2021 review – Part 2: Do as I say, I’m superior

Jan 07, 2022 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

---

Kaieteur News – It is such a loss not only to Guyana but the world when academics who work at a country’s only university cannot attempt to theorise about social and moral behaviour in their country so the world can have access to those interpretations that may be used in textbooks for younger minds to learn from.
It doesn’t matter what earth shattering negativity occurs in this land, the UG academics do not seem to have mental strength to put pen to paper. When the intention of certain classes, cultural organisations and political actors became clear that the no-confidence motion (NCV) must be rejected because power was at stake, I can remember only one UG lecturer, Dr. Thomas Singh, publicly rejected the folly that the majority of 65 is 34.
I can remember at that time in 2018, the head of Guyana Transparency Institute was UG lecturer, Dr. Troy Thomas of the Department of Mathematics. Guyanese since the NCV are yet to hear Dr. Thomas’ take on what is the mathematical majority of 65.
2021 is gone, and we have seen no theoretical arguments from independent academic minds on what took place in the realm of political behaviour in Guyana. It was one of the most terrible years in pre and post-Independence Guyana. What occurred last year was a rejection of rational dialogue by anti-government forces and government critics using an anthropological premise that though was invisible and not directly stated was the fulcrum on which their attitude toward the PPP government and Indian Guyanese stood.
In 2021, theoretically there was no complex psychological separation between the following anti-government actors; mainstream opposition political parties, certain civil society entities, certain personalities that appear independent but for reasons of class and race resent the PPP’s control of state power; individuals both inside and outside of Guyana who because of ego see their mental refreshment as being guaranteed by being anti-government, and finally sections of the independent media whose attitude to religion, eugenics, anthropology, culture, class and colour in general determines how they see politics in this land.
I don’t believe for a moment these sectors are racist against Indian people in Guyana. What has played out in Guyana in 2021 was the invocation of the Lionel Luckhoo/Rupert Roopnaraine syndrome whereby the loss of Christian, Western Creole middle class power in 2020 was psychically shattering giving the psychological comfort in 2015 that finally, the domination of rural Indian presence in government was over.
There is a caveat however, that must figure in my theoretical formulation. Although there was never ever any historical hatred for and any ongoing sentiments against Indian Guyanese, these sectors mentioned above may open themselves to the charge of racism when you deconstruct the meaning of the term. If you feel that Western values and Creole class breeding is better suited for administering the governments of the post-colonial West Indies then isn’t that racist thinking?
How did the Freudian mind of these strata named about express itself in 2021? The caption of this column says it all. What happened last year in Guyana was the open manifestation of cultural and moral superiority. All the strata named above took the position that the political leadership of the Guyana Government must shape its behaviour the way these sections of Guyana think it should. The various personalities in these strata feel but they do not have any moral obligation to governmental leaders to shape their politics and moral values.
Let me put it in ordinary language without any grammatical sophistication. You must dialogue with us on: Exxon investment, local content, gas to shore, election reform, how the EPA must operate, climate change, cash grants, etc. But don’t tell us how we must approach national issues.
Don’t tell us we didn’t raise our voice on the election rigging; don’t tell us that we didn’t chastise Granger and Harmon for their inciting words in September 2020 in Region Five; don’t tell us that we were silent when GECOM chairperson properly selected Vishnu Persaud for the post of chief election officer; don’t tell us our organisations conveniently ignore human rights violations elsewhere but only picks on the government; don’t tell us we live outside where we enjoy the good life; don’t tell us we are just a one-man show; don’t tell us who and what to report on. I could go on but the list is long.
I believe that every parliamentary bill must face scrutiny from various sections of the society. This is what governments must do. But I also believe that there has to be the display at all times in society of moral obligations on everyone’s part. The government has a right to demand such moral obligation from its critics.
(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

---

---