Baseman posted:Iguana posted:
How did Indians respond to FCH? They saw it as "discrimination" against them. Burnham didn't want them to make roti. Well, didn't black people make bread with flour too? Weren't we likewise affected? NO, the Indian saw only himself as the victim!
Granted, FCH was not well thought out and rolled out too quickly, before local substitutes and/or alternatives were identified.
And yes, Burnham's good intentions were overshadowed by his megalomania.
You talking lil skont! Not every aspect of FCH was responded in a negative manner. However, it should have been more phased and the Govt should have picked on items where there are viable local alternatives. It would have taken a little longer, but become more sustainable. They went about in a heavy-handed slash and burn approach which caused a lot of disruption and hardship.
Any population needs time to adjust to a new situation. Where the discrimination came in is when the brought in KSI and had a Party-Card access model. That was GROSSLY discriminatory and racist given the Guyana Ethno-political environment!
You are talking SHEER skont!!!!! You spend your entire post (with the exception of "not every aspect of FCH was responded in a negative manner"), reiterating what I stated in my post. Clearly I said FCH was not rolled out properly and alluded to the lack of alternatives prior to roll out. You basically repeat what I wrote then call what I wrote "lil skont". The sheer contagious dunceness of the Indo KKK is beginning to afflict you.
And what is this "aspect" of FCH that Indians responded to positively???? What did they do other than scream bloody murder and cry victimization because of a lack of flour conveniently forgetting black people couldn't bake bread either?!
Who owned the farms? INDIANS. One would think they would jump at the chance given by Burnham to "feed the nation" by increasing operations and revenue. NO. They did not. National interest meant nothing to them, just PPP and Indian only rule!