I am reading two books right now...
Rodney's History of the Guyanese Working People and Seecharan's Mother India...so my responses below are based on those two sources and what little I know about Guyana's history...
I make the following points...
1. The BGEIA was elitist, yes. But there was no other way that an Indo organization that represented Indians could have been formed without the elitists. Many of these so called elites were from rural areas who traveled to GT (and abroad) in search of opportunities. Many who were educated or returned from abroad settled in GT. The program of the BGEIA was broad and they made attempts to unite, protect and serve the interests of all Indos, in the city and the rural areas. For example, the founders of the BGEIA were from Berbice. Its program to register Indians to vote and fight for universal adult suffrage (for those over 21, elimination of property and literacy requirements, etc) were genuinely designed to help all Indians, just like African, Portuguese, and Chinese organizations that existed at the time.
To suggest that the BGEIA was racist is simplistic and ignores the broader goals of the organization. Its goals mirrored those of the League of Colored People (of which Burnham was a supporter).
2. Nathaniel Critchlow was indeed the father of trade unionism. However, according to Seecharan, whatever assistance Critchlow provided to sugar workers in the rural areas was limited in scope. He concentrated his efforts in Georgetown organizing the stevedores, ship workers, hospital workers, etc. He does not have a strong record assisting sugar workers or rural Indians.
In fact, some would also consider Critchlow a hypocrite. All his life he supported universal adult suffrage. However, he took a 360 degree turn and opposed it, giving a ridiculous reason as to why. Critchlow opposed universal adult suffrage when he realized that too many Indians were entering the political space and were becoming eligible to vote. He felt a greater number of Indos who could vote was a threat to Afros.
3. I dont disagree that the PPP is a de facto Indian organization. But we cant act like the other major organization, the PNC, is a multiracial organization either.
4. I would not place too much faith on what Ramotar is saying. He is a simpleton, a Marxist ideologue, and probably the worst President Guyana has has. His "analysis" is biased in favor of the PPP.
Aye.... Mouthoprekke.... throw away dem books and go to Guyana. Find one old person of each race and sit down and gyaff with them. One hour with each will teach you more about Guyana than all them books. Unless is just hard yuh head hard. Of course, maybe you've convinced yourself your redundant comments stating what most people here already know make you look smart.