Lincoln Lewis’ claims are devoid of substantive proof

Jul 05, 2023 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

Seldom do I respond to the ramblings of an individual seeking relevance or importance without substantive support for his/her claims or remarks. However, when innuendoes filled diatribe is being peddled to Guyanese as assessment or analysis, it becomes insulting not only to the reader but also to the person or entities being discredited. In such instances I find is disconcerting. Such is the case of Lincoln Lewis letter in Kaieteur News, July 3, 2023.

In the first and second paragraphs of his letter, Lewis claims that Guyana is “lurching from crisis to crisis” under the leadership of President Irfaan and Vice President Jagdeo who seem unconcerned. The astute reader quickly realizes that “lurching from crisis” is Webster’s dictionary example of how to use the word “lurching.” What pathetic plagiarism? Furthermore, Lewis’ use of the word “crisis” fails to provide evidence of what is catastrophic or dangerous about Guyana, given the definition of crisis. Lewis did mention “high cost of living”. If high cost of living is a crisis, then, what was Burnham’s policy of oppressing Guyanese to the brink of starvation – banning essential foodstuffs such as salted fish, potatoes, split peas (dhal), sardines, flour etc., all staples of Guyanese diet? Was this a period of celebratory exuberance, or crisis? Am I to assume that Lewis was not born then? And if he was not, is he suffering persistent amnesia in that he fails to recognise, or acknowledges, this period of crisis in Guyana?

In the third paragraph of his letter Lewis hurled attack on the PPP for failing to acknowledge the racial composition and diversity of Guyana, and that the opposition needs to awake from their “slumber” to keep the government in check. Such infantile ramblings make it seem as if the opposition is a bunch of sleeping beauties which in fact they are not. Could it be that Lewis himself is in ‘sweet slumber’and hence oblivious to Norton, Hinds, and other APNUites daily attacks on the government? Aren’t the opposition participants in the parliamentary process and discussions, and therefore actively engaged in the country’s decision making?

The fourth paragraph of Lewis’ letter is an exemplar of someone who is delusional. Lewis claims that the PPP is carving up Guyana and distributing it to “a few as if it is their personal property.” I guess disadvantaged Guyanese do not deserve house lots and small plots because this is exactly how President Irfaan is carving and distributing bits and pieces of the country.

In the same paragraph, Lewis calls for “agitation to ensure our economic, social, cultural and political rights are respected and safeguarded.”  What are these rights?

At the very basic level, qualified social scientists will tell you that when they use the term ‘social’ they are referring to the interactional everyday conduct among people, ‘cultural’ refers to the beliefs and practices and ‘political’ customarily refers to participation in, or influence over the policy decisions that affect their lives.

Again, Lewis’ claims prove foolhardy at best. Here’s why. President Irfaan continues to reach out, interact and engage with the people regardless of race or ethnicity. If this isn’t social, cultural, and political then what is. Can Lewis please explain?

In the final paragraphs, Lewis displayed the depth of insipidity. He attacked Guyanese for wearing red in solidarity with the PPP. I am not sure why this is an abomination. Secondary school students wear the colours representative of their schools, Hindis, Muslims, Christians wear the appropriate colors of their faith, why then wearing the color of your political preference so abhorrent to Lewis. Unless he is a pseudo deity who would like people to wear colors he prefers, I do not understand his rant.

After reading, and reading Lewis’s letter, I am still miffed. In his final paragraph, his continued rant about healthcare and poverty in Guyana is devoid of valid examples or substantive claims, all of which leave the reader stupefied in awe. Could it be as he inferred, he is trying to stir up “agitation?” Or, could it be that he is seeking recognition or relevance? If the latter is true, then he needs to substantiate his bombastic claims with real examples. In so doing he would reduce, or eliminate his ramblings, which would then give him the iota of legitimacy he seeks.

Regards,

Narayan Persaud, PhD

Professor Emeritus

---

• Emeritus, Irfaan, Narayan Persaud, PhD, Professor

---