, when the incendiary is all too commonplace. Leaders and seniors have to hold the feet of their more risk-willing comrades to the fire. Call them out, by letting them know that they have no standing, no heroic regard; and that they will not have the protective embrace of safe harbours provided by the party.
In fact, the best proof of leadership and party authenticity, that they will not mess around with the racially hostile or racially insensitive, and that they will not condone in any manner the breaches of their own, would be to make a public spectacle of their own, then publicly expel them from party membership, party responsibility, and party warmth and welcome. There is no other proof, no more persuasive pudding, than when political parties and their leaders take such firm and unequivocal actions. There is no quibbling, no halfway measures, no winking, blinking, and nodding, as have all been the case for decade after decade.
It is our belief, and our position, that the message will be clear: engage in the racially hostile and insensitive at your own risk. The position of the political parties must be as unambiguous as this: Anyone doing so will be on their own. Perhaps a start could be made with some of the recommendations we make. But the bona fides must be present or we are going nowhere with the racially hostile and the racially insensitive. It starts with leadership by example and continues with the strongest and clearest leadership actions.

---

---