How To Analyze David Granger's Rule Over Guyana. He Is Combination Julius Caesar & Lucius Cincinnatus

Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
We've elected a Consul. From Day 1 I knew this Granger chap was a different kettle of hassar. I didn't know how right I was.


Even in small gestures he leaves an impression when he wants to. He gave me a signed copy of his book on national defence after we spoke at length privately in our initial meeting. Even in small gestures, the man is a Roman patrician. And a gentleman who commands respect.


Just look at how that small seemingly insignificant gesture probably had some influence over me in not attacking him throughout the campaign even though I would be prevailed upon some time later into advising the PPP mudheads.

And wid all dis that "you know" about Granger being Gluteus Maximus Pontificus super cali fraggalilstic expee allidocious you chose to offer your services to the cabal. It was because you wanted Indian domination, n'cest pas bai?


Just as a pointless historical note...I'm sure you've been talked into stuff against your better judgment by your lifelong friends. My friends begged cajoled me into advising the PPP. Fortunately for the Coalition, much of my advice was unheeded or else at the least you would have ended up with a Granger Presidency, a deadlocked Parliament 33-33, and fresh elections by Christmas of this year. My choice was not about Indian domination. I still cannot and will not forgive the PNC for their post-1992 anti-Indian violence. I don't oppose the PNC because they're Black. I oppose them because they're the PNC.


However, will all that said. The PPP is out of office and the PNC seems to be behaving as a Government. Therefore, I'm inclined to support the Government whenever and wherever possible.


It was never about Indian domination for me. Indians are privately charged with the preservation of their unique heritage as they see it without interference from the Government. And the Government is charged with making sure that Indians are treated fairly. That's not some radical Hindutva agenda. And FYI...I was among the first and loudest supporters of Granger personally (when it was a big deal for Mike Persaud to invite him in Richmond Hill publicly) since he came on the scene before he became sliced bread because I genuinely judge individuals and I am genuinely favorably inclined towards him.


The world is very complex Itaname. Try and look at it in all it's complexity. I don't believe we have some ingrained hatred of each other at play here on either side of the racial divide. We have legitimate ethic security issues. Both Blacks and Indians do. I do not talk about the Black ethnic security dilemma because I prefer Blacks do it (and they do a credible job of it) and I will support them when and wherever I can. Indians are really lagging behind in all spheres of achievement in Guyana quite behind their Black compatriots. This is why I argue almost daily with Carib that my biggest issue is that I want to see more Indian clerks and Indian Soldiers in Guyana. That is not unreasonable. I don't want domination just participation to a reasonable level.

Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
 Indians are really lagging behind in all spheres of achievement in Guyana quite behind their Black compatriots..

Funny thing that Africans will say that Indians control every aspect of economic activity, and with that employment outside of the state sector.  This is the base of their ethnic insecurity.  The fear that Indians can and will starve them out.


Given that Guyana will remain a private sector dominant market economy that puts Indians, or at least the elites, in the driver's seat.  I am not impressed with your laments of lack of Indo power.  Yes the grass roots Indos are left out of this equation, but then this is true regardless as to which party is in power.


Where does all this black power come from by being the numerically dominant group in the public sector?  Forced to follow the orders of those in charge.  The GDF is docile and will do what the commander in chief, as only those loyal to the commander will be allowed to serve the highest posts.  Even as most of the police and GDF are black most of their fire power was directed against black protestors when the PPP was in power.


The GDF doesnt have a tradition of lower level officers rebelling against the command, as we saw in both Trinidad and Suriname.  So which ever group dominates the governmental executive will control the GDF.


As to the poor civil servants.  These are people who are paid so little that they cannot afford to pay rent, cover travel, buy food, and send their kids to school out of their pay check.  So some combination of remittances, corruption, and begging is how they survive.  Guyanese have lost all semblance of pride, when compared to their Caribbean counterparts.


So given that, why do you source the mainly black civil service clerks and low level admin as a power source.  Under the PPP, you as an Indo could mention a powerful Indo name, and as they see their job being lost, they would have polished your shoes with their tongues, and maybe similarly cleaned your ass.


Blacks in Guyana only have some power when they control the executive. And even then the business elites (almost exclsuively NOT black) will still control as it is to them that APNU must bow to in order to fund their election campaigns.

Anyone watched the State Opening of Parliament where Granger patterned the ceremony after the British Royal ceremonial?


His speech was patterned after the Queen's Throne Speech and the Speaker and Clerk bowed low to him. The optics alone portrayed an Imperial Presidency.

A separate glimpse into Granger’s thinking is the informative 2009 article he wrote on the colonial governor of the 18th century, Laurens Storm vans Gravesande. In his critical examination of Gravesande legacy, Granger noted the ability of the “inspired proconsul” with the colony’s security at the time, his economic success in sugar production, and Gravesande’s talent in “transforming Demerara from a wilderness into an vibrant colony”. At one point in the article Granger addresses Gravesande’s weaknesses, among them:

“The imprudent mingling of public duties and private interests and the preferment of his family, together with other issues, alienated him from councillors and colonists alike. Gravesande’s patriarchal rule provoked resentment and sedition among some settlers and called forth reproof from the directors.”

Add Reply

Likes (0)