WHEN Malcolm Harripaul (in the ‘Kaieteur News” dated 2011-05-25), opines that “Mr. Bisram, and Mr. Ravi Dev, are both erring, in referring to the PPP’s regime as “being democratically elected at free and fair elections” and that he (MH) is going to debunk both gentlemen, he evokes laughter. He, Harripaul (being a double joker now), also (in the same breath) suggests that he would “critically examine this position” that is “if the PPP is a democratic institution, and if Indo- Guyanese were really free from fear.”
Let this response be premised on the suggestion that if ever one wants to comment on the idea of a ‘lack of democracy’ and its corollary, ‘lack of fairness,’ then any ingenuous effort will start with the Burnham/Hoyte led PNC’s tenure as the government of Guyana. One remembers well the pre-1992 era, especially in matters pertaining to elections. This epoch remains a ludicrous page in the annals of Guyana’s history. So beaten back was the anti-PNC clique that there was a dreadful atmosphere pervading and suffocating this land. During this period, elections were reduced to a farce. So that is a good pivot for Malcolm Harripaul to begin his exegesis on ‘democracy’ and ‘fairness.’
Secondly, the mere fact, that since 1992, elections in Guyana have been certified ‘fair and free’ and characterised by ‘transparency’ is sufficient to rebuff the ‘nonsense’ that is now being dispensed, not only by Malcolm Haripaul, but by members of his ilk. So how does Malcolm Harripaul try to ‘pull the wool’ over the people’s eye?
He goes into a territory, and speaks for people who snicker at him. He tries to insinuate that the PPP’s presidential candidate Donald Ramotar was simply forced into this position and then foisted onto the people. What he foolishly does is try to represent a constituency that does not exist. It is so simple and obvious: if there was and is bickering within the PPP, regarding the choice of Donald Ramotar, then how does one account for the continued gelling of the PPP and its gathering momentum for the upcoming elections?
So the stupidity and the fallacy of one only “has to look at the manner in which the PPP presidential candidate was imposed on the PPP membership and Indo Guyanese to see how undemocratic the PPP is” is really Malcolm Harripaul’s evincing his penchant for caviling and carping.
This brings to mind the contretemps of Freddie Kissoon. When Freddie Kissoon was asked by Christopher Ram, to explain how he feels, knowing, realising and experiencing fighting for a cause that is seemingly imagined, and for a people who seem least bothered (the garbage situation), he sought refuge in his philosophising. It is really laughable that Malcolm Harripaul is representing disgruntled PPP elites and PPP Indo-based supporters who really do not exist. One can only surmise that in wild, childish fantasy, a group of imaginary people are asking Malcolm Harripaul to represent them.
If the elections were all fair, free and transparent, and the PPP’s presidential choice sits well with the supporters and there seems to be a spirit of cohesion, then how is it that this imagined issue comes to the fore? Malcolm Harripaul needs to get real and accept what he is ‘mad’ against, when it is just.
The second issue of “… (wanting) to expose the inherent, hidden racism in Bisram’s letter” when Bisram noted “… the struggle (of Hinds and Ogunseye) (but how that) does not give them the right to advocate lawlessness and violence against an elected government,” Malcolm Harripaul accuses Bisram of “…hide (in) under the cloak of impartiality and fairness in order to state a blatant lie about Ogunseye and Hinds.” and that “ His (Bisram’s) intention is to reinforce the PPP’s demonisation of Ogunseye and Hinds,” is another laughing matter.
So yes, according to Malcolm Harripaul, he did listen to Ogunseye’s speech on Demerara Waves and (that) he (Ogunseye), did not call for lawlessness and violence. This view of Malcolm Harripaul is not the popular one, and has been shattered many times. And Malcolm Harripaul should explain how devoid of incendiary and inflammatory content is an address that he listened to, that suggests, that even if the PPP should win (fairly freely and transparently), Afro-Guyanese take to the streets and count on the support of the army and police, since they will be banked on for support of their ‘kith and kin’. One can add that in suggesting this, Ogunseye’s assessment of his own people is that they are unwilling to accept democracy in a fair, free and transparent setting. So Malcolm Harripaul is way off.