He paid the ultimate price, his life, by assassination

Jun 14, 2026 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

As I contemplate writing this letter, to mark the 46th anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Walter Rodney, I ask myself for the first time whether it would be a disservice to Rodney, given where Guyana has arrived, to invoke his struggle and ideas in our society as things stand at present. This is not a commentary on Rodney’s teaching, ideas, or political practice, and its relevance. Instead, I am raising the question of what value there is in doing so, given the degenerate politics and political culture in society. Is it a dishonour to discuss Rodney in this environment?

Having asked the question, I am not sure how to answer it. So, I will do what we in the WPA have done for the last 46 years: we reflect and seek inspiration from Walter Rodney’s ideas, struggles, and sacrifice. He paid the ultimate price, his life, by assassination.

When I reflect on the situation in the country, I am inclined to the view that patriots and revolution-minded citizens should refrain from invoking our martyrs when we are not fighting in meaningful ways to change the negative direction the country is going. We should adopt this position as a way of consciously challenging ourselves to do more for the liberation of the country. In that way, we give real meaning to the sacrifice of our martyrs. Only when we are doing so do we earn the right to invoke our martyrs.

I will restrict this letter to addressing two questions that are often asked by people who were involved, directly or indirectly, in the Rodney and the WPA struggles of the late 70s and early 1980s.

The first question: If Rodney were alive today, would Guyana be what it is now? The second question: Were the sacrifices made by Rodney and the WPA worth it, given the direction the country has taken?

There are two approaches to dealing with these questions.  The first is to dismiss them on the grounds that they cannot be answered in any meaningful or definite way, since any response can only be speculative. The second is to offer answers while remaining conscious of the limitations of those answers, seeking both to satisfy the curiosity of those posing the questions and to avoid the accusation of political evasiveness. Such an exercise can also encourage imaginative thinking about alternative futures through critical questioning and reflection. These questions have engaged the minds of sections of the Guyanese community for many years, particularly among the older generation. Inherent in the first question, “If Rodney were alive, would Guyana be what it is today? Are several assumptions and possibilities that merit careful examination.

It implies an assessment that Rodney would have been more proactive in confronting those in power and would not have been intimidated by threats of repression or fear. This is an indictment of the present leadership of the opposition, since it suggests that Rodney would have inspired the masses toward united action rather than the present passivity.

While critics will state that there is no certainty in such judgments, the truth is that many Guyanese have formed an opinion on the matter and have tended to give Rodney the benefit of the doubt. They believe that had he lived, Guyana would have been in a better place today: a more united nation, less racially polarized, and making more effective and equitable use of its oil revenues in the interest of all Guyanese. What we are dealing with here is the perception becoming “reality “in the public imagination. This is an unavoidable aspect of political and social engagement, given the ways in which human beings interpret events, our leaders, and possibilities. My fellow Co-Leader, brother Rohit Kanhai, is fond of advancing a philosophical position on such matters. He would argue that what has actually occurred constitutes reality; while speculation may have value as an intellectual exercise, it is not reality.  In his view, there are no “ifs” in history, only what was done and what was not.

The second question is whether the sacrifices made by WPA and Rodney’s sacrifice in the struggle against Burnham and the PNC were worth it, given the present situation in the country. This question forces the WPA to objectively assess what it has done and achieved, bearing in mind its stated convictions on multi-racial politics, the empowerment of all our ethnic communities politically, economically, and socially.

This compels the WPA to objectively assess what it has done and what it has achieved, bearing in mind its stated commitment to multi-racial politics, the political, economic, and social empowerment of all our ethnic communities, and the aspirations of the poor and powerless to be liberated from poverty. I will say without fear of contradiction that the WPA never took a self-righteous position on our political practice.  We demonstrated a willingness to engage in self-criticism and critical reflection. Having said that, our answer to the question remains clear: we stand steadfast in our beliefs that what we did at the time was necessary and in the best interests of the nation.

It is that conviction that drives our present opposition to the PPP rulers and the direction in which they are taking the country.  Yes! We don’t believe that ours and Rodney’s sacrifice was in vain.  This is a matter that should long have been addressed through a process of national reconciliation, leading to a broad consensus in a liberated Guyana. The fact that this question continues to be raised, more than four and a half decades after Rodney’s passing, and in light of the country’s present condition, it is an indictment of the nation. It reflects our collective failure to mature as a nation and objectively deal with our past. This deficiency in the body politic leaves the younger generation vulnerable to manipulations and with little understanding of the struggles, and sacrifices that have shaped our history.

I end my response to these two above-mentioned questions, which are frequently posed to the WPA, particularly during the period when we commemorate the anniversary of Brother Walter Rodney’s assassination, by asking a question of my own:  Where do we, as a country, go from here, 46 years after the end of Rodney’s activism and his assassination?

Yours sincerely,

Tacuma Ogunseye

---

• assassination, Dr. Walter Rodney, Letters, Tacuma Ogunseye

---