Gilbakka posted:The black activists have genuine grievances. Afro-Guyanese have been shortchanged where land rights are concerned. But the activists have to be careful not to antagonize Amerindians. The activists must concede that the Granger administration will need crucial votes from Amerindians to stay in power beyond 2020. Meanwhile, I wish the activists well in their drive to redress an historical anomaly.
Eric is an ass. He is cozy with Granger so given the latitude to say a lot of stupid crap. He believes his credential as a historian ( faux from where I stand given what he said) and an ivy league grad means he is authoritative on the subject matter or who we are and what are our duties and obligations to each other.
Worse, he believes he is final arbiter on who suffered most. They add the term " Indigenous" to the name of their reparation organization when no ingenuous group is involved. This is because he believes in the myth that Africans sailed the seas a la the narrative of Vansertima and build all the great monuments in the west and seeded all cultures. He also believes that an ancient skull proved his point (Luiza woman).
He, and I presume Granger, by default believes that natural patrimony does not belong to Amerinds but to Africans. He advocates a cessation of land titles and especially do not think the Wai Wais and Wapishanas deserve land in Guyana. since he claims to know they are 19th century immigrants.
The idea that any of us owe Africans for slavery is bunk. Everyone suffered at the hands of the Brits and there should be no measure of who suffered most. If we give the default title to the Brits then we must admit they had treaties with the Natives they found there ( guess what, no Africans were there!) It follows then the brits left us an independent state the ceded the land equally to all of us here with specific notation as to what to do for treaty holders. In no commonwealth state is there precedent that Africans and by extension Indentured was to be given land differentiated per some arbitrary measure on who suffered most. If any land was to be given deferentially then the Brits could have done it when they owned it. We own it communally now and are not obliged to reapportion the land per some retrospective of a faux historian and retroactively allocate lands to one group over another.