Bisram and company continue to snipe from the political periphery utilizing language that belongs to another era

Feb 14, 2024 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

In his letter published in the February 9, 2024 edition of S/N, Vishnu Bisram sought to have readers believe that Jagan was a stupid and foolish man. That Burnham was the brightest and smartest of all and that’s why Jagan was outfoxed and thrown out of office resulting in Burnham being installed by the CIA in fulfillment of Anglo-American interests.

Assuming the role of a Monday morning quarter back, we are told that, had Jagan abandoned his ideological convictions, not hooked up with the Soviet Union and, had he hitched his wagon to the USA, Washington would have seen to it that he remained in power until such time he became expendable as was the case of Burnham and Hoyte.

According to Bisram, had Jagan collaborated with the CIA and sucked-up to Washington and London, he would never have been removed from office. As Bisram’s logic goes, Jagan would have remained in office following the 1964 election; he would have been elected at all other elections and as a consequence, Indo-Guyanese would not have suffered. There would not have been any authoritarian rule and East Indians would not have fled to America. In sum, ‘Guyana’s faith (sic) would have been vastly different.’ In Bisram’s mind, a serene, idyllic and near-perfect society would have been established with Jagan in power.

According to Bisram’s simplistic analysis, the key to remaining in power for any Third World political leader at that time, would of necessity, required them to dump any anti-colonial, pro-socialist ideological convictions they might have espoused. It would have been compulsory for them to kowtow to the whims and fancies of their sponsors in the same way as dictators like; Juan Perón of Argentina, Fulgencio Batista of Cuba, Rafael Trujillo of the Dominican Republic, François Duvalier of Haiti, Anastasio Somoza of Nicaragua, Alfredo Stroessner of Paraguay, Eric Gairy of Grenada and the triumvirate of military personnel and later, as Marcos Pérez Jiménez of Venezuela did. According to Bisram’s analysis, had Jagan pursued policies similar to those mentioned earlier, Washington and London would have embraced him and ensured that he remain in government.

As far as Bisram and his New York and London-based colleagues are concerned, Jagan was foolish to pursue policies that allegedly resembled those of Joao Goulart of Brazil, Jacobo Arbenz of Guatemala, Gamel Abdel Nasser of Egypt, Mohammed Mossadegh of Iran, Patrice Lumumba of Congo and Fidel Castro of Cuba.

Worse yet, as far as Bisram and his comrades are concerned, the greatest and unforgivable sin Jagan ever committed was to associate his party with that of the communist parties of the Soviet Union (CPSU) and Cuba. In Bisram’s view, he should have shied away from supporting national liberation movements branded ‘terrorist organizations’ in Asia, Africa and Latin America. And implicitly, for the sake of survival, Jagan, should have associated the PPP with the CIA and the AFLCIO in the US.

According to Bisram and company’s logic, it was Jagan’s ‘communism’ that caused his Indo-Guyanese supporters to suffer, not Burnham’s bureaucratic, corrupt and discriminatory practices nor his failed cooperative socialism.

So it was not until sometime in the late 1980’s after the collapse of the Soviet Union that Bisram and company became ‘educated’ about ‘communism’ and aware of the ‘consequences of Jagan’s anti-Americanism and pro-Soviet solidarity, that Bisram and company ‘parted ways’ on ‘Jagan’s philosophy.’ Strangely, during the decades while the USSR was a major world power, Bisram had nothing bad to say about the Soviet Union nor about Jagan while he was alive.

The records show that the 17-year-old Bisram migrated to America, where at the age of 24, he subsequently landed a teaching job. It was during that period, his brilliance shone and led him to the realization that since, ‘there was no return of Jagan to office unless he reformed his ideology’ consequently, he joined the bandwagon to encourage Jagan to drop all the talk about communism and Marxism and to look to America for salvation.

The elitist and secretarian approach adopted by Bisram and company towards Jagan’s supporters branding them an ignorant and stupid lot to have followed Jagan’s anti-colonial, anti-imperialist, and progressive policies is blatantly demeaning and insulting, it portrayed the poor working people and farmers, the progressive intelligentsia and patriotic business community of that era, as people who were incapable thinking for themselves, and who did not understand what Jagan stood for and why his party should be supported.

Bisram completely ignored significant contributions made by brilliant and outstanding Indo-Guyanese like Dr. C.R. Jacobs, Fenton Ramsahoye, ‘Boysie’ Ram Karran, Moneer Khan, Derek Jagan, Pandit Ramlall, Maccie Hamid, Yacoob Ally, Pandit Reepu Daman Persaud, Isahack Basir, Pandit Siridhar Misir, and many other outstanding Indo-Guyanese freedom fighters. As far as Bisram is concerned these men were all foolish individuals who couldn’t think for themselves, they were all ‘brainwashed’ by Jagan and his ‘communist ideas.’

In contrast, Bishram chose to highlight a group he described as ‘stalwarts’ many of whom were not associated with the independence struggle, were never detained, imprisoned nor had their movements restricted. In fact, many, with the exception of two, were rabidly opposed to the PPP. Some advanced crude religious and racist appeals associated with Hinduism and racism; some blended medicine with religion while others resorted to downright racist emotionalism using the slogan “Apan Jhaat,” meaning vote for your own race.

Bisram chose to mount these individuals on a pedestal as ‘stalwarts’ and do-gooders’ who sought to rescue Jagan from his ‘stubbornness’ and to detach him from his ideological and philosophical convictions.

Bisram and others repeatedly failed to take into account an important fact; Jagan’s ideological convictions never led him to betray his followers nor to fall prey to opportunistic tendencies; neither did his communist or socialist philosophy make the PPP lose a free and fair election; nor did his beliefs dissuade his supporters from standing firmly behind him and to give up on what he stood. On the contrary, they supported Jagan throughout the difficult days before and after independence, till October 1992, when after toiling in the political vineyards, he finally triumphed. In the meantime, Bisram and company continue to snipe from the political periphery utilizing language that belongs to another era, that gains no traction other than to a few trapped in the labyrinth of the past.

Yours faithfully,
Clement J. Rohee

---

• Alfredo Stroessner of Paraguay, Anastasio Somoza of Nicaragua, CPSU, Eric Gairy of Grenada, Nicaragua, Vishnu Bisram

---