Skip to main content

FM
Former Member

Balram Singh Rai

By Ralph Ramkarran On June 7, 2015 @ 5:06 am In Features,Sunday

Guyanese who have served their country with distinction can once again look forward to being recognized. National awards to three persons, Bryn Pollard and Llewellyn John, the latter a vintage politician going back to the 1940s, and Hamilton Green, a politician from the 1950s with a controversial past, revive the possibility that distinguished service given in the distant past by those ignored by the PPP can still be recognized. I refer to Fenton Ramsahoye and Balram Singh Rai, of the same era as the above three, but this article is about the latter. The atmosphere may now be more conducive and the time opportune to raise the issue of Rai.

Balram Singh Rai has remained an iconic political figure in Guyana’s political history, even though the last political event in which he was involved, the general elections of 1964, occurred fifty years ago. A book, Against the Grain, by Baytoram Ramharak, was published in 2005 about him. Although sympathy for Rai drips from its pages, it indicates the considerable interest that his name still evokes. His great successes and enormous contribution as well as the respect in which he was held across the board, come out clearly. Apart from Cheddi Jagan, no other leader of that era has been subject to such academic scrutiny.

Fully contextualized is his Hindu faith of the Arya Samaj persuasion, which was probably the cultural and religious foundation for his anti-communism and defence of Indian interests against the PPP’s ‘communism.’ At that time, among some circles in the PPP, intolerance was high for anti-communist views. Had Rai been active today his defence of ethnic interests in the same manner would not have been unusual. Eusi Kwayana, who has spoken well of Rai, was substantially more vocal during Rai’s time in defence of African ethnic interests and is today regarded as an ‘elder.’ I understand that Rai made an effort at reconciliation with Cheddi Jagan in 1992 but received no response.

20131201ralphramkarranRai had an early interest in politics. Together with Ashton Chase and Eusi Kwayana, he is the only other towering political figure who is still alive today from the 1947 era when he supported Cheddi Jagan in his successful contest for a seat in the legislature. He opposed the PPP at the elections in 1953. By 1957 he was a well-known lawyer. He emerged into political prominence when he won a seat in the legislature on behalf of the PPP in that year and served as Minister of Education and later, of Home Affairs, in both of which he performed with distinction. It was when he decided to challenge Brindley Benn, for the post of Chairman at the PPP’s Congress in 1962, that all hell broke loose.

At that time the Chairman was the next most important position after Leader, the post which Jagan held. Brindley Benn, a prominent African Guyanese, had held the post of Chairman for some time. He was supported by the PPP leadership because he was popular, having emerged from the youth ranks and, a well-liked Minister of Agriculture and an African Guyanese, an important consideration in the context of Guyana’s divisive politics. Although Rai had become a respected and popular figure by 1962, he could not compete in the eyes of the leadership with Benn’s credentials, even omitting the issue of ethnicity.

The campaign against Rai mounted by the PPP leadership became increasingly bitter and culminated in his defeat at the Congress. The famous statement by Fenton Ramsahoye, then Attorney General, that “the PPP works in devious ways,” was made at the Congress. Rai was expelled from the PPP for accusatory remarks he had made. His Justice Party secured only about 4,000 votes in the 1964 elections. He then migrated to the UK and has remained silent ever since. He is in his nineties and the state of his health is not known.

The PPP should have long recognized Rai’s contribution to Guyana. Brindley Benn left the PPP in 1968, a mere six years later, and became a fierce critic for 20 years. Welcomed back in 1992, he served as High Commissioner to Canada and in other positions. He was recognized with a national award. Ranji Chandisingh, considered to be Jagan’s deputy in the 1970s, crossed over to the PNC in 1977 with great bitterness, causing much consternation and upheaval in the entire PPP. He served as a Vice President, General Secretary of the PNC and Ambassador to the USSR. He remained loyal to the PNC to the end. However, at Chandisingh’s funeral in 2009, Donald Ramotar, then General Secretary of the PPP, spoke for the PPP in glowing terms about Chandisingh.

We should not allow Rai’s contribution to Guyana to be defined by the PPP’s antagonism, which has already devolved to another generation. Rai’s achievements in government have been recognized by many outside the PPP. Hamilton Green, Eusi Kwayana, Llewellyn John and Ashton Chase have become recognized as national icons. The time has come for Balram Singh Rai to be given due recognition in some way for his contribution to Guyana − to be literally brought in from the cold − and for his parliamentary pension, which he has sought for many years, to be paid to him. The government’s magnanimity, not only for Rai, but for so many others deliberately ignored by the PPP, including Fenton Ramsahoye, would go a long way in correcting egregious historical omissions.

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Originally Posted by Prashad:
Ramkarrran and his father bitterly opposed Rai.

Prash, people are entitled to change their views over time. In hindsight, lots of us realize that we made wrong decisions, supported unjust policies, followed others blindly, etc at certain points in our lives.

In the case of Ralph Ramkarran who was just a teenager in 1962, it's better late than never to pay due respect to Balram Singh Rai.

FM
Originally Posted by Prashad:
When Ramkarrran was.speaker for almost a decade why did he not give Mr Rai his pension?

Good question, Prash. I can only assume that it was a PPP-regime decision not to pay Rai's pension.

Another thing, Ralph says: "I understand that Rai made an effort at reconciliation with Cheddi Jagan in 1992 but received no response."

Frankly speaking, Jagan was mean-spirited to rebuff Rai. A lot of party deserters crawled back to Freedom House in 1992 and they were accepted.

Rai just wanted to be a gentleman and show goodwill towards Jagan.

FM

Balram Singh Rai has always been my hero. I admired his style of politics when I was in my teenager. He taught me the concept of "Satyamewa Jayate" meaning that the truth alone triumphs. Rai would have loved to do more for his country and his people but they derived themselves of his service. On a wall in my home is a large portriat of Balram Singh Rai.  

FM
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

Balram Singh Rai has always been my hero. I admired his style of politics when I was in my teenager. He taught me the concept of "Satyamewa Jayate" meaning that the truth alone triumphs. Rai would have loved to do more for his country and his people but they derived themselves of his service. On a wall in my home is a large portriat of Balram Singh Rai.  

I know Bayto .

FM
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

I am not Winston Mits. You know that. Now let get back on topic.What are your views on BS Rai. I'd love to hear it.

I heard about Rai from my father, but did not fully appreciate his contributions until Bayto's book: Against the Grain. If only he had been in the place of Cheddi Jagan by independence, I would say Guyana could have been today at the level of development of Barbados or Mauritius.

FM
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

I am not Winston Mits. You know that. Now let get back on topic.What are your views on BS Rai. I'd love to hear it.

The first time I heard the word Chatri, it was in relation to Balram Singh Rai. 

 

The comment was, "He was a Chatri, and he made certain others were aware of it."

 

Now, I seek to understand where the word come from. I doan seem to find it the caste of India.

 

Is it a Guyanese interpretation of an upper caste?

S

Hey,

Do anyone of you know how to get in touch with the author, or how to get a copy of Rai's book?? I have my own copy but I do not want to lose it....someone else needs a copy. I bought mine at Austin's, apparently they are out of stock. 

Thank you kindly.

V
Originally Posted by VishMahabir:

Hey,

Do anyone of you know how to get in touch with the author, or how to get a copy of Rai's book?? I have my own copy but I do not want to lose it....someone else needs a copy. I bought mine at Austin's, apparently they are out of stock. 

Thank you kindly.

Still a few copies remaining on Amazon.

FM
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

I am not Winston Mits. You know that. Now let get back on topic.What are your views on BS Rai. I'd love to hear it.

I heard about Rai from my father, but did not fully appreciate his contributions until Bayto's book: Against the Grain. If only he had been in the place of Cheddi Jagan by independence, I would say Guyana could have been today at the level of development of Barbados or Mauritius.

Wasn't he an Indian Advocate (maybe supremacist)...so how would he have done better than Cheddi?  Just asking...I am not very familiar with his political stance; I am just going from hearsay.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by VishMahabir:

Hey,

Do anyone of you know how to get in touch with the author, or how to get a copy of Rai's book?? I have my own copy but I do not want to lose it....someone else needs a copy. I bought mine at Austin's, apparently they are out of stock. 

Thank you kindly.

Still a few copies remaining on Amazon.

TK, it would be nice if Baytoram makes the book available in Amazon Kindle format. After 10 years, time for him to consider a second edition.

FM
Originally Posted by VVP:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

I am not Winston Mits. You know that. Now let get back on topic.What are your views on BS Rai. I'd love to hear it.

I heard about Rai from my father, but did not fully appreciate his contributions until Bayto's book: Against the Grain. If only he had been in the place of Cheddi Jagan by independence, I would say Guyana could have been today at the level of development of Barbados or Mauritius.

Wasn't he an Indian Advocate (maybe supremacist)...so how would he have done better than Cheddi?  Just asking...I am not very familiar with his political stance; I am just going from hearsay.

I was alluding to his politics. He was rabidly anti-communist. He would have found a better way to work with Forbes Burnham because those guys, including the BGEIA, were pragmatic. There would have been less need for foreign destabilizations of Guyana.

FM
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by VishMahabir:

Hey,

Do anyone of you know how to get in touch with the author, or how to get a copy of Rai's book?? I have my own copy but I do not want to lose it....someone else needs a copy. I bought mine at Austin's, apparently they are out of stock. 

Thank you kindly.

Still a few copies remaining on Amazon.

TK, it would be nice if Baytoram makes the book available in Amazon Kindle format. After 10 years, time for him to consider a second edition.

Doubt whether the authors have that ability unless they self-publish. The publishers have to do that.

FM
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by VVP:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

I am not Winston Mits. You know that. Now let get back on topic.What are your views on BS Rai. I'd love to hear it.

I heard about Rai from my father, but did not fully appreciate his contributions until Bayto's book: Against the Grain. If only he had been in the place of Cheddi Jagan by independence, I would say Guyana could have been today at the level of development of Barbados or Mauritius.

Wasn't he an Indian Advocate (maybe supremacist)...so how would he have done better than Cheddi?  Just asking...I am not very familiar with his political stance; I am just going from hearsay.

I was alluding to his politics. He was rabidly anti-communist. He would have found a better way to work with Forbes Burnham because those guys, including the BGEIA, were pragmatic. There would have been less need for foreign destabilizations of Guyana.

Okay, got you.

FM
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by VishMahabir:

Hey,

Do anyone of you know how to get in touch with the author, or how to get a copy of Rai's book?? I have my own copy but I do not want to lose it....someone else needs a copy. I bought mine at Austin's, apparently they are out of stock. 

Thank you kindly.

Still a few copies remaining on Amazon.

TK, it would be nice if Baytoram makes the book available in Amazon Kindle format. After 10 years, time for him to consider a second edition.

Doubt whether the authors have that ability unless they self-publish. The publishers have to do that.

Chakra Publishing House printed Bayto's book. I just sent Chakra a request to consider e-book format in addition to print edition.

FM
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by VishMahabir:

Hey,

Do anyone of you know how to get in touch with the author, or how to get a copy of Rai's book?? I have my own copy but I do not want to lose it....someone else needs a copy. I bought mine at Austin's, apparently they are out of stock. 

Thank you kindly.

Still a few copies remaining on Amazon.

TK, it would be nice if Baytoram makes the book available in Amazon Kindle format. After 10 years, time for him to consider a second edition.

Doubt whether the authors have that ability unless they self-publish. The publishers have to do that.

Chakra Publishing House printed Bayto's book. I just sent Chakra a request to consider e-book format in addition to print edition.

Man...you like dem young bais...can you really read a book on dem electronic readers?

FM
Originally Posted by seignet:
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

I am not Winston Mits. You know that. Now let get back on topic.What are your views on BS Rai. I'd love to hear it.

The first time I heard the word Chatri, it was in relation to Balram Singh Rai. 

 

The comment was, "He was aChatri, and he made certain others were aware of it."

 

Now, I seek to understand where the word come from. I doan seem to find it the caste of India.

 

Is it a Guyanese interpretation of an upper caste?

sege..Chatri real word is Kastriya is second in the hindu caste

system most Guyanese with the name Singh claim to be from

that caste.Our ancestors will define themselves being from Brahamin,Kastrya,Vaishya and Sudra,when i was growing my

mom told me i am Chatri inherited from my father,i never paid

any attention, it does not matter to me, i was even told  my

grandmother was a Sudra.I am more inclined to Atheism due to

exploring science.

 

Django
Last edited by Django
Originally Posted by Django:
Originally Posted by seignet:
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

I am not Winston Mits. You know that. Now let get back on topic.What are your views on BS Rai. I'd love to hear it.

The first time I heard the word Chatri, it was in relation to Balram Singh Rai. 

 

The comment was, "He was aChatri, and he made certain others were aware of it."

 

Now, I seek to understand where the word come from. I doan seem to find it the caste of India.

 

Is it a Guyanese interpretation of an upper caste?

sege..Chatri real word is Kastriya is second in the hindu caste

system most Guyanese with the name Singh claim to be from

that caste.Our ancestors will define themselves being from Brahamin,Kastrya,Vaishya and Sudra,when i was growing my

mom told me i am Chatri inherited from my father,i never paid

any attention, it does not matter to me, i was even told  my

grandmother was a Sudra.I am more inclined to Atheism due to

exploring science.

 

Thank You. It is like a sub-caste from the kastyra. I read a detailed account of the invasions of the different tribes(if that is a good word) in India. Everytime, one tribe displaced another tribe, the kastyras made off with the treasury and  set up a separate kingdom. That is how, Indian had some many Rajas and Ranis.

S
Originally Posted by Wally:

I don't read anything written by Ralph anymore.  But I will say this.  It is up to the PPP to honor BS Rai and not the PNC.

I do not get your logic Wally. We are honoring people's contribution to our history. The PPP refused to honor Rai, and as Ralph said, he should have been given his parliamentary pension. The has a chance to correct this wrong and do justice to Rai.

V

Vish, BS Rai should receive some type of honor for his contribution to Guyana but I cannot see the PNC being part of the present government honoring him. There are still several people in that party who feel deep hurt by some of his actions in the past. Similarly there are some powerfull folks in the PPP party who also feel deep hurt because they perceive him as being a CIA informer who stool pigeoned on his brothers and sisters.  He should be given his pension and he should receive some type of award but I just don't know from whom.   

Wally
Originally Posted by VVP:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by VVP:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

I am not Winston Mits. You know that. Now let get back on topic.What are your views on BS Rai. I'd love to hear it.

I heard about Rai from my father, but did not fully appreciate his contributions until Bayto's book: Against the Grain. If only he had been in the place of Cheddi Jagan by independence, I would say Guyana could have been today at the level of development of Barbados or Mauritius.

Wasn't he an Indian Advocate (maybe supremacist)...so how would he have done better than Cheddi?  Just asking...I am not very familiar with his political stance; I am just going from hearsay.

I was alluding to his politics. He was rabidly anti-communist. He would have found a better way to work with Forbes Burnham because those guys, including the BGEIA, were pragmatic. There would have been less need for foreign destabilizations of Guyana.

Okay, got you.

Thanks for clarifying this, TK.

Z
Originally Posted by Wally:

Vish, BS Rai should receive some type of honor for his contribution to Guyana but I cannot see the PNC being part of the present government honoring him. There are still several people in that party who feel deep hurt by some of his actions in the past. Similarly there are some powerfull folks in the PPP party who also feel deep hurt because they perceive him as being a CIA informer who stool pigeoned on his brothers and sisters.  He should be given his pension and he should receive some type of award but I just don't know from whom.   

He was respected among those who sought independence without confrontations with the British-the British Guyanese favorable to the colonials, Indo and Afro alike. A small circle of people.

 

Just like Forbes, he also suffered from the smear campaign. He wanted to balance the Police Force. It became the rumor that he was anti-black. Especially since he raised hell about the rigging of Benn's election.

S
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

I am not Winston Mits. You know that. Now let get back on topic.What are your views on BS Rai. I'd love to hear it.

You sound like someone I know from the Abary area.

 

Balram stood up to the Jagans. He did not allow them to bully him. He refused to retract his statement that the Jagans rigged the PPP elections for Party Chairman post in 1962. When the Jagans went into hiding, he single-handedly avoided the break out of a Civil War in 1962.

 

Where were you on Feburary 16th, 1962?

Mitwah
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by VishMahabir:

Hey,

Do anyone of you know how to get in touch with the author, or how to get a copy of Rai's book?? I have my own copy but I do not want to lose it....someone else needs a copy. I bought mine at Austin's, apparently they are out of stock. 

Thank you kindly.

Still a few copies remaining on Amazon.

TK, it would be nice if Baytoram makes the book available in Amazon Kindle format. After 10 years, time for him to consider a second edition.

Doubt whether the authors have that ability unless they self-publish. The publishers have to do that.

Chakra Publishing House printed Bayto's book. I just sent Chakra a request to consider e-book format in addition to print edition.

Man...you like dem young bais...can you really read a book on dem electronic readers?

That's how I've been reading all my books for the past 3 years. Besides buying from Amazon.ca I borrow books from the Toronto Public Library and read on my PC, smartphone and Kindle. Immediate downloads, and the best part is that I don't have to spend public transit fares to visit the library or a bookshop.

FM
Originally Posted by Wally:

I don't read anything written by Ralph anymore.  But I will say this.  It is up to the PPP to honor BS Rai and not the PNC.

That is nonsense, Wally. The PPP has despised Balram Singh Rai since 1962 and will not honour him.

Regarding the PNC, you may be surprised to learn that Forbes Burnham personally regarded Rai with respect even after Rai left Guyana. In fact, after the PPP had rigged internal congress elections and kicked out Rai, Burnham said that the PPP had dispensed with one of its best.

President Granger is a historian and he is more likely to look at Rai as a Guyanese, not merely a PPP man. In any case, it's an open secret that Rai and the Jagans hardly got along even when he was in the PPP.

FM

Balram Singh Rai was Guyana's second Minister of Education [1957 - 1961] after Forbes Burnham [April - Oct 1953].

In September 1959, as Education Minister, Mr Rai formally opened the Mackenzie High School.

FM

The high school at MacKenzie was established a very long time before 1959 and it was known as Echols High School, dating back to 1945.

 

When the school was moved to its current location, indeed it was renamed Mackenzie High School, with the then current Principal D. D Sim.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:

The high school at MacKenzie was established a very long time before 1959 and it was known as Echols High School, dating back to 1945.

 

When the school was moved to its current location, indeed it was renamed Mackenzie High School, with the then current Principal D. D Sim.

Thanks, D_G, I should have stipulated that Mr Rai formally opened the renamed high school.

I got the info here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M..._School_%28Guyana%29

FM
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

Balram Singh Rai has always been my hero. I admired his style of politics when I was in my teenager. He taught me the concept of "Satyamewa Jayate" meaning that the truth alone triumphs. Rai would have loved to do more for his country and his people but they derived themselves of his service. On a wall in my home is a large portriat of Balram Singh Rai.  

With such fond memories of Mr Rai, please tell us who he ran against in the 1957 elections.

FM

* My dad always spoke highly of Balram Singh Rai. Had the Jagan listened to him Guyana's history would have been different. But the Jagans were insecure. They felt threatened by strong willed and strong-minded supporters and so Rai was pushed aside. The Jagan continued with their Marxism-Leninism nonsense and we know the rest. Burnham ran circles around Cheddi and the US kept him in opposition for 28 years.

 

Rev

FM
Originally Posted by seignet:
Originally Posted by Wally:

Vish, BS Rai should receive some type of honor for his contribution to Guyana but I cannot see the PNC being part of the present government honoring him. There are still several people in that party who feel deep hurt by some of his actions in the past. Similarly there are some powerfull folks in the PPP party who also feel deep hurt because they perceive him as being a CIA informer who stool pigeoned on his brothers and sisters.  He should be given his pension and he should receive some type of award but I just don't know from whom.   

He was respected among those who sought independence without confrontations with the British-the British Guyanese favorable to the colonials, Indo and Afro alike. A small circle of people.

 

Just like Forbes, he also suffered from the smear campaign. He wanted to balance the Police Force. It became the rumor that he was anti-black. Especially since he raised hell about the rigging of Benn's election.

I have no problem with BS Rai getting his pension and an award from the government.  I know how powerful and lasting the Jagan-Ramkarran-Benn historical negative and dirty smear can be. Particularly, to the uneducated. So it will be an uphill battle for his supporters to get him his pension and award. Nevertheless, they have persevered over the years and they should not stop until they get to their goal.

Wally
Last edited by Wally
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

Balram Singh Rai has always been my hero. I admired his style of politics when I was in my teenager. He taught me the concept of "Satyamewa Jayate" meaning that the truth alone triumphs. Rai would have loved to do more for his country and his people but they derived themselves of his service. On a wall in my home is a large portriat of Balram Singh Rai.  

With such fond memories of Mr Rai, please tell us who he ran against in the 1957 elections.

On a note ... Balram Singh Rai only had to contest the seat against Sydney King who was an independent candidate while Burnham's group presented no candidate.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

Balram Singh Rai has always been my hero. I admired his style of politics when I was in my teenager. He taught me the concept of "Satyamewa Jayate" meaning that the truth alone triumphs. Rai would have loved to do more for his country and his people but they derived themselves of his service. On a wall in my home is a large portriat of Balram Singh Rai.  

With such fond memories of Mr Rai, please tell us who he ran against in the 1957 elections.

On a note ... Balram Singh Rai only had to contest the seat against Sydney King who was an independent candidate while Burnham's group presented no candidate.

Thank you DG. For the ill informed or the young ones, Sydney King is Eusi Kwayana. Most of you may not know it, but Eusi Kwayana was a founding member of the PPP. He even wrote the party song. He, LFS, Ashton Chase and others were all black people in the PPP in the 50's and on. Kwayana stood with the PPP in opposition to the British. Oh, and he was from BUXTON!!!

 

In spite of Kwayana's PPP support, the PPP chose not to support him in the 57 elections and supported Balram Singh Rai instead. You see, Singh was Indian. Kwayana contested as an independent as DG pointed out. It was after this 57 election I believe Kwayana saw the racism of the PPP and bolted the party. He was later in the WPA fiercely contesting Burnham policies.

 

Just food for thought from our history for those of you who think racism in Guyana began with the PNC rule. As Caribny and I pointed out earlier, this ethnic insecurity goes way back.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
. It was after this 57 election I believe Kwayana saw the racism of the PPP and bolted the party. He was later in the WPA fiercely contesting Burnham policies.

 

Just food for thought from our history for those of you who think racism in Guyana began with the PNC rule. As Caribny and I pointed out earlier, this ethnic insecurity goes way back.

In fact all of these PPP and AFC Indos want to avoid discussion of the reality of the division.

 

Burnham did NOT set out to create an African PNC as the African vote was NOT large enough.  Most of the mixed, Chinese, Portuguese vote went to the UF, as did a few urban elite (Christian) Indians.

 

So Burnham could have only won an election by splitting the Indian vote.  He departed the PPP with Indians, who he had hoped would win in the predominantly Indians areas.  They lost, but the African candidates won.

 

The PPP could have won the election with only the Indian vote as the "winner take all" constituency system favored the PPP.  They didn't need the black vote, so gradually SQUEEZED OUT most of the blacks who remained in the PPP after Burnham left. 

 

It was the PPP which had incentive to introduce racial voting.  NOT the PNC.  This is why Eusi left the PPP.  He didn't initially join Burnham because he didn't trust him, and in fact didn't stay long in the PNC.

 

But the Jaganite worshippers would have one believe that the Jagans didn't have anything to do with race based voting.  Once Burnham left Cheddi and Janet realized the merits of racial voting, and embraced those who called for "apaan jhat".

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by caribny:

But the Jaganite worshippers would have one believe that the Jagans didn't have anything to do with race based voting.  Once Burnham left Cheddi and Janet realized the merits of racial voting, and embraced those who called for "apaan jhat".

That term apna jaat was used when LFS and Cheddie met the head of India. Was it Nehru? (not GNI's drunk of course). It means keep it in the family and legend has it that Nehru told Cheddie to "keep it in the family".

 

Wasn't Rai the faction of the PPP that called for apna jat? I've heard that but not sure. There must be an element of truth to it because our resident segregationist Prashad and like minded Indians hold Rai in high esteem.

FM
Originally Posted by Mitwah:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:

Noted Gilbakka.

 

My father were friends with Mr. J. N. Fraser, the then General Manager of DEMBA, and Mr. D.D. Sim.

irrelevant.

Indeed, your statements and views are always irrelevant.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
 

Wasn't Rai the faction of the PPP that called for apna jat? .

Yes.  It is not true that the Jagans coined that phrase, but it is true that they took full advantage of those sentiments.

 

In fact when the PPP won in 1961 their mainly Indian supporters drove through black villages on ECD hurling racist abuse with threats of sending blacks back into slavery. 

 

A black woman, who loved Cheddi, came on to support that motorcade, and was met by the same racist bile which they hurled at other blacks, who they presumed to be PNC supporters.

 

These facts are considered to be racist on GNI, with the majority of the posters (BOTH PPP and AFC) do NOT want this issue discussed.  But will talk at length about the Wismar massacres and the Burnham "Indian Holocaust".

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Mitwah:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:

Noted Gilbakka.

 

My father were friends with Mr. J. N. Fraser, the then General Manager of DEMBA, and Mr. D.D. Sim.

irrelevant.

Indeed, your statements and views are always irrelevant.

Perhaps, perhaps not.

Mitwah
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
 

Wasn't Rai the faction of the PPP that called for apna jat? .

Yes.  It is not true that the Jagans coined that phrase, but it is true that they took full advantage of those sentiments.

 

In fact when the PPP won in 1961 their mainly Indian supporters drove through black villages on ECD hurling racist abuse with threats of sending blacks back into slavery. 

 

A black woman, who loved Cheddi, came on to support that motorcade, and was met by the same racist bile which they hurled at other blacks, who they presumed to be PNC supporters.

 

These facts are considered to be racist on GNI, with the majority of the posters (BOTH PPP and AFC) do NOT want this issue discussed.  But will talk at length about the Wismar massacres and the Burnham "Indian Holocaust".

Now, this all preceded Burnham, who incidentally was also a PPP man under Jagan. So here we have Indians calling for apna jat (keep it in the family). I do not in any way excuse Burnham's racism, but does it not give one reason to ponder why the PNC was racist toward Indians? Afro Guyanese were the minority and here the other side is telling them that they intend to "keep it in the family" (Indians). There is fear on both sides, much of it justified.

 

Again, the narrative being peddled that racism started with Burnham is pure hogwash. We and our young ones need to understand the history of our country and the insecurities that lie on both sides if we are to move forward.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:
 

Now, this all preceded Burnham, who incidentally was also a PPP man under Jagan. So here we have Indians calling for apna jat (keep it in the family). I do not in any way excuse Burnham's racism, but is there any wonder why the PNC was racist toward Indians? There is fear on both sides, much of it justified.

 

Again, the narrative being peddled that racism started with Burnham is pure hogwash. We and our young ones need to understand the history of our country and the insecurities that lie on both sides if we are to move forward.

Agreed.  But expect that you will be called a racist for not peddling the usual "black brute savaging defenseless Indians" narrative.

 

What people need to learn is the fact that a variety of narratives exist and that we will never moved forward unless and until we respect this fact.

 

I say this, and now Kari calls this cultist and laughs at the notion that Indian racism=black racism.

FM
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
 

Now, this all preceded Burnham, who incidentally was also a PPP man under Jagan. So here we have Indians calling for apna jat (keep it in the family). I do not in any way excuse Burnham's racism, but is there any wonder why the PNC was racist toward Indians? There is fear on both sides, much of it justified.

 

Again, the narrative being peddled that racism started with Burnham is pure hogwash. We and our young ones need to understand the history of our country and the insecurities that lie on both sides if we are to move forward.

Agreed.  But expect that you will be called a racist for not peddling the usual "black brute savaging defenseless Indians" narrative.

 

What people need to learn is the fact that a variety of narratives exist and that we will never moved forward unless and until we respect this fact.

 

I say this, and now Kari calls this cultist and laughs at the notion that Indian racism=black racism.

Don't care what anyone says here. We have clowns screaming apan jat here, yet they don't even know what the word cunumunu means, much less anything of Guyanese history. Failure to speak allows these frauds to perpetuate the lies of their masters.

 

I am not sure if Mr. Rai had any involvement with the apna jat movement. There are posters here who know of that period in our history and I hope they opine.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
 

Now, this all preceded Burnham, who incidentally was also a PPP man under Jagan. So here we have Indians calling for apna jat (keep it in the family). I do not in any way excuse Burnham's racism, but is there any wonder why the PNC was racist toward Indians? There is fear on both sides, much of it justified.

 

Again, the narrative being peddled that racism started with Burnham is pure hogwash. We and our young ones need to understand the history of our country and the insecurities that lie on both sides if we are to move forward.

Agreed.  But expect that you will be called a racist for not peddling the usual "black brute savaging defenseless Indians" narrative.

 

What people need to learn is the fact that a variety of narratives exist and that we will never moved forward unless and until we respect this fact.

 

I say this, and now Kari calls this cultist and laughs at the notion that Indian racism=black racism.

Don't care what anyone says here. We have clowns screaming apan jat here, yet they don't even know what the word cunumunu means, much less anything of Guyanese history. Failure to speak allows these frauds to perpetuate the lies of their masters.

 

I am not sure if Mr. Rai had any involvement with the apna jat movement. There are posters here who know of that period in our history and I hope they opine.

have not heard that word in a long time,paging Cain

one more new word for you.

Django
Originally Posted by Django:
have not heard that word in a long time,paging Cain

one more new word for you.

You can thank Nehru for that one. At least he knows our unique creole/ Guyanses culture.

FM
Originally Posted by Mitwah:
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

I am not Winston Mits. You know that. Now let get back on topic.What are your views on BS Rai. I'd love to hear it.

You sound like someone I know from the Abary area.

 

Balram stood up to the Jagans. He did not allow them to bully him. He refused to retract his statement that the Jagans rigged the PPP elections for Party Chairman post in 1962. When the Jagans went into hiding, he single-handedly avoided the break out of a Civil War in 1962.

 

Where were you on Feburary 16th, 1962?

Bai, I was in Georgetown that day and was able to see what was happening. Rai did what he had to do to save Guyana. He was not a racial man but he stood up for the truth -Satyameywa Jayati.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
 

Now, this all preceded Burnham, who incidentally was also a PPP man under Jagan. So here we have Indians calling for apna jat (keep it in the family). I do not in any way excuse Burnham's racism, but is there any wonder why the PNC was racist toward Indians? There is fear on both sides, much of it justified.

 

Again, the narrative being peddled that racism started with Burnham is pure hogwash. We and our young ones need to understand the history of our country and the insecurities that lie on both sides if we are to move forward.

Agreed.  But expect that you will be called a racist for not peddling the usual "black brute savaging defenseless Indians" narrative.

 

What people need to learn is the fact that a variety of narratives exist and that we will never moved forward unless and until we respect this fact.

 

I say this, and now Kari calls this cultist and laughs at the notion that Indian racism=black racism.

Don't care what anyone says here. We have clowns screaming apan jat here, yet they don't even know what the word cunumunu means, much less anything of Guyanese history. Failure to speak allows these frauds to perpetuate the lies of their masters.

 

I am not sure if Mr. Rai had any involvement with the apna jat movement. There are posters here who know of that period in our history and I hope they opine.

With a combined hundreds of years of guyana history on this board, no one care to share on the roots of apna jat? No one willing to share more on Mr. Rai and his role? The silence is deafening. I reference my earlier post above.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:
With a combined hundreds of years of guyana history on this board, no one care to share on the roots of apna jat? No one willing to share more on Mr. Rai and his role? The silence is deafening. I reference my earlier post above.

I have provided information on this item a few times.

 

Succinctly ...

 

APAN Jat or apna jat ... was indeed used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's.

 

Note however ...

 

In those days there was the PPP-Jaganite and the PPP-Burnhamite.

 

It was known quite clearly that ...

 

It was NOT - repeat - NOT - started by the PPP-Jaganite.

 

Note also ...

 

It was after the 1957 elections that the PPP-Burnhamite was changed to the PNC.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
With a combined hundreds of years of guyana history on this board, no one care to share on the roots of apna jat? No one willing to share more on Mr. Rai and his role? The silence is deafening. I reference my earlier post above.

I have provided information on this item a few times.

 

Succinctly ...

 

APAN Jat or apna jat ... was indeed used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's.

 

Note however ...

 

In those days there was the PPP-Jaganite and the PPP-Burnhamite.

 

It was known quite clearly that ...

 

It was NOT - repeat - NOT - started by the PPP-Jaganite.

 

Note also ...

 

It was after the 1957 elections that the PPP-Burnhamite was changed to the PNC.

Thanks DG. So you confirm that apna jat (or apan jaat, not sure which is correct) which essentially means "keep it in the family" was perpetuated by the PPP. If it wasn't Jagan who advocated apna jat then who was it? It could not have been Burnham, as he would have known nothing of this Indian term and its practice though I do believe he found out later what it meant, hence the 1957 split.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
With a combined hundreds of years of guyana history on this board, no one care to share on the roots of apna jat? No one willing to share more on Mr. Rai and his role? The silence is deafening. I reference my earlier post above.

I have provided information on this item a few times.

 

Succinctly ...

 

APAN Jat or apna jat ... was indeed used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's.

 

Note however ...

 

In those days there was the PPP-Jaganite and the PPP-Burnhamite.

 

It was known quite clearly that ...

 

It was NOT - repeat - NOT - started by the PPP-Jaganite.

 

Note also ...

 

It was after the 1957 elections that the PPP-Burnhamite was changed to the PNC.

Thanks DG. So you confirm that apna jat (or apan jaat, not sure which is correct) which essentially means "keep it in the family" was perpetuated by the PPP. If it wasn't Jagan who advocated apna jat then who was it? It could not have been Burnham, as he would have known nothing of this Indian term and its practice though I do believe he found out later what it meant, hence the 1957 split.

Who was the leader of the PPP-Burnhamite??

 

Check also on information on Daniel Debedin of the United Workers and Farmers Party - UFWP.

 

The term used is Apan Jhaat.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Who was the leader of the PPP-Burnhamite??

 

Check also on information on Daniel Debedin of the United Workers and Farmers Party - UFWP.

 

The term used is Apan Jhaat.

On my way out now, but I think I know where you're coming from. There was a Jai Singh or Jung Singh who was the head of the Burnham faction. The name Debedin rings a bell. Was he the guy who went to meetings and told Indians to vote race (apan jhaat) in 53/57? I will research more tomorrow as well as speak with my uncle who remembers this period well.

 

Anyway, what is clear to me and what I've known since childhood is that racism did not begin with LFS and the PNC. It was used well before 1964 by Indians in the colonial period. Thanks again for the info.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by cain:

Oi man, read that thingy and break it down to one line for me nuh man.

Here is the gist of apan jhaat as practiced in Guyana in the 50's way before Burnham, as DG confirmed above and pointed out some of the personalities involved.

 

1. Apan jhaat means to vote for your own or keep it in the family. In a political sense - Indians only.

 

2. In the 50's before independence and the PNC, the PPP consisted of both Burnham and Jagan and also Mr. Rai.

 

3. There was a faction of PPP Indians who advocated apan jhaat and did not see black folks having any place in government or even in Guyana. Personally, I do not believe Dr. Jagan was one of those but he had to deal with elements in his party who advocated apan jhaat. Was Mr. Rai one of them? I don't know. Furthermore, remember that his wife Janet came from the US where segregation against black folks was common place. What was her feeling about blacks?

 

4. Forbes got wind of this apan jhaat talk. It was going on at bottom house meetings, screamed loudly that Indians were to vote for Indians only. DG listed some of the names in his earlier post. What effect did calls for apan jhaat  have on black people and Forbes?

 

5. But why Apan Jhaat? Why Indians only when BOTH races struggled against colonialism and massa's whip? It is my opinion that Indian castism brought from India was at the root of it, where the dark skinned (dalits) were considered sub human. The black man, because of his complexion fell into this category. In the view of those who practiced castism, he was a subhuman not worthy to have any role in government or in the country and certainly inferior to the light skinned chatree / rajput Indians who were peddling apan jhaat and wanted to subjugate the black man.

 

6. The average Indian followed along. In that era many people (blacks and Indians) were uneducated and did as they were told. The Indian laborer class followed their light skinned chatree/rajput leaders.

 

7. This Indian only, apan jhaat mentality is what gave rise to the PNC. Burnham, realizing that blacks were outnumbered and would become an underclass in Indian rule, formed coalitions with the UF to gain power. I believe the apan jhaat of the Indians never left his psyche. No excuse for the racism Burnham practiced against Indians, but he experienced their racism first hand.

 

8. The PNC ruled for 28 years. You know the history.

 

So pre dating Burnham was this mindset among the chatree / rajput Indians that they were superior to black people. They and only they deserved to rule and black folks were to survive at their mercy. I concur with Redux when he says this racism among some of these Indians runs deep and has NOTHING to do with Burnham. It all pre dated Burnham!!!!

 

This mindset is still with us today and the reason for this post. As long as we have the basemans, shaitaans, cobras, ramas, skeldon man, sachins, prashads, yugis, revs and sadly now Seignet who feel that black people are an inferior class to them then there will always be another Burnham.

 

The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by cain:

Oi man, read that thingy and break it down to one line for me nuh man.

Here is the gist of apan jhaat as practiced in Guyana in the 50's way before Burnham, as DG confirmed above and pointed out some of the personalities involved.

 

1. Apan jhaat means to vote for your own or keep it in the family. In a political sense - Indians only.

 

2. In the 50's before independence and the PNC, the PPP consisted of both Burnham and Jagan and also Mr. Rai.

 

3. There was a faction of PPP Indians who advocated apan jhaat and did not see black folks having any place in government or even in Guyana. Personally, I do not believe Dr. Jagan was one of those but he had to deal with elements in his party who advocated apan jhaat. Was Mr. Rai one of them? I don't know. Furthermore, remember that his wife Janet came from the US where segregation against black folks was common place. What was her feeling about blacks?

 

4. Forbes got wind of this apan jhaat talk. It was going on at bottom house meetings, screamed loudly that Indians were to vote for Indians only. DG listed some of the names in his earlier post. What effect did calls for apan jhaat  have on black people and Forbes?

 

5. But why Apan Jhaat? Why Indians only when BOTH races struggled against colonialism and massa's whip? It is my opinion that Indian castism brought from India was at the root of it, where the dark skinned (dalits) were considered sub human. The black man, because of his complexion fell into this category. In the view of those who practiced castism, he was a subhuman not worthy to have any role in government or in the country and certainly inferior to the light skinned chatree / rajput Indians who were peddling apan jhaat and wanted to subjugate the black man.

 

6. The average Indian followed along. In that era many people (blacks and Indians) were uneducated and did as they were told. The Indian laborer class followed their light skinned chatree/rajput leaders.

 

7. This Indian only, apan jhaat mentality is what gave rise to the PNC. Burnham, realizing that blacks were outnumbered and would become an underclass in Indian rule, formed coalitions with the UF to gain power. I believe the apan jhaat of the Indians never left his psyche. No excuse for the racism Burnham practiced against Indians, but he experienced their racism first hand.

 

8. The PNC ruled for 28 years. You know the history.

 

So pre dating Burnham was this mindset among the chatree / rajput Indians that they were superior to black people. They and only they deserved to rule and black folks were to survive at their mercy. I concur with Redux when he says this racism among some of these Indians runs deep and has NOTHING to do with Burnham. It all pre dated Burnham!!!!

 

This mindset is still with us today and the reason for this post. As long as we have the basemans, shaitaans, cobras, ramas, skeldon man, sachins, prashads, yugis, revs and sadly now Seignet who feel that black people are an inferior class to them then there will always be another Burnham.

 

The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

Vote for race is a faction in both camps and for the same reason, fear of the other side.

 

You might be correct about the fears of LFSB which led to the 1960s conflagration.  Then the 28 years of PNC injustice helped perpetuate the mindset as reflected in the 1992 vote.  Corruption and ineptness frustrated many many Indians leading some to defect in 2015 putting the "PNC" over the top.

 

This small shift could become a sea change if handled well by Granger and the new Govt.  Many Indians did not feel much benefits of the PPP in power so the opportunity is there for the PNC to make a positive mark.  I hope in future, Afros are willing to give the PNC a chuck should they become lazy and lethargic.   Of course, the PPP has to reform and broaden it base and attract Afros.  PPP should actually change its name.

FM

look, race voting by Black and Indian is tribal, period! . . . very little to do with caste and Hinduism, especially in the Guyana context

 

let us not overthink this and fall into the Kean-Gibson trap

 

people are constantly defining and re-defining themselves, shaping the categories to suit perceived self-interest

 

Janet Jagan and Cheddi Jagan come out of the post-WWII 'progressive' Communist movement in the USA . . . Chicago then was not Birmingham, Ala.

 

Guyana and the imperatives of its ethnic power politics likely bent and distorted the best of intentions in both Burnham and the Jagans

 

just off the top of my head . . . will return to this important topic when i free up some time later

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by redux:

look, race voting by Black and Indian is tribal, period! . . . very little to do with caste and Hinduism, especially in the Guyana context

 

let us not overthink this and fall into the Kean-Gibson trap

 

people are constantly defining and re-defining themselves, shaping the categories to suit perceived self-interest

 

Janet Jagan and Cheddi Jagan come out of the post-WWII 'progressive' Communist movement in the USA . . . Chicago then was not Birmingham, Ala.

 

Guyana and the imperatives of its ethnic power politics likely bent and distorted the best of intentions in both Burnham and the Jagans

 

just off the top of my head . . . will return to this important topic when i free up some time later

"very little to do with caste and Hinduism, especially in the Guyana context"

 

agreed

 

Django
Originally Posted by baseman:
 

Vote for race is a faction in both camps and for the same reason, fear of the other side.

 

You might be correct about the fears of LFSB which led to the 1960s conflagration.  Then the 28 years of PNC injustice helped perpetuate the mindset as reflected in the 1992 vote.  Corruption and ineptness frustrated many many Indians leading some to defect in 2015 putting the "PNC" over the top.

 

This small shift could become a sea change if handled well by Granger and the new Govt.  Many Indians did not feel much benefits of the PPP in power so the opportunity is there for the PNC to make a positive mark.  I hope in future, Afros are willing to give the PNC a chuck should they become lazy and lethargic.   Of course, the PPP has to reform and broaden it base and attract Afros.  PPP should actually change its name.

The PPP has to do what the PNC just did, and that is preach national unity, which allowed it to attract a sliver of an Indian vote, combined with a massive African/mixed turn out.

 

The PPP will NOT get the Amerindian vote next time, as they play patronage politics.  They vote for who offers them goodies and the PPP will have none to offer.  So unless the PPP makes inroads into the African/mixed vote, their

continued defeat is assured.

 

And the PPP needs to find an African with the credibility among non Indians that Nagamootoo enjoys among a decent swath of Indians (even though he didn't get their votes because of ethnic fear). 

 

 

in colonial Guyana there was absolutely no way that Burnham could have won, based on a racial vote.  Africans were a mere 33%.  British Guiana was an ethnic pyramid with whites at the top, Portuguese just below, with the mulattos and Chinese being the sub elites. 

 

All of these groups had disdain for Africans who were at the base, and East Indians, who were viewed even more unfavorably due to their "pagan" habits.  It is only fear of communism, and their limited numbers which allowed an alliance with an African led party.  But Burnham had to woo them, and playing the "African race card" wouldn't have worked.

 

Now let us look at Cheddi.  Weakened by the departure of Burnham who, contrary to popular belief, left with not only most URBAN blacks, but also some Indians (probably Christian/Muslim). 

 

The whole thrust of the PPP being the "working class" party was over, with the loss of the African working class, who considered Burnham a hero because of his involvement with trade unions in G/town and MacKenzie.  So he got supported from the more right wing groups like the BGEIA.  He didn't coin the phrase "apaan jhat".  It was coined by these more Indo centered groups who thought that an independent Guyana should be Indo dominated.   Making note that a racial vote did favor the PPP, Cheddi acquiesced to those groups, thereby losing the RURAL AFRICAN voters who didn't trust Burnham,  Eusi is an example of this.

 

 

Seeing the blatant "Indianism" of the PPP through apaan jhat, and fearing that Indians are more ethnically cohesive than are Africans (severely divided by social class, skin color, being more ambivalent to their African heritage, etc),  a "kith & kin" belief structure begun.  The mulattos gradually shifted to the PNC out of a need for survival, notwithstanding their strong reservations about blacks. 

 

So cease your nonsense that the PNC started race voting.  That would have been a very quick path to defeat. 

 

The PPP will have to put aside its heritage as an "Indian party" and seek to attract non Indians who have credibility and a support base.  They need to abandon the notion that light weights like Elizabeth Harper will win them black support.  They see her for watch she was.  A soup licking stooge.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Here is the gist of apan jhaat as practiced in Guyana in the 50's way before Burnham, as DG confirmed above and pointed out some of the personalities involved.

 

1. Apan jhaat means to vote for your own or keep it in the family. In a political sense - Indians only.

 

2. In the 50's before independence and the PNC, the PPP consisted of both Burnham and Jagan and also Mr. Rai.

 

3. There was a faction of PPP Indians who advocated apan jhaat and did not see black folks having any place in government or even in Guyana. Personally, I do not believe Dr. Jagan was one of those but he had to deal with elements in his party who advocated apan jhaat. Was Mr. Rai one of them? I don't know. Furthermore, remember that his wife Janet came from the US where segregation against black folks was common place. What was her feeling about blacks?

 

4. Forbes got wind of this apan jhaat talk. It was going on at bottom house meetings, screamed loudly that Indians were to vote for Indians only. DG listed some of the names in his earlier post. What effect did calls for apan jhaat  have on black people and Forbes?

 

5. But why Apan Jhaat? Why Indians only when BOTH races struggled against colonialism and massa's whip? It is my opinion that Indian castism brought from India was at the root of it, where the dark skinned (dalits) were considered sub human. The black man, because of his complexion fell into this category. In the view of those who practiced castism, he was a subhuman not worthy to have any role in government or in the country and certainly inferior to the light skinned chatree / rajput Indians who were peddling apan jhaat and wanted to subjugate the black man.

 

6. The average Indian followed along. In that era many people (blacks and Indians) were uneducated and did as they were told. The Indian laborer class followed their light skinned chatree/rajput leaders.

 

7. This Indian only, apan jhaat mentality is what gave rise to the PNC. Burnham, realizing that blacks were outnumbered and would become an underclass in Indian rule, formed coalitions with the UF to gain power. I believe the apan jhaat of the Indians never left his psyche. No excuse for the racism Burnham practiced against Indians, but he experienced their racism first hand.

 

8. The PNC ruled for 28 years. You know the history.

 

So pre dating Burnham was this mindset among the chatree / rajput Indians that they were superior to black people. They and only they deserved to rule and black folks were to survive at their mercy. I concur with Redux when he says this racism among some of these Indians runs deep and has NOTHING to do with Burnham. It all pre dated Burnham!!!!

 

This mindset is still with us today and the reason for this post. As long as we have the basemans, shaitaans, cobras, ramas, skeldon man, sachins, prashads, yugis, revs and sadly now Seignet who feel that black people are an inferior class to them then there will always be another Burnham.

 

The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

Itaname, I have highlighted the relevant parts for my comments.

 

1. In 1953, both Cheddi Jagan and Forbes Burnham were together in the PPP as Leader and Chairman respectively.

 

2. After the constitution was suspended in 1953, the PPP was divided in to two separate political organisations --

   a. PPP-Jaganite, and

   b. PPP-Burnhamite.

 

3. Both political parties contested the 1957 elections under the respective names; PPP-Jaganite and PPP-Burnhamite.

 

4. After the 1957 elections the PPP-Burnhamite change its name to the PNC.

 

5. Cheddi Jagan never got involved with nor promoted the term Apan Jhaat.

 

6. In the early 1950's Balram Singh Rai was never with the PPP, and he not only lost the seat he contested but also lost his deposit. It was only when Balram Singh Rai joined the PPP in the latter part of the 1950's that he won a seat in parliament.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

The best solution which I have been advocating since in the late 1960's, is a merger / solidification of the progressive elements of the PPP and PNC.

 

Such a merger would provide a solid base of about 70+% for the progressive elements.

 

There indeed will be unhappy and disgruntled members in both parties who may leave and perhaps join other political groups.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

The best solution which I have been advocating since in the late 1960's, is a merger / solidification of the progressive elements of the PPP and PNC.

 

Such a merger would provide a solid base of about 70+% for the progressive elements.

 

There indeed will be unhappy and disgruntled members in both parties who may leave and perhaps join other political groups.

Hi DG, but isn't that merger what we have with the AFC? Or do you consider the AFC guys from the PPP/PNC not progressive enough? Anyway, there has to be a better way than this racial hatred. Granted, it is less than it was but we are still too tribal in our politics.

 

I have heard since teenage years growing up during that period that Dr. Jagan was not part of the apan jhaat message being spread then but other members of his PPP were. Curious as to whether Rai was one of them. My family was very threatened by that message and what it would mean for us. Thanks for the info you provided.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by redux:

look, race voting by Black and Indian is tribal, period! . . . very little to do with caste and Hinduism, especially in the Guyana context

 

let us not overthink this and fall into the Kean-Gibson trap

 

people are constantly defining and re-defining themselves, shaping the categories to suit perceived self-interest

 

Janet Jagan and Cheddi Jagan come out of the post-WWII 'progressive' Communist movement in the USA . . . Chicago then was not Birmingham, Ala.

 

Guyana and the imperatives of its ethnic power politics likely bent and distorted the best of intentions in both Burnham and the Jagans

 

just off the top of my head . . . will return to this important topic when i free up some time later

You may be right Redux, and you are certainly correct when it comes to self interest being involved. My view is just that - a view, an opinion. I cannot prove that the castism of Indians was the root for apan jhaat, but one has to wonder why the reason for it. I think it is more than self interest. 

 

Anyway, what is clear is that there was racist politics practiced by Indians which pre dates Burnham. In fact Indian racism may have given rise to him. This fact is contrary to the Indian victim hood stories being spread here daily about black man in Guyana perpetuating some holocaust against Indians for eternity, raping them, starving them and depriving them of cutlasses and medicine. It is telling that DG is the lone Indian here to contribute to this discussion. Baseman had a comment or 2 but he does "come and go".

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
 

I have provided information on this item a few times.

 

Succinctly ...

 

APAN Jat or apna jat ... was indeed used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's.

 

Note however ...

 

In those days there was the PPP-Jaganite and the PPP-Burnhamite.

 

It was known quite clearly that ...

 

It was NOT - repeat - NOT - started by the PPP-Jaganite.

 

Note also ...

 

It was after the 1957 elections that the PPP-Burnhamite was changed to the PNC.

Not started by PPP-Jaganite but used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's...so are you saying is was started by the PPP-Burnhamite?

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

The best solution which I have been advocating since in the late 1960's, is a merger / solidification of the progressive elements of the PPP and PNC.

 

Such a merger would provide a solid base of about 70+% for the progressive elements.

 

There indeed will be unhappy and disgruntled members in both parties who may leave and perhaps join other political groups.

Hi DG, but isn't that merger what we have with the AFC? Or do you consider the AFC guys from the PPP/PNC not progressive enough? Anyway, there has to be a better way than this racial hatred. Granted, it is less than it was but we are still too tribal in our politics.

 

I have heard since teenage years growing up during that period that Dr. Jagan was not part of the apan jhaat message being spread then but other members of his PPP were. Curious as to whether Rai was one of them. My family was very threatened by that message and what it would mean for us. Thanks for the info you provided.

The AFC is not focused on a progressive approach for Guyana.

 

The merger of the progressive elements must come directly from the PPP and PNC.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

The best solution which I have been advocating since in the late 1960's, is a merger / solidification of the progressive elements of the PPP and PNC.

 

Such a merger would provide a solid base of about 70+% for the progressive elements.

 

There indeed will be unhappy and disgruntled members in both parties who may leave and perhaps join other political groups.

Hi DG, but isn't that merger what we have with the AFC? Or do you consider the AFC guys from the PPP/PNC not progressive enough? Anyway, there has to be a better way than this racial hatred. Granted, it is less than it was but we are still too tribal in our politics.

 

I have heard since teenage years growing up during that period that Dr. Jagan was not part of the apan jhaat message being spread then but other members of his PPP were. Curious as to whether Rai was one of them. My family was very threatened by that message and what it would mean for us. Thanks for the info you provided.

The AFC is not focused on a progressive approach for Guyana.

 

The merger of the progressive elements must come directly from the PPP and PNC.

So what is a progressive approach?

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by VVP:
So what is a progressive approach?

At least, get a basic understanding of issues.

You sound like a prick.  It was a simple question AH.

FM
Originally Posted by cain:

Forgive him, he's very very old....oops, nearly forgot.. and fragile.

I think he couldn't find an answer to cut and paste   I was thinking that he is one of the "knowledge grabber" who do not like to share or educate others, but now I am convinced he is a prick.

FM
Originally Posted by VVP:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by VVP:
So what is a progressive approach?

At least, get a basic understanding of issues.

You sound like a prick.  It was a simple question AH.

Perhaps, you do not know the answer to simple questions.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
 

Wasn't Rai the faction of the PPP that called for apna jat? .

Yes.  It is not true that the Jagans coined that phrase, but it is true that they took full advantage of those sentiments.

 

In fact when the PPP won in 1961 their mainly Indian supporters drove through black villages on ECD hurling racist abuse with threats of sending blacks back into slavery. 

 

A black woman, who loved Cheddi, came on to support that motorcade, and was met by the same racist bile which they hurled at other blacks, who they presumed to be PNC supporters.

 

These facts are considered to be racist on GNI, with the majority of the posters (BOTH PPP and AFC) do NOT want this issue discussed.  But will talk at length about the Wismar massacres and the Burnham "Indian Holocaust".

Now, this all preceded Burnham, who incidentally was also a PPP man under Jagan. So here we have Indians calling for apna jat (keep it in the family). I do not in any way excuse Burnham's racism, but does it not give one reason to ponder why the PNC was racist toward Indians? Afro Guyanese were the minority and here the other side is telling them that they intend to "keep it in the family" (Indians). There is fear on both sides, much of it justified.

 

Again, the narrative being peddled that racism started with Burnham is pure hogwash. We and our young ones need to understand the history of our country and the insecurities that lie on both sides if we are to move forward.

I am not aware anyone on GNI is claiming Burnham invented apan jaat and race voting in Guyana. Since 2011 the PPP has been the undisputed public race baiting party, but it started neither with Forbes nor the PPP. My thesis is the ethnic insecurity is rooted in economics and adverse geography.  All the stereotyping and political mess are the reflection of the history and harsh geography of Guyana.

FM
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
 

Wasn't Rai the faction of the PPP that called for apna jat? .

Yes.  It is not true that the Jagans coined that phrase, but it is true that they took full advantage of those sentiments.

 

In fact when the PPP won in 1961 their mainly Indian supporters drove through black villages on ECD hurling racist abuse with threats of sending blacks back into slavery. 

 

A black woman, who loved Cheddi, came on to support that motorcade, and was met by the same racist bile which they hurled at other blacks, who they presumed to be PNC supporters.

 

These facts are considered to be racist on GNI, with the majority of the posters (BOTH PPP and AFC) do NOT want this issue discussed.  But will talk at length about the Wismar massacres and the Burnham "Indian Holocaust".

Now, this all preceded Burnham, who incidentally was also a PPP man under Jagan. So here we have Indians calling for apna jat (keep it in the family). I do not in any way excuse Burnham's racism, but does it not give one reason to ponder why the PNC was racist toward Indians? Afro Guyanese were the minority and here the other side is telling them that they intend to "keep it in the family" (Indians). There is fear on both sides, much of it justified.

 

Again, the narrative being peddled that racism started with Burnham is pure hogwash. We and our young ones need to understand the history of our country and the insecurities that lie on both sides if we are to move forward.

I am not aware anyone on GNI is claiming Burnham invented apan jaat and race voting in Guyana. Since 2011 the PPP has been the undisputed public race baiting party, but it started neither with Forbes nor the PPP. My thesis is the ethnic insecurity is rooted in economics and adverse geography. 

As Karl Marx affirmed, economics determines politics.

FM
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
 

Wasn't Rai the faction of the PPP that called for apna jat? .

Yes.  It is not true that the Jagans coined that phrase, but it is true that they took full advantage of those sentiments.

 

In fact when the PPP won in 1961 their mainly Indian supporters drove through black villages on ECD hurling racist abuse with threats of sending blacks back into slavery. 

 

A black woman, who loved Cheddi, came on to support that motorcade, and was met by the same racist bile which they hurled at other blacks, who they presumed to be PNC supporters.

 

These facts are considered to be racist on GNI, with the majority of the posters (BOTH PPP and AFC) do NOT want this issue discussed.  But will talk at length about the Wismar massacres and the Burnham "Indian Holocaust".

Now, this all preceded Burnham, who incidentally was also a PPP man under Jagan. So here we have Indians calling for apna jat (keep it in the family). I do not in any way excuse Burnham's racism, but does it not give one reason to ponder why the PNC was racist toward Indians? Afro Guyanese were the minority and here the other side is telling them that they intend to "keep it in the family" (Indians). There is fear on both sides, much of it justified.

 

Again, the narrative being peddled that racism started with Burnham is pure hogwash. We and our young ones need to understand the history of our country and the insecurities that lie on both sides if we are to move forward.

I am not aware anyone on GNI is claiming Burnham invented apan jaat and race voting in Guyana. Since 2011 the PPP has been the undisputed public race baiting party, but it started neither with Forbes nor the PPP. My thesis is the ethnic insecurity is rooted in economics and adverse geography. 

As Karl Marx affirmed, economics determines politics.

And he is right on that count. I would add geography.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
With a combined hundreds of years of guyana history on this board, no one care to share on the roots of apna jat? No one willing to share more on Mr. Rai and his role? The silence is deafening. I reference my earlier post above.

I have provided information on this item a few times.

 

Succinctly ...

 

APAN Jat or apna jat ... was indeed used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's.

 

Note however ...

 

In those days there was the PPP-Jaganite and the PPP-Burnhamite.

 

It was known quite clearly that ...

 

It was NOT - repeat - NOT - started by the PPP-Jaganite.

 

Note also ...

 

It was after the 1957 elections that the PPP-Burnhamite was changed to the PNC.

TK, Re your post above.  What is DG man sehing here?  Me na da brite fuh deciper

FM
Originally Posted by VVP:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
With a combined hundreds of years of guyana history on this board, no one care to share on the roots of apna jat? No one willing to share more on Mr. Rai and his role? The silence is deafening. I reference my earlier post above.

I have provided information on this item a few times.

 

Succinctly ...

 

APAN Jat or apna jat ... was indeed used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's.

 

Note however ...

 

In those days there was the PPP-Jaganite and the PPP-Burnhamite.

 

It was known quite clearly that ...

 

It was NOT - repeat - NOT - started by the PPP-Jaganite.

 

Note also ...

 

It was after the 1957 elections that the PPP-Burnhamite was changed to the PNC.

TK, Re your post above.  What is DG man sehing here?  Me na da brite fuh deciper

Is now I am seeing DG. The conflict did not start in 1957.

FM
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by VVP:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
With a combined hundreds of years of guyana history on this board, no one care to share on the roots of apna jat? No one willing to share more on Mr. Rai and his role? The silence is deafening. I reference my earlier post above.

I have provided information on this item a few times.

 

Succinctly ...

 

APAN Jat or apna jat ... was indeed used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's.

 

Note however ...

 

In those days there was the PPP-Jaganite and the PPP-Burnhamite.

 

It was known quite clearly that ...

 

It was NOT - repeat - NOT - started by the PPP-Jaganite.

 

Note also ...

 

It was after the 1957 elections that the PPP-Burnhamite was changed to the PNC.

TK, Re your post above.  What is DG man sehing here?  Me na da brite fuh deciper

Is now I am seeing DG. The conflict did not start in 1957.

I think he is insinuating that it was Burnham under the PPP-Burnham faction that started it.  Like everything else the prick would not answer my direct question above. 

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:

Individuals can indeed do their research to verify information.


You guh larn me how to research?  Me nah want to larn about researching PPP in Pakistan though.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Here is the gist of apan jhaat as practiced in Guyana in the 50's way before Burnham, as DG confirmed above and pointed out some of the personalities involved.

 

1. Apan jhaat means to vote for your own or keep it in the family. In a political sense - Indians only.

 

2. In the 50's before independence and the PNC, the PPP consisted of both Burnham and Jagan and also Mr. Rai.

 

3. There was a faction of PPP Indians who advocated apan jhaat and did not see black folks having any place in government or even in Guyana. Personally, I do not believe Dr. Jagan was one of those but he had to deal with elements in his party who advocated apan jhaat. Was Mr. Rai one of them? I don't know. Furthermore, remember that his wife Janet came from the US where segregation against black folks was common place. What was her feeling about blacks?

 

4. Forbes got wind of this apan jhaat talk. It was going on at bottom house meetings, screamed loudly that Indians were to vote for Indians only. DG listed some of the names in his earlier post. What effect did calls for apan jhaat  have on black people and Forbes?

 

5. But why Apan Jhaat? Why Indians only when BOTH races struggled against colonialism and massa's whip? It is my opinion that Indian castism brought from India was at the root of it, where the dark skinned (dalits) were considered sub human. The black man, because of his complexion fell into this category. In the view of those who practiced castism, he was a subhuman not worthy to have any role in government or in the country and certainly inferior to the light skinned chatree / rajput Indians who were peddling apan jhaat and wanted to subjugate the black man.

 

6. The average Indian followed along. In that era many people (blacks and Indians) were uneducated and did as they were told. The Indian laborer class followed their light skinned chatree/rajput leaders.

 

7. This Indian only, apan jhaat mentality is what gave rise to the PNC. Burnham, realizing that blacks were outnumbered and would become an underclass in Indian rule, formed coalitions with the UF to gain power. I believe the apan jhaat of the Indians never left his psyche. No excuse for the racism Burnham practiced against Indians, but he experienced their racism first hand.

 

8. The PNC ruled for 28 years. You know the history.

 

So pre dating Burnham was this mindset among the chatree / rajput Indians that they were superior to black people. They and only they deserved to rule and black folks were to survive at their mercy. I concur with Redux when he says this racism among some of these Indians runs deep and has NOTHING to do with Burnham. It all pre dated Burnham!!!!

 

This mindset is still with us today and the reason for this post. As long as we have the basemans, shaitaans, cobras, ramas, skeldon man, sachins, prashads, yugis, revs and sadly now Seignet who feel that black people are an inferior class to them then there will always be another Burnham.

 

The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

Itaname, I have highlighted the relevant parts for my comments.

 

1. In 1953, both Cheddi Jagan and Forbes Burnham were together in the PPP as Leader and Chairman respectively.

 

2. After the constitution was suspended in 1953, the PPP was divided in to two separate political organisations --

   a. PPP-Jaganite, and

   b. PPP-Burnhamite.

 

3. Both political parties contested the 1957 elections under the respective names; PPP-Jaganite and PPP-Burnhamite.

 

4. After the 1957 elections the PPP-Burnhamite change its name to the PNC.

 

5. Cheddi Jagan never got involved with nor promoted the term Apan Jhaat.

 

6. In the early 1950's Balram Singh Rai was never with the PPP, and he not only lost the seat he contested but also lost his deposit. It was only when Balram Singh Rai joined the PPP in the latter part of the 1950's that he won a seat in parliament.


Just some responses to you.

 

1.  The PPP split in 1955, not in 1953.

 

2.  Chedii didnt coin the phrase apan jhat, but he didnt condemn it, and was complicit in the fact that such votingt behavior benefitted him, given that the Indian vote was larger than the African vote, and the orher groups, included mixed people, supported the UF.

 

Why do you think that Cheddi and Janet always insisted that they were trhe rightful rulers at a time when Burnham was rigging the elections.  The elections were moot as actual ballots cast were not counted.  So no one can know for a fact who the winner was. 

 

The Jagans operated with the assumption that a RACE vote is what assured their victory.  Hence Janet's frequent appeals not to split the vote.  What was she talking about?  Obviously a RACE vote.

FM
Originally Posted by TK:
 

I am not aware anyone on GNI is claiming Burnham invented apan jaat and race voting in Guyana. .


Obviously you do not read the majority of the posts on this topic on GNI.

 

To summarize.  All racism in Guyana is because of Afro Guyanese.  Burnham started race voting (a few even claim that he actually used the term apan jhat).  And all the violence in the 60s was Africans on Indians.  There was never Indo on Afro violence.  Sun Chapman wasnt blown up.

 

Any one who disputes this is branded, racist and anti Indian, because it defies the narrative of "baad black man, saintly Indo".

FM
Originally Posted by Jay Bharrat:

Why are we discussing dinosaurs?

 

This man is a blip in history and has nothing for the past 50 years.  Why is he relevant?

 

Leave the man alone.


Oh so Cheddi is a dinosaur now?  So why every word out of you PPP refugees is "Cheddi, Cheddi, Cheddi".

FM
Originally Posted by VVP:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by VVP:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
With a combined hundreds of years of guyana history on this board, no one care to share on the roots of apna jat? No one willing to share more on Mr. Rai and his role? The silence is deafening. I reference my earlier post above.

I have provided information on this item a few times.

 

Succinctly ...

 

APAN Jat or apna jat ... was indeed used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's.

 

Note however ...

 

In those days there was the PPP-Jaganite and the PPP-Burnhamite.

 

It was known quite clearly that ...

 

It was NOT - repeat - NOT - started by the PPP-Jaganite.

 

Note also ...

 

It was after the 1957 elections that the PPP-Burnhamite was changed to the PNC.

TK, Re your post above.  What is DG man sehing here?  Me na da brite fuh deciper

Is now I am seeing DG. The conflict did not start in 1957.

I think he is insinuating that it was Burnham under the PPP-Burnham faction that started it.  Like everything else the prick would not answer my direct question above. 

Burnham did not start the ethnic insecurity problems in Guyana.

FM

This is what my father told me and it might be hearsay because he was not well connected in the PPP.

 

Jagan and Burnham went to meet Nehru (PM of India).  Burnham later CLAIMED that he heard Nehru mentioned the word Apan Jhaat.  Burnham came back to Guyana and asked an Indian what the word meant.  The Indian  told him that that it meant "Vote for your race." Burnham then started to spread the word that Jagan was preaching Apan Jhaat.  By doing this he was able to siphon some of the Indian vote to D'Aguair who also use to get the Amerindians and Portuguese.  Hence they were able to combine and  get more votes than Jagan.

FM
Originally Posted by VVP:

This is what my father told me and it might be hearsay because he was not well connected in the PPP.

 

Jagan and Burnham went to meet Nehru (PM of India).  Burnham later CLAIMED that he heard Nehru mentioned the word Apan Jhaat.  Burnham came back to Guyana and asked an Indian what the word meant.  The Indian  told him that that it meant "Vote for your race." Burnham then started to spread the word that Jagan was preaching Apan Jhaat.  By doing this he was able to siphon some of the Indian vote to D'Aguair who also use to get the Amerindians and Portuguese.  Hence they were able to combine and  get more votes than Jagan.

This was an era when the govt of India was telling people of Indian descent to integrate into their societies and not expect India to be involved.

 

Why would he instigate race based voting in Guyana?

 

FACT.  Ethnocentric Indians, who joined the PPP after Burnham left, concocted that phrase as they sought Indian DOMINATION of Guyana using their larger voting numbers. 

 

Cheddi did NOT start the phrase, but he DID NOT condemn it either.  This is why it is linked to him.  He knew full well that the easiest way to win was to rely on an Indo race vote, and he continued with this belief until his death.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by VVP:

This is what my father told me and it might be hearsay because he was not well connected in the PPP.

 

Jagan and Burnham went to meet Nehru (PM of India).  Burnham later CLAIMED that he heard Nehru mentioned the word Apan Jhaat.  Burnham came back to Guyana and asked an Indian what the word meant.  The Indian  told him that that it meant "Vote for your race." Burnham then started to spread the word that Jagan was preaching Apan Jhaat.  By doing this he was able to siphon some of the Indian vote to D'Aguair who also use to get the Amerindians and Portuguese.  Hence they were able to combine and  get more votes than Jagan.

The story of the trip to India and the use of "apan jhaat" in Burnham's presence by the PM of Inida was common in the 50's. Racism on both sides intensified after that trip leading to the eventual Jagan / Burnham split. I spoke to my uncle who is now in his 90's and recalls these events.

 

The "elite" Indo Guyanese did not like Jagan because of his Communism (they were business owners and more educated so understood the impact of communism on them). I think these are the folks who DG refers to as the PPP Burnhamites because they viewed LFS as a more moderate leader for the PPP.

 

Nevertheless apan Jhaat came from India to our shores. An Indian man named Debidin (see DG's earlier post) openly called for apan jhaat at bottom house meetings. Burnham's eyes were opened to the racism of a segment of Indians and realized that apan jhaat as practiced by indo Guyanese spelled doom for the African population. And yes, though Jagan never advocated apan jhaat he certainly did not discourage it.

 

Indo Guyanese are equally culpable in our history of racism. Everyday I read these tall tales peddled by racist indians on this site that afro guyanese were racist savages who perpetuated "holocaust" on them. Some even had the nerve to demand an "apology" from the PNC. Why not apologize for "apan jhaat" that indo guyanese started?

 

DG - not sure if I got the names above correct. Was JB Singh not a Burnham supporter and in the early PNC?

 

 

FM
Last edited by Former Member

History of Guyana

PREINDEPENDENCE GOVERNMENT, 1953-66

The PPP'S First Government, 1953

Once the new constitution was adopted, elections were set for 1953. The PPP's coalition of lower-class Afro-Guyanese and rural Indo-Guyanese workers, together with elements of both ethnic groups' middle sectors, made for a formidable constituency. Conservatives branded the PPP as communist, but the party campaigned on a center-left platform and appealed to a growing nationalism. The other major party participating in the election, the National Democratic Party (NDP), was a spin-off of the League of Coloured People and was largely an Afro-Guyanese middle-class organization, sprinkled with middle-class Portuguese and IndoGuyanese . The NDP, together with the poorly organized United Farmers and Workers Party and the United National Party, was soundly defeated by the PPP. Final results gave the PPP eighteen of twenty-four seats compared with the NDP's two seats and four seats for independents.

The PPP's first administration was brief. The legislature opened on May 30, 1953. Already suspicious of Jagan and the PPP's radicalism, conservative forces in the business community were further distressed by the new administration's program of expanding the role of the state in the economy and society. The PPP also sought to implement its reform program at a rapid pace, which brought the party into confrontation with the governor and with high-ranking civil servants who preferred more gradual change. The issue of civil service appointments also threatened the PPP, in this case from within. Following the 1953 victory, these appointments became an issue between the predominantly Indo-Guyanese supporters of Jagan and the largely Afro-Guyanese backers of Burnham. Burnham threatened to split the party if he were not made sole leader of the PPP. A compromise was reached by which members of what had become Burnham's faction received ministerial appointments.

The PPP's introduction of the Labour Relations Act provoked a confrontation with the British. This law ostensibly was aimed at reducing intraunion rivalries, but would have favored the GIWU, which was closely aligned with the ruling party. The opposition charged that the PPP was seeking to gain control over the colony's economic and social life and was moving to stifle the opposition. The day the act was introduced to the legislature, the GIWU went on strike in support of the proposed law. The British government interpreted this intermingling of party politics and labor unionism as a direct challenge to the constitution and the authority of the governor. The day after the act was passed, on October 9, 1953, London suspended the colony's constitution and, under pretext of quelling disturbances, sent in troops.

The Interim Government, 1953-57

Following the suspension of the constitution, British Guiana was governed by an interim administration consisting of small group of conservative politicians, businessmen, and civil servants that lasted until 1957. Order in the colonial government masked a growing rift in the country's main political party as the personal conflict between the PPP's Jagan and Burnham widened into a bitter dispute. In 1955 Jagan and Burnham formed rival wings of the PPP. Support for each leader was largely, but not totally, along ethnic lines. J.B. Lachmansingh, a leading Indo- Guyanese and head of the GIWU, supported Burnham, whereas Jagan retained the loyalty of a number of leading Afro-African radicals, such as Sydney King. Burnham's wing of the PPP moved to the right, leaving Jagan's wing on the left, where he was regarded with considerable apprehension by Western governments and the colony's conservative business groups.

The Second PPP Government, 1957-61, and Racial Politics

The 1957 elections held under a new constitution demonstrated the extent of the growing ethnic division within the Guianese electorate. The revised constitution provided limited selfgovernment , primarily through the Legislative Council. Of the council's twenty-four delegates, fifteen were elected, six were nominated, and the remaining three were to be ex officio members from the interim administration. The two wings of the PPP launched vigorous campaigns, each attempting to prove that it was the legitimate heir to the original party. Despite denials of such motivation, both factions made a strong appeal to their respective ethnic constituencies.

The 1957 elections were convincingly won by Jagan's PPP faction. Although his group had a secure parliamentary majority, its support was drawn more and more from the Indo-Guyanese community. The faction's main planks were increasingly identified as Indo- Guyanese: more rice land, improved union representation in the sugar industry, and improved business opportunities and more government posts for Indo-Guyanese. The PPP had abrogated its claim to being a multiracial party.

Jagan's veto of British Guiana's participation in the West Indies Federation resulted in the complete loss of Afro-Guyanese support. In the late 1950s, the British Caribbean colonies had been actively negotiating establishment of a West Indies Federation. The PPP had pledged to work for the eventual political union of British Guiana with the Caribbean territories. The Indo-Guyanese, who constituted a majority in Guyana, were apprehensive of becoming part of a federation in which they would be outnumbered by people of African descent. Jagan's veto of the federation caused his party to lose all significant Afro-Guyanese support.

Burnham learned an important lesson from the 1957 elections. He could not win if supported only by the lower-class, urban AfroGuyanese . He needed middle-class allies, especially those AfroGuyanese who backed the moderate United Democratic Party. From 1957 onward, Burnham worked to create a balance between maintaining the backing of the more radical Afro-Guyanese lower classes and gaining the support of the more capitalist middle class. Clearly, Burnham's stated preference for socialism would not bind those two groups together against Jagan, an avowed Marxist. The answer was something more basic--race. Burnham's appeals to race proved highly successful in bridging the schism that divided the Afro-Guyanese along class lines. This strategy convinced the powerful Afro-Guyanese middle class to accept a leader who was more of a radical than they would have preferred to support. At the same time, it neutralized the objections of the black working class to entering an alliance with those representing the more moderate interests of the middle classes. Burnham's move toward the right was accomplished with the merger of his PPP faction and the United Democratic Party into a new organization, the People's National Congress (PNC).

Following the 1957 elections, Jagan rapidly consolidated his hold on the Indo-Guyanese community. Though candid in expressing his admiration for Josef Stalin, Mao Zedong, and, later, Fidel Castro Ruz, Jagan in power asserted that the PPP's MarxistLeninist principles must be adapted to Guyana's own particular circumstances. Jagan advocated nationalization of foreign holdings, especially in the sugar industry. British fears of a communist takeover, however, caused the British governor to hold Jagan's more radical policy initiatives in check.

PPP Reelection and Debacle

The 1961 elections were a bitter contest between the PPP, the PNC, and the United Force (UF), a conservative party representing big business, the Roman Catholic Church, and Amerindian, Chinese, and Portuguese voters. These elections were held under yet another new constitution that marked a return to the degree of self-government that existed briefly in 1953. It introduced a bicameral system boasting a wholly elected thirty-five-member Legislative Assembly and a thirteen-member Senate to be appointed by the governor. The post of prime minister was created and was to be filled by the majority party in the Legislative Assembly. With the strong support of the Indo-Guyanese population, the PPP again won by a substantial margin, gaining twenty seats in the Legislative Assembly, compared to eleven seats for the PNC and four for the UF. Jagan was named prime minister.

Jagan's administration became increasingly friendly with communist and leftist regimes; for instance, Jagan refused to observe the United States embargo on communist Cuba. After discussions between Jagan and Cuban revolutionary Ernesto ""Che"" Guevara in 1960 and 1961, Cuba offered British Guiana loans and equipment. In addition, the Jagan administration signed trade agreements with Hungary and the German Democratic Republic (East Germany).

From 1961 to 1964, Jagan was confronted with a destabilization campaign conducted by the PNC and UF. Riots and demonstrations against the PPP administration were frequent, and during disturbances in 1962 and 1963 mobs destroyed part of Georgetown.

Labor violence also increased during the early 1960s. To counter the MPCA with its link to Burnham, the PPP formed the Guianese Agricultural Workers Union. This new union's political mandate was to organize the Indo-Guyanese sugarcane field-workers. The MPCA immediately responded with a one-day strike to emphasize its continued control over the sugar workers.

The PPP government responded to the strike in March 1964 by publishing a new Labour Relations Bill almost identical to the 1953 legislation that had resulted in British intervention. Regarded as a power play for control over a key labor sector, introduction of the proposed law prompted protests and rallies throughout the capital. Riots broke out on April 5; they were followed on April 18 by a general strike. By May 9, the governor was compelled to declare a state of emergency. Nevertheless, the strike and violence continued until July 7, when the Labour Relations Bill was allowed to lapse without being enacted. To bring an end to the disorder, the government agreed to consult with union representatives before introducing similar bills. These disturbances exacerbated tension and animosity between the two major ethnic communities and made a reconciliation between Jagan and Burnham an impossibility.

Jagan's term had not yet ended when another round of labor unrest rocked the colony. The pro-PPP GIWU, which had become an umbrella group of all labor organizations, called on sugar workers to strike in January 1964. To dramatize their case, Jagan led a march by sugar workers from the interior to Georgetown. This demonstration ignited outbursts of violence that soon escalated beyond the control of the authorities. On May 22, the governor finally declared another state of emergency. The situation continued to worsen, and in June the governor assumed full powers, rushed in British troops to restore order, and proclaimed a moratorium on all political activity. By the end of the turmoil, 160 people were dead and more than 1,000 homes had been destroyed.

In an effort to quell the turmoil, the country's political parties asked the British goverment to modify the constitution to provide for more proportional representation. The colonial secretary proposed a fifty-three member unicameral legislature. Despite opposition from the ruling PPP, all reforms were implemented and new elections set for October 1964.

As Jagan feared, the PPP lost the general elections of 1964. The politics of apan jhaat, Hindi for ""vote for your own kind,"" were becoming entrenched in Guyana. The PPP won 46 percent of the vote and twenty-four seats, which made it the majority party. However, the PNC, which won 40 percent of the vote and twenty-two seats, and the UF, which won 11 percent of the vote and seven seats, formed a coalition. The socialist PNC and unabashedly capitalist UF had joined forces to keep the PPP out of office for another term. Jagan called the election fraudulent and refused to resign as prime minister. The constitution was amended to allow the governor to remove Jagan from office. Burnham became prime minister on December 14, 1964.

Guyana History Contents

SOURCE: Area Handbook of the US Library of Congress

FM

As Jagan feared, the PPP lost the general elections of 1964. The politics of apan jhaat, Hindi for ""vote for your own kind,"" were becoming entrenched in Guyana.

 

So Apan Jhaat started in the early 60s?

FM
Originally Posted by VVP:

As Jagan feared, the PPP lost the general elections of 1964. The politics of apan jhaat, Hindi for ""vote for your own kind,"" were becoming entrenched in Guyana.

 

So Apan Jhaat started in the early 60s?

Apan jhaat came to Guyana after the meeting with Nehru in the 50's. Working class Indians (the majority) were whipped into a frenzy to vote race by men like Debidin at bottom house meetings. Race voting among Indians became entrenched by the 60's.

 

See my post earlier today. The "elite" indo guyanese like JB Singh etc. did not like Jagan because of his communism, so the tended towards Burnham for leader of the PPP. However, the working class Indians supported Jagan heavily and subscribed to Debidin's apan jhaat.

 

Burnham, now conscious of apan jhaat and its implications for afro guyanese countered by forming various coalitions which included the business class Indians like JB Singh. Note the Luckhoos, the Ramphals, Shahabudeen's etc (educated, well off Indians) over time never supported Jagan and were welcomed by Forbes!!!!

 

So it began in the 50's after the India trip and is with us until today. I posit that Burnham's succeeding anti indo racism, while inexcusable, was at least in part shaped by apan jhaat practiced by Indians first.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
DG - not sure if I got the names above correct. Was JB Singh not a Burnham supporter and in the early PNC?

Correct Itaname.

DG, I understand JB Singh even bought Forbes his first car. And something about them singing "I am Jai and Jai is me".

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
DG - not sure if I got the names above correct. Was JB Singh not a Burnham supporter and in the early PNC?

Correct Itaname.

DG, I understand JB Singh even bought Forbes his first car. And something about them singing "I am Jai and Jai is me".

Correct observation, Itaname.

 

It should be noted that the individual is known as J.B. Singh and also J.B. Latchmansingh

FM
Originally Posted by VVP:

As Jagan feared, the PPP lost the general elections of 1964. The politics of apan jhaat, Hindi for ""vote for your own kind,"" were becoming entrenched in Guyana.

 

So Apan Jhaat started in the early 60s?

It started in the 1957 election.  It became entrenched in the 1961 when racial violence began.

 

It has remained ever since, despite the pretense of some that the coalition won a large swing Indo vote.

 

If Amna Ally is supposed to lead the discussion on how to reduce ethnic insecurity, she has a lot of work to do.  Hope she is up to the task.

 

BTW Region 10 has fired its first salvo, reminding Granger that it delivered a recorde vote and almost 17k votes for the coalition, with a winning margin of 14k.  If Granger alienates Linden, as Corbin did, the PPP comes roaring back. 

 

In 2006 the combined APNU AFC vote was uinder 11k.  Had this happened this year, the PPP would have won by a margin of almost 2,000.

 

Granger has to pay close attention to Linden.  His start is quite ominous as he seeks revenge against its PNC leaders.  Does he have others in Linden witrh the credibility.  Or is he risking a protest vote for the PPP in the LGE in Linden.

 

I hope that Jay, Kari and others are watching this.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
 

So it began in the 50's after the India trip and is with us until today. I posit that Burnham's succeeding anti indo racism, while inexcusable, was at least in part shaped by apan jhaat practiced by Indians first.


I think there was also a cultural divide.  Many of the Indians who left with Burnham were more "westernized", and quite likely Christians.  They probably despised this rural, heavily Hindu group who followed Jagan, and might have felt more cultural affinity with Burnham.

 

We can even see this today with the first wave of Indians who joined the AFC in 2006.  A more urban and educated crowd.

 

It is noteworthy in both Trinidad and Guyana that a disproportionate % of Indians embedded within the PNM and the PNC tend to be Muslims or Christians.  Given common Judeo origins I think that Christians understand Muslims more than they do Hindus.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by caribny:
I think there was also a cultural divide.  Many of the Indians who left with Burnham were more "westernized", and quite likely Christians.  They probably despised this rural, heavily Hindu group who followed Jagan, and might have felt more cultural affinity with Burnham.

 

We can even see this today with the first wave of Indians who joined the AFC in 2006.  A more urban and educated crowd.

 

It is noteworthy in both Trinidad and Guyana that a disproportionate % of Indians embedded within the PNM and the PNC tend to be Muslims or Christians.  Given common Judeo origins I think that Christians understand Muslims more than they do Hindus.

Yes. The educated Indians, fearing Jagan's communism, migrated early and yes, many of them preferred Forbes over Jagan. Guyana's most famous family, the Luckhoos (indians), never backed Jagan. The sheer numbers of working class Indians and their apan jhaat politics did not bode well for afro guyanese and LFS knew it.

 

Witness the low class behavior, pedestrian performance, outright teefing,  sheer boorishness and lack of any sophistication in the current PPP and you see the apan jhaat indian.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
DG - not sure if I got the names above correct. Was JB Singh not a Burnham supporter and in the early PNC?

Correct Itaname.

DG, I understand JB Singh even bought Forbes his first car. And something about them singing "I am Jai and Jai is me".

Correct observation, Itaname.

 

It should be noted that the individual is known as J.B. Singh and also J.B. Latchmansingh

J. B. Singh was Dr Jung Bahadur Singh, Rajkumari's father.

J. P. Latchmansingh was another person, notably the President of GIWU, forerunner of GAWU. There was no J. B. Latchmansingh.

FM
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
DG - not sure if I got the names above correct. Was JB Singh not a Burnham supporter and in the early PNC?

Correct Itaname.

DG, I understand JB Singh even bought Forbes his first car. And something about them singing "I am Jai and Jai is me".

Correct observation, Itaname.

 

It should be noted that the individual is known as J.B. Singh and also J.B. Latchmansingh

J. B. Singh was Dr Jung Bahadur Singh, Rajkumari's father.

J. P. Latchmansingh was another person, notably the President of GIWU, forerunner of GAWU. There was no J. B. Latchmansingh.

 

He was lecturing me on U.S. nationality law and dual citizenship policy yesterday

 

I don't know why people don't just shut up or say "I don't know" if they really don't know instead of make shyte up.

FM
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
DG - not sure if I got the names above correct. Was JB Singh not a Burnham supporter and in the early PNC?

Correct Itaname.

DG, I understand JB Singh even bought Forbes his first car. And something about them singing "I am Jai and Jai is me".

Correct observation, Itaname.

 

It should be noted that the individual is known as J.B. Singh and also J.B. Latchmansingh

J. B. Singh was Dr Jung Bahadur Singh, Rajkumari's father.

J. P. Latchmansingh was another person, notably the President of GIWU, forerunner of GAWU. There was no J. B. Latchmansingh.

Check carefully and you will indeed find J. B Latchmansingh's name.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:

Check carefully and you will indeed find J. B Latchmansingh's name.

I think DG is right. There was a JB Latchmansingh who was a member of the early party. And yes, Jung Bahdur (JB) Singh was a separate individual.

FM
Originally Posted by Wally:

Dr Latchmansingh and Mr.Burnham were very close friends.

It was JB singh and Forbes who were close, no? Forbes lust for power (even noted by his sister) and his anti indian sentiments in the 60's did that friendship in. My recollection as a young one.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Check carefully and you will indeed find J. B Latchmansingh's name.

I think DG is right. There was a JB Latchmansingh who was a member of the early party. And yes, Jung Bahdur (JB) Singh was a separate individual.

Correct Itaname.

 

On a personal note ...

 

We both have Guyanese folklore usernames.

 

Mine is from the folksong by Ramjohn Holder in the 1950's named Demerara Boy.

 

I changed Boy to Guy ... hence Demerara_Guy.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Wally:

Dr Latchmansingh and Mr.Burnham were very close friends.

It was JB singh and Forbes who were close, no? Forbes lust for power (even noted by his sister) and his anti indian sentiments in the 60's did that friendship in. My recollection as a young one.


Burnham loved the Madras culture and people.  Even though the Madras component of the PPP party comprising Comrade Moses, Boysie Ramkaran and Mel Carpin were opposed to him and his government.  He always ensured that the Madras culture was included in cultural events at the Cultural Centre when he was Prime Minister.  So to say that the man despised all East Indians is not true

Wally
Originally Posted by Wally:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Wally:

Dr Latchmansingh and Mr.Burnham were very close friends.

It was JB singh and Forbes who were close, no? Forbes lust for power (even noted by his sister) and his anti indian sentiments in the 60's did that friendship in. My recollection as a young one.


Burnham loved the Madras culture and people.  Even though the Madras component of the PPP party comprising Comrade Moses, Boysie Ramkaran and Mel Carpin were opposed to him and his government.  He always ensured that the Madras culture was included in cultural events at the Cultural Centre when he was Prime Minister.  So to say that the man despised all East Indians is not true


Dr Latchmansingh was a close friend of Burnham under Latchmansingh died.

Wally

That's the name of the drugstore I was trying to remember Latchman Singh, one is/was on Regent St not far from Bourda market, my relatives had a store next door. The other is/was on Camp St by the jail.

cain
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:

Check carefully and you will indeed find J. B Latchmansingh's name.

I think DG is right. There was a JB Latchmansingh who was a member of the early party. And yes, Jung Bahdur (JB) Singh was a separate individual.

Guys, I checked again thru Google. Indeed, there are entries for both JB and JP Latchmansingh but the descriptions fit one and the same person who was a founding member of the PPP as well as the PNC. Until today, I've known the gentleman as Joseph Pariag Latchmansingh but it seems he had a B initial too. I ran an image check too and found a pic for JP but not for JB:

http://s1.stabroeknews.com/images/2010/04/20100411lachmansingh-208x280.jpg

FM
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:

Check carefully and you will indeed find J. B Latchmansingh's name.

I think DG is right. There was a JB Latchmansingh who was a member of the early party. And yes, Jung Bahdur (JB) Singh was a separate individual.

Guys, I checked again thru Google. Indeed, there are entries for both JB and JP Latchmansingh but the descriptions fit one and the same person who was a founding member of the PPP as well as the PNC. Until today, I've known the gentleman as Joseph Pariag Latchmansingh but it seems he had a B initial too. I ran an image check too and found a pic for JP but not for JB:

http://s1.stabroeknews.com/images/2010/04/20100411lachmansingh-208x280.jpg

http://www.genealogy.com/ftm/s...E-0001/UHP-0663.html

 

This link may relate to J.B.Latchmansingh

Django
Originally Posted by Django:
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:

Check carefully and you will indeed find J. B Latchmansingh's name.

I think DG is right. There was a JB Latchmansingh who was a member of the early party. And yes, Jung Bahdur (JB) Singh was a separate individual.

Guys, I checked again thru Google. Indeed, there are entries for both JB and JP Latchmansingh but the descriptions fit one and the same person who was a founding member of the PPP as well as the PNC. Until today, I've known the gentleman as Joseph Pariag Latchmansingh but it seems he had a B initial too. I ran an image check too and found a pic for JP but not for JB:

http://s1.stabroeknews.com/images/2010/04/20100411lachmansingh-208x280.jpg

http://www.genealogy.com/ftm/s...E-0001/UHP-0663.html

 

This link may relate to J.B.Latchmansingh

According to this link, John Babu Latchmansingh is Joseph Pariag's father.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:

Correct Itaname.

 

On a personal note ...

 

We both have Guyanese folklore usernames.

 

Mine is from the folksong by Ramjohn Holder in the 1950's named Demerara Boy.

 

I changed Boy to Guy ... hence Demerara_Guy.

Hi DG, well someone has to keep the Guyanese folklore and folk songs alive. Yes, Ramjohn Holder went on to play Porkpie in the sitcom "Desmond".

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:

Correct Itaname.

 

On a personal note ...

 

We both have Guyanese folklore usernames.

 

Mine is from the folksong by Ramjohn Holder in the 1950's named Demerara Boy.

 

I changed Boy to Guy ... hence Demerara_Guy.

Hi DG, well someone has to keep the Guyanese folklore and folk songs alive. Yes, Ramjohn Holder went on to play Porkpie in the sitcom "Desmond".

There's one Ramjohn Holder song I enjoy, titled Guiana.

Someone told me Ramjohn Holder was a member of the PPP youth arm in the late 1950s or early '60s.

FM
Originally Posted by Wally:

Burnham loved the Madras culture and people.  Even though the Madras component of the PPP party comprising Comrade Moses, Boysie Ramkaran and Mel Carpin were opposed to him and his government.  He always ensured that the Madras culture was included in cultural events at the Cultural Centre when he was Prime Minister.  So to say that the man despised all East Indians is not true

It was clear in my earlier posts on this matter that Forbes had a lot of Indian friends, notably the indo guyanese elite. So not suggesting he hated all Indians.

 

You, DG and others have helped affirm that our history of racism pre dates Forbes. It is time the vicious, nasty lives  perpetuated by today's racist indians about genocidal africans raping and starving poor helpless indians cease! Indians and their apan jhaat racism are equally culpable for our divided nation. In fact, they may have precipitated it.

 

Let baseman and kindred folks take note. Stop vilifying Afro Guyanese as though we are animals. To me, your indo nationalist racism is far more toxic. Educated Indians did not share your views on afro guyanese.

 

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:

Correct Itaname.

 

On a personal note ...

 

We both have Guyanese folklore usernames.

 

Mine is from the folksong by Ramjohn Holder in the 1950's named Demerara Boy.

 

I changed Boy to Guy ... hence Demerara_Guy.

Hi DG, well someone has to keep the Guyanese folklore and folk songs alive. Yes, Ramjohn Holder went on to play Porkpie in the sitcom "Desmond".

Indeed about Ramjohn Holder and his other song/acting career.

 

I have "tons" of folk songs; sharing one ...

 

 

SMALL DAYS

FM

Thanks for the memories DG! I will look at more of the videos later on. I think my daughter is purchasing the Desmond series on DVD for me. I told her about Desmond after our chat here. It's supposed to be a surprise but grandchildren have a way of talking

 

The place is dead. Where has everyone gone?

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:

Thanks for the memories DG! I will look at more of the videos later on. I think my daughter is purchasing the Desmond series on DVD for me. I told her about Desmond after our chat here. It's supposed to be a surprise but grandchildren have a way of talking

 

The place is dead. Where has everyone gone?

You will indeed enjoy the music plus the memories behind each song.

 

I have two daughters; spouse transitioned in life; who were born in Canada and they are always interested in learning about Guyana.

 

While I was in the US_of_A on an official visit; with my family; at various hydroelectric power projects, I explained to them that I was the Executive Coordinator responsible for the development and construction of hydroelectric facilities in Canada, Europe, Africa, etc., including works for the Guyana government. At one of the facilities, they were engrossed with the dam, structures and other facilities that when we were in the theater of the facility where the works are simulated, surprisingly, my daughters began to operate the facilities and were enjoying the various scenes on the simulated model.

 

When we returned home, they began to review the various technical publications I have on hydroelectric projects and developments.

FM

DG, listening to some of those songs, we are really a wutliss people. Anyway I spoke to 2 of my older relatives, one of whom was a police sergeant in the 50's and 60's (he's now in his 90's) and clarified some of the names

 

Jung Bahadur Singh - doctor in Lamaha street

Jainarine Singh - PPP member, LFS best friend as I pointed out earlier

JP Latchmansingh - a doctor in La Penitence opposite the market. PPP member. His brother owned a drug store in Bourda by Orange Walk and lived upstairs.

 

Apan Jhaat first reared its ugly head in Guyana in the Balram Singh Rai versus Sydney King (Eusi Kwayana) elections where Rai appealed to apan jhaat and won by a thousand votes or less. King (Kwayana) was devastated at the betrayal of the Jagans and left the PPP. That evening my relative saw King being carried on the shoulders of supporters by St James school in Kitty and then home to Buxton.

 

For the Indians like Nehru who hate Buxton and everything black, know that it was BLACK MAN IN BUXTON who first voted for Jagan and gave him his first seat. There was some UNITY until indian masses saw apan jhaat as a strategy.

 

Now I understand why Rai has appeal among some Indians so many decades later. Apan Jhaat is alive and well among them, but it ain't gon wuk no mo!

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Apan Jhaat first reared its ugly head in Guyana in the Balram Singh Rai versus Sydney King (Eusi Kwayana) elections where Rai appealed to apan jhaat and won by a thousand votes or less. King (Kwayana) was devastated at the betrayal of the Jagans and left the PPP. That evening my relative saw King being carried on the shoulders of supporters by St James school in Kitty and then home to Buxton.

 

 

Now I understand why Rai has appeal among some Indians so many decades later. Apan Jhaat is alive and well among them, but it ain't gon wuk no mo!

Your elder relatives have touched on the gist of the issues.

 

As a note, it is wonderful to have much older relatives and acquaintances who can indeed assist us to understand past issues.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Apan Jhaat first reared its ugly head in Guyana in the Balram Singh Rai versus Sydney King (Eusi Kwayana) elections where Rai appealed to apan jhaat and won by a thousand votes or less. King (Kwayana) was devastated at the betrayal of the Jagans and left the PPP. That evening my relative saw King being carried on the shoulders of supporters by St James school in Kitty and then home to Buxton.

 

 

Now I understand why Rai has appeal among some Indians so many decades later. Apan Jhaat is alive and well among them, but it ain't gon wuk no mo!

Your elder relatives have touched on the gist of the issues.

 

As a note, it is wonderful to have much older relatives and acquaintances who can indeed assist us to understand past issues.

My reason for posting the facts on this thread DG. We must learn from the past. The plot to lay racism in Guyana squarely at the feet of afro Guyanese must be stopped.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Apan Jhaat first reared its ugly head in Guyana in the Balram Singh Rai versus Sydney King (Eusi Kwayana) elections where Rai appealed to apan jhaat and won by a thousand votes or less. King (Kwayana) was devastated at the betrayal of the Jagans and left the PPP. That evening my relative saw King being carried on the shoulders of supporters by St James school in Kitty and then home to Buxton.

 

 

Now I understand why Rai has appeal among some Indians so many decades later. Apan Jhaat is alive and well among them, but it ain't gon wuk no mo!

Your elder relatives have touched on the gist of the issues.

 

As a note, it is wonderful to have much older relatives and acquaintances who can indeed assist us to understand past issues.

My reason for posting the facts on this thread DG. We must learn from the past. The plot to lay racism in Guyana squarely at the feet of afro Guyanese must be stopped.

Arite go tell dem fuh stap rabbing dem coolie people and everything gun be all rite.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Apan Jhaat first reared its ugly head in Guyana in the Balram Singh Rai versus Sydney King (Eusi Kwayana) elections where Rai appealed to apan jhaat and won by a thousand votes or less. King (Kwayana) was devastated at the betrayal of the Jagans and left the PPP. That evening my relative saw King being carried on the shoulders of supporters by St James school in Kitty and then home to Buxton.

 

 

Now I understand why Rai has appeal among some Indians so many decades later. Apan Jhaat is alive and well among them, but it ain't gon wuk no mo!

Your elder relatives have touched on the gist of the issues.

 

As a note, it is wonderful to have much older relatives and acquaintances who can indeed assist us to understand past issues.

My reason for posting the facts on this thread DG. We must learn from the past. The plot to lay racism in Guyana squarely at the feet of afro Guyanese must be stopped.

 

All those racist Indians who target Blacks criminally must be stopped. All those racist Indians who commit election-related violence must be stopped. All those Indo Freedom Fighters murdering ordinary Black people must be stopped.

FM

Like we doan have Apan Jhaat in the Black community. Wah happening in Guyana right now is apan jhaat. It is an Indian word that defines those who vote for their own. And that was going on since the time when only Blacks, Putagees and Mixed People had the rights to vote.

 

We cooolie people were still at the logies when Apan Jhaat started in Guyana. Even the white planters were practicing apan jhaat. 

 

 

S
Originally Posted by seignet:

Like we doan have Apan Jhaat in the Black community. Wah happening in Guyana right now is apan jhaat. It is an Indian word that defines those who vote for their own. And that was going on since the time when only Blacks, Putagees and Mixed People had the rights to vote.

 

We cooolie people were still at the logies when Apan Jhaat started in Guyana. Even the white planters were practicing apan jhaat. 

 

 

 

Apaan jaat is practiced by every race, tribe, nation, ethnic group on earth. That is how it is and always has been. Blacks say "Black Power." British whites say "Rule Britannia" and American whites have "white privilege." All fancy words for "apaan jaat"

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
Originally Posted by seignet:

Like we doan have Apan Jhaat in the Black community. Wah happening in Guyana right now is apan jhaat. It is an Indian word that defines those who vote for their own. And that was going on since the time when only Blacks, Putagees and Mixed People had the rights to vote.

 

We cooolie people were still at the logies when Apan Jhaat started in Guyana. Even the white planters were practicing apan jhaat. 

 

 

 

Apaan jaat is practiced by every race, tribe, nation, ethnic group on earth. That is how it is and always has been. Blacks say "Black Power." British whites say "Rule Britannia" and American whites have "white privilege." All fancy words for "apaan jaat"

Yeh, I know. These racists come on here claiming the words sounds Hindi like suh it signifies some kind of kulie thing.

S
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Apan Jhaat first reared its ugly head in Guyana in the Balram Singh Rai versus Sydney King (Eusi Kwayana) elections where Rai appealed to apan jhaat and won by a thousand votes or less. King (Kwayana) was devastated at the betrayal of the Jagans and left the PPP. That evening my relative saw King being carried on the shoulders of supporters by St James school in Kitty and then home to Buxton.

 

 

Now I understand why Rai has appeal among some Indians so many decades later. Apan Jhaat is alive and well among them, but it ain't gon wuk no mo!

Your elder relatives have touched on the gist of the issues.

 

As a note, it is wonderful to have much older relatives and acquaintances who can indeed assist us to understand past issues.

My reason for posting the facts on this thread DG. We must learn from the past. The plot to lay racism in Guyana squarely at the feet of afro Guyanese must be stopped.

Indeed Itaname.

 

As we know, worldwide and indeed long before 1492, we have become aware of the indifference of the Indians in India and Africans in Africa whereby there are marked differences in how groups of people treat others.

 

In Africa, one is aware that various groups captured and assisted in the capture of other Africans to eventually have them transported to Guyana and the other Caribbean countries.

 

Similarly, in India the people there were also captured, traded, sold, etc.; to eventually be transported to Guyana and other Caribbean countries, plus also to places like Fiji, Mauritius, etc..

 

In Guyana, while racial indifference has somewhat abated, the main reason for its existence lies particularly with the politicians, dating from the days of the British rule in the early 1800"s.

FM

Old boy, iz wah razz yuh talking. Was apan jhaat at play when one african sold another african to the arabs and baccra.

 

In India, our people doan SELLLLLLLLLL ANYBODY. We have a well organized system of apan jhaat. We all know we place. And the intelligent ones, willingly leff India for the unknown places of the world. If u doan know, leh me tell u how dey recruit indentured servants. A group of men go to the remote villages, dey beat the drums, people gather, dey tell dem the lies. And those who fall for it fallow dem to Calcutta. There! It is a different story at Garden Reach-the waiting and the tiefing chokdars(Jagdeo family) robb and beat the people.

 

Do u know how nice dem black people threat indians when dem arrive in the wilderness of BG. Dem Black folks were more than happy to receive them-right up the Forbes Burnham. Then, Forbes forget about the Apostle James and he used his tongue to set strife.

 

Here we go.   

S
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Dondadda:

Balram Singh Rai has always been my hero. I admired his style of politics when I was in my teenager. He taught me the concept of "Satyamewa Jayate" meaning that the truth alone triumphs. Rai would have loved to do more for his country and his people but they derived themselves of his service. On a wall in my home is a large portriat of Balram Singh Rai.  

I know Bayto .

I know him also...growing up. We went to the same high school for a bit. He was an introverted awkward kid. He had to come to his Hinduism in the US.

 

 

Anyways, here is a bit he posted about 15 years ago on  rai.

 

BALRAM SINGH RAI OF GUYANA

By Dr. Baytoram Ramharack

It is important if only for purposes of future guidance that we should have an adequate and objective understanding of the way our people lived, thought and acted since they came or were brought to this land, for what is a people or a nation that has no history or that has lost its history? In this way we can learn of our mistakes in the past and are enabled to avoid similar pitfalls in the future. Again, the past furnishes us with an organic connection with what we are today; it can tell us how, when and why we came to be what we are. The history of our people may also serve as an inspiration to us and a spur to future conduct and activity.”

Balram Singh Rai - Radio Broadcast, History and Culture Week, October 18, 1959
INTRODUCTION

The annals of Guyanese history is a reservoir for many political leaders who have achieved prominence because of their unique leadership skills and the particular circumstances that have created opportunities for them to demonstrate the application of those skills. In the modern era, Cheddi Jagan has emerged as the main architect of Guyanese political culture, and his influence in Guyana is demonstrated by the continued support by Indians for the organization he left behind, the Peoples Progressive Party (PPP).

While the role and contributions of Cheddi Jagan is yet to be critically evaluated and scrutinized by scholars, Jagan’s image as an iconoclastic figure overshadows that of another charismatic Indian political leader, that of Balram Singh Rai. Balram Singh Rai was a PPP member of Parliament who served as the Minister of Community Development and Education (1959-61) and as Minister of Home Affairs (1961-62). His association with the PPP exposed many contradictions and inconsistencies within the PPP and the leadership of Cheddi Jagan.

 

In 1964, when he formed the Justice Party (JP), he was in fact offering his political leadership as an alternative to the PPP as the representative vehicle for the Indians in Guyana. Unfortunately, his personality and organization could not transcend the political control and hegemonic hold that Jagan and the PPP maintained over Indians. His political contributions, some of which are examined here, are directly linked to the search for solutions to some of the pressing problems faced by Guyanese society today. This article, which is part of a larger study, will briefly examine the role of Balram Singh Rai during the pre-independence period in Guyana.

INDIAN HISTORIOGRAPHY
An examination of the political contributions of Balram Singh Rai is significant and merit careful examination for various reasons. One, it represents another attempt to add to the growing historiography of Indians in the Caribbean, Guyana in particular. In general, the history of Indians in the Caribbean has been minimized because of the dominant Western or Afro-centric paradigm from which most writers have approached the Indian presence in the region. Indians have been perceived and defined, often negatively and pejoratively, as the “Hindustanis” of Surinam, as Eric Williams’ “recalcitrant minority,” and as the “interloping, unpatriotic latecomers” in Guyana by members of other communities (Ramharack, 1994). This combined image of the Indian as an alien and sojourner in an Africanized Caribbean has certainly reinforced stereotypical perception of the Caribbean Indian. Others have sought to define the Indian in their own world-view, such as the Indian as being “black” (particularly during the Black Power movement) (Rodney, 1969:28-29) or the Indian as being a “creolized” or “assimilated West Indian” (Brathwaite, 1971). In Guyana, the Indians were not seen as a distinct ethnic community who deserved to be studied and defined by their own “primordial sentiments” but they were assimilated into Walter Rodney’s and Cheddi Jagan’s concept of “working class people.” Rai rejected the “cultural balkanization” of the various communities in the Caribbean and, as indicated in the excerpt from his radio broadcast above, was conscious of the role each community could play in the development of a plural society like Guyana.

Second, with regards to Rai, existing literature has not fully examined his political activities in Guyana, except through anecdotal references. For instance, Edwin Ali’s The Rise of the Phoenix in Guyana’s Turbulent Politics (1991), which reflected the author’s journalistic training, rather than critical analytical skills, contains several scattered references to Rai, including his participation at the 1960 London Constitutional Conference and his ministerial role in the 1962 riots. (The United States government, under the Freedom of Information Act, released some interesting information about that period, but that information will not be considered here). The other source that refers to Rai’s involvement in Guyanese political affairs is Cheddi Jagan's The West on Trial (1980). However, despite Jagan's ambivalent approval and praise for Rai’s role in assisting his candidacy (and political career) in 1947 and the PPP, the leadership of the PPP has aggressively and consistently attacked Rai’s credibility. Judging by the responses to the letter debates in the Guyana Stabroek News, including one by former President Janet Jagan (April 8, 1999), the PPP seemed to have embarked on a deliberate campaign to discredit, rewrite and erase Rai’s role in that party. Any attempt to define the role of Balram Singh Rai and examine his political legacy by the PPP must therefore be viewed with suspicion.

Third, as noted earlier, Rai’s relationship with the PPP brings out some of the contradictions and missed political opportunities within the PPP. Most notably is the relationship Indians continue to share with the PPP, despite Jagan’s long established Marxist-Leninist ideology and the failure to address Indian security interests vis-à-vis Africans. Rai’s Indian consciousness and progressive ideology were crucial elements that highlighted the contradiction/distinction between the PPP as a "Marxist party" and the perception held by Indians that the PPP is a "party for Indians," a dichotomy that still plague Indians today. An investigation into the role played by Rai within the PPP, in hindsight, offers some indication into the workings of the PPP and the nature of some of the important decisions made by the party leadership at a crucial point in Guyanese history. More specifically, there were some marked personal and political differences between the leadership styles of Balram Singh Rai and Cheddi Jagan that transcended into their political ideology. It is therefore an interesting task to examine the reasons why Rai joined the PPP, a question Janet Jagan posed in her letter to Stabroek News (April 8, 1999). Such a study can help us in the search for greater understanding of a tumultuous and controversial period in Guyanese history, and, hopefully, offer some insights into our current dilemmas.

Finally, from the standpoint of Guyanese politics, the 1950s and early 1960s clearly demanded skillful leadership and decisive decision-making about the events that defined the pre-independence period. There were some crucial moments in which Rai played a key role. For example, during the 1962 riots, in his capacity as Minister of Home Affairs, he successfully countermanded a police order to fire upon striking urban workers, largely Africans. This act prevented more extensive Indian-African carnage and negated the possibility of a re-entry of British troops to maintain law and order in the colony (as in 1953). Referring to the riots, Reynold Burrowes noted that “ …even if the police had succeeded in dispersing the demonstrators by the most violent means, the result would have most likely been the stimulation of civil war. Should such a situation have occurred the result would have been the same, the re-entry of the British government and the imposition of a solution” (Burrowes, 1984:187).

One of the frequently recurring themes in Guyanese society today surrounds the imbalance in the disciplined force in favor of Africans. Political leaders who want to justify this anomaly argue that, historically, Indians did not want to join the police force and the army. While various reasons are often advanced for this position, most ignore the negative climate created by the PNC (and the British) and the failure of the present PPP government to take corrective measures to address these concerns (chest measurements, screening by non-Indians, dietary laws, etc.). However, under Rai’s tenure-ship as Minister of Home Affairs, an effective recruitment policy ensured that Indians were well represented in the police force. For example, in 1961 there was an increase of Indian applicants compared to previous years, and in 1962 and 1963, more male Indians applied than Africans. In 1961, there were 700 Indian applicants, compared to 320 in 1958. In 1962 there were 1,407 Indian applicants compared to 1,711 Africans and 1,448 Indian applicants in 1963 compared to 1,698 African applicants. In 1962, a total of 52 Indians and 49 Africans were recruited to serve in the Police Force. George Danns attributed the “upsurge in East Indian application and recruitment” into the police force between 1961 and 1964 to increased interethnic tensions and “a deliberate policy of the PPP government to fill the ranks of the police with its own supporters” (Danns, 1982:118). While Danns has obviously overstated the PPP’s motive, this period covered the years Rai assumed greater control of the police force during his tenure as Minister of Home Affairs.

EARLY BACKGROUND
Balram Singh Rai, known to his friends as “Bal”, was born on February 8, 1921 in Beterverwagting Village, East Coast Demerara, to the parents of Ramlachan and Radha Rai. According to information on the Emigration Pass, Rai’s father was recruited from the village of Majholia in Chapra, at the age of 20, on June 18, 1901 and departed India on the Forth, which left the port of Calcutta on July 19, 1901. His parents were neither wealthy nor did they occupy any exalted social position in Guyanese society. They enjoyed a modest lifestyle and were well respected by fellow villagers. They were devoted Hindus who played a major role in establishing the foundations of the Arya Samaj movement in Guyana. Official documents indicate that Rai’s parents were of the Rajput (Kshatriya) social class. Rai’s father was literate both in Hindi and English, and was indentured with his mother and brother to the sugar plantation of British Guiana. He became a village councilor, and was a part-time Hindi teacher at a congregational primary school for several years.

Rai’s family placed great emphasis on the value of education. A strong sense of consciousness and regard for social justice for the unfortunate was imbued in the young Rai. His desire to help the less fortunate was inculcated, and later manifested in his various roles as a teacher, public servant, lawyer, politician and as a leader in the Indian community. It is perhaps this aspect of his upbringing and initial inculcation into the reformist Hindu culture and tradition that clearly distinguished Balram Singh Rai from Cheddi Jagan, and patterned his vision for a post-colonial Guyana very different from that envisioned by Jagan.

Given his religious persuasions and social consciousness, it was not surprising that Rai’s father would become a founding member of the village Arya Samaj (Society of the Noble) – a reformist Hindu organization – which was established after the visit from India of Pandit Ayodya Persaud around 1928 (Sriram, 1999). Rai himself would emerge as the President of the Beterverwagting/Triumph Arya Samaj, and those who knew him, often remembered that he was able to initiate many forward-looking reformist policies and practices in the Samaj. The reforms he initiated were in keeping with the tradition established by Maharishi Swami Dayanand Saraswati of India and the founding members of the Arya Samaj movement in British Guiana.

At age 13, Rai passed the Junior Cambridge examination and at the age of 15, he passed the Senior Cambridge examination. He was not as fortunate as Jagan to attend the Georgetown-based Queens College, the leading secondary school to which the country’s elite business community and professional class sent their children. Nor was he allowed to compete for the Mitchell scholarship tenable at Queen’s College since he was regarded as being of illegitimate birth because his parents were married under Hindu rites and customs. The British government or the trustees of the Mitchell Foundation did not recognize Hindu marriages as legitimate. The government was in collusion with the churches to Christianize the Moslem and Hindu “heathens.” Rai was deeply offended by this experience and hoped that one day he would be able to rid society of such discriminatory practices against the Indian community [Interview]. Such an opportunity presented itself while he was Minister of Community Development and Education and he proceeded to take over 51 denominational schools and placed them under direct or indirect government control.

During his formative school years, Rai was able to compare urban and rural life styles and was much affected by the comparative poverty and harshness of life for the majority of Indians, most of whom were rural-based. He felt, in particular, “for young children in the village trudging along early in the morning with their buckets to the neighboring sugar estate to bail out leaking punts transporting sugar cane from the fields to the factory; for women, many emaciated and some pregnant, with cutlasses going to weed the fields; and, men with their shovels, forks and cutlasses going to work in the fields and to reap the sugar cane, all barefooted and in tattered clothes” [Interview with Rai].

In 1949, the same year he got married, he was elected Vice-President of the Civil Service Association (CSA). The CSA secured better salary scales and cost of living allowances for its members during the war years when inflation was rising. However, as a trade unionist and member of the CSA, Rai was committed to the principle of “Guianization,” which was a policy of the CSA to “ensure the best available man for each post and that the selection had naturally to take into account not only formal qualifications but also experience and personal qualities.” (Lutchman, 1973:113-4). Guianization was a way to secure promotion for Africans and Indians to high-ranking positions in the civil service. Rai argued vigorously for the highest positions in the civil service to be filled by locally born Guyanese, particularly Africans and Indians. Rai’s role as a militant member of the CSA and an advocate for the postal workers were very visible in promoting the interests of serving officers, especially those in the lower levels, and the promotion of employment for qualified young men and women from rural communities. So effective was his role as a civil servant that Jagan noted that he “played a militant role as president of the Junior Section of the Civil Service Association” (Jagan, 1980:110).

However, it was after Rai became a Minister in the PPP government in 1957 and 1961, that many Guyanese were continuously being appointed to the highest career positions in the civil service, the education and teaching services and the judiciary. It should be noted too that his militancy very often led him on a collision course with sources of power in the colonial establishment. For example, at the risk of losing his job, he promoted Cheddi Jagan as a candidate for the 1947 General Election, and openly solicited electoral support for him in the Central Demerara (Buxton to Kitty) constituency. Civil servants were barred from such overt political activities. Jagan acknowledged this important contribution of Rai when he stated that “During the 1947 general election he [Rai] gave me strong support” (Jagan, 1980:110).

Because he was overlooked for promotion more than once, he resigned from the Civil Service and left to read Law at Middle Temple, London, in 1949. He secured the LLB degree with honors from the University of London and qualified as a Barrister at Law of the Honorable Society of the Middle Temple in 1952.

SOCIAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCE
The young Balram Singh Rai, who was grounded in the teachings of the Arya Samaj, was taught from an early age that there is no authority in the Vedas for caste separation as a hereditary system. Progress and status were based on an individual’s karma (actions/achievements), guna (knowledge/wisdom) and subhavo (conduct/character). Even though he ranked high on social status due to the caste origins of his parents, he stood against inequality attributed to groups of people based on one’s class, as well as, caste. Rai believed “not only in the brotherhood of man but also in the unity of all life” [Interview with Rai]. While his father reinforced his Hindu values at home, his mother frequently took him to religious services sponsored by local committees on the sugar estates and villages so that he would be able to play an active role in local dramas about the Indian experience (Ramayana, Ramleela, etc). More important, however, was the fact that this cultural and religious exposure created an indelible impression upon his future personal life and political orientation.

Rai became an active member of the American Aryan League, the central organization representing Arya Samajists, and his village Samaj was affiliated to the League. His activities and support for the League led to his appointment as Senior Vice-President of the League with Dr. Jairam Bissessar, as President in 1957. He took time off from his budding legal practice to attend meetings and formulate plans for the League’s advancement. He frequently addressed conventions of large Indian gatherings in the rural areas. Upon his return from London as a barrister in 1952 he was elected as a Senior Vice President of the Hindu Religious Society (HRS), a charitable organization founded by Pandit Ramsaroop Maraj. The HRS, through its dharamsala in Georgetown, and with a branch in Canje, Berbice, catered to the needs of the old, sick and indigent, irrespective of race or religion. His role as a member of the government also greatly enhanced his standing within the Indian community. According to Shiv Gangadeen, a supporter of the United Force, “even before he assumed his present Ministry, Mr. Rai was highly regarded by Hindus of a particular persuasion: the Arya Samajists. His work and utterances as Minister are not only enhancing this regard, but are also winning the respect of people outside of the Arya Samaj” (Chronicle, November 27, 1959).

While Rai was aware of the differences that existed within the various traditions of the Hindu community, orthodox and reformist, he continuously professed a “love for the Vedic religion.” His goal was always to seek “unity and fraternity and for rallying all Hindus under the banner of OM” [Rai, “Diwali”, no date]. In his presentations, he often used the Deepavali celebrations to highlight the commonality among Hindus by referring to the “heroes” who were associated with this tradition that is celebrated annually. Sri Rama and Swami Dayanand were the two Indian heroes whom he exemplified as role models and held in high honor [Rai, “Dharma and Sri Rama”, no date].

Rai recognized that Deepavali was symbolic for Hindus because it was the commemoration of the triumphal return to Ayodhya of Maharaja Sri Ramachandra (Rama) after fourteen years of banishment and his victory over the demon-king Rawana of Lanka. Deepavali also symbolized for the Arya Samajists the transition of Maharishi Dayanand who died on that day and it was the day that his soul attained mukti or salvation. Referring to Rama, he noted “The festival [Deepavali] thus is marked by different events in different spheres of life by the noble achievements of two Aryan heroes. Sri Rama, who was wont to be called Aryaputra by his consort Sita, by his conduct in private life and by his dealings with his subjects and even his enemies typifies the Vedic ruler - just, upright, patient, virtuous, courageous, truthful and dutiful in accordance with dharma. The Vedas taught us ‘to be noble and righteous in word, thought and deed.’ So great was his devotion to dharma that he was reported to have said that he did not care for the sovereignty of the three worlds if it were in conflict with dharma…the term Ramraja is now used to refer to any state in which peace, social justice and good government prevail. A dutiful prince, he was also a dutiful son, a loving husband and a loving brother” [Rai, “Diwali”, no date]. Celebrating Deepavali, as Rai often reminded his listeners, also meant the commemoration of the life and recognition of the contributions of Swami Dayanand and condemnation of the many abuses he spoke out against.

For Rai, the teachings of the Ramayana presented the ideal characteristics and qualities that reflected balanced moral leadership and social responsibility that were worthy of emulation. He acknowledged the social and moral influence of the Hindu tradition on his character. Invoking references to the dichotomy of Plato’s philosopher-king, he noted “In his [Sri Rama] life there co-existed the Prince and the Philosopher, providing a loving and living example of the ideal Ruler, for it is my firm conviction that there can be no good government until statesmen and kings are imbued with religion and philosophy which is probably the converse of Plato’s observation that there would be no good government until philosophers became kings” [Rai, “Diwali”, no date]. His ideal society was to reflect these defining characteristics of a leader, characteristics that were embedded within his concept of “Ramraja.”

POLITICAL ORIENTATION
Rai was a frequent contributor to the letters column of the daily newspapers. In the 1940s, his letters to the press appeared under the pseudo name of “iconoclast.” He also wrote letters around the same time calling for local government reform and an extension of the franchise. His interests and observations of the functioning of the local government dated back to the early days when his father was a village councilor. His primary concern was to ensure a more efficient and democratic functioning of the village councils. In a letter to the editor of the Daily Chronicle (April 6, 1954), titled “Adult Suffrage for Rural Districts Urged,” he called for a transformation and reform of the local council to make them more democratic and responsive to the needs of the community. In relation to this concern, he was able to promote a number of country districts to village status during his tenure as Minister of Education and Community Development.

Many of Rai’s speeches, addresses and presentations as a Minister in the PPP government, were published either in whole or in part as extracts in the daily newspapers. Between 1952 to 1957, he wrote extensively on religious matter. These writings gave a very detailed overview of his early ideas and social and cultural orientation. They serve as an important primary source of information in helping us to understand the development and shaping of Rai’s political ideology. Rai’s role within the political sphere in Guyanese society is remembered by many who were associated with him or who were influenced by the policies he championed when he was a minister in the PPP government. It was therefore not surprising that PPP supporters protested and expressed deep concern when he was relieved of his portfolio as the first Minister of Home Affairs and subsequently expelled from the PPP. The event was precipitated by the 1962 election for PPP Party Chairman in which Rai, a popular candidate, challenged Jagan’s choice, Brindley Benn, an African, for the position and took a principled position against the high-handed and undemocratic practices employed by Cheddi Jagan and his supporters during the election. The controversy following that election revealed the extent to which the party elites, namely Cheddi Jagan and Janet Jagan, were willing to go to preserve the appearance of the “multi-racial” image of the PPP. The exchange of letters between himself, Cheddi Jagan and Janet Jagan regarding this incident was documented in a pamphlet, “Democracy Betrayed” , which was widely circulated throughout Guyana.

Balram Singh Rai, unlike Cheddi Jagan, was not, and had no intention of becoming a career politician. Increasingly, demands to expand his political role within the PPP were based on the series of unfolding events in Guianese society and the insistence by the Jagans that he accept greater political responsibility within the party. However, his agreement to assume a greater role in the PPP government was not necessarily motivated by personal ambition, but was based on an abiding desire to help his fellow Guyanese. Despite his close association with the PPP, Rai has consistently opposed the party’s ideology and raised concerns with Cheddi Jagan about the direction in which the PPP was heading. His ideological differences with the PPP led him to join forces with the National Democratic Party (NDP) during the 1953 election. The NDP was made up of a cross-section of the Guyanese community, including some members of the League of Colored Peoples (LCP). He had calculated, like others, that the PPP did not possess the organizational capability and resources to make a serious bid for office. Nevertheless, Rai, after several requests from both Cheddi Jagan and Janet Jagan, officially joined the PPP on July 2, 1956. He was part of the influx of Indians who joined or had remained with the PPP after the split with Forbes Burnham and his African supporters. During the 1953-1957 interim period, following the suspension of the constitution, he provided valuable pro bono legal services to PPP members who were arrested and detained by British authorities for violating their travel restrictions. His progressive views about social, economic and political issues were also reflected in the 1964 manifesto of the Justice Party.

Despite the views held by PPP leaders about Rai, his political stature commanded respect from various political leaders in the country. For instance, Peter D’Aguiar, the Leader of the UF, referring to the PPP’s dismissal of Rai as Minister of Home Affairs, said, “Dr. Jagan has made his greatest political blunder…he has cast aside moderate Indians in favor of rabid Communists. He has exchanged competence for incompetence” (Sunday Graphic, June 17, 1962). L.F.S. Burnham, who was Mayor of Georgetown when Rai was the Minister of Home Affairs, said “the Minister’s (Mr. Rai’s) dismissal meant that the last vestige of intelligence was removed from the PPP” (Sunday Chronicle, June 17, 1962). Rickey Singh, a prominent reporter who followed the 1962 Rai-Jagan split and reported on “RAI: THE INSIDE STORY” said “I happen to know that Mr. Rai is not in the habit of bowing easily to any situation. The ‘schools take-over’ legislation is ample proof of this” (Sunday Chronicle, June 24, 1962). Shiv Gangadeen, who recognized that Rai was thrust into a situation in which he did not invite, made this observation when he noted that Rai was “one of our successful Barristers, and can make quite a good living at his profession.” Gangadeen, as early as 1959, also recognized the distinction in the political ideology of Rai, which separated him from the doctrinaire Marxist-Leninist Cheddi Jagan and saw the potential for conflict between Rai and Jagan. Of Rai, he explained “He is already regarded as a serious threat to Dr. Jagan’s leadership of the PPP, and if he gets too deeply involved in the Jagans’ Communism, he will eventually be faced with the choice of either accepting a toady’s role model and going all the way with them, or else getting denounced as a stooge, traitor, etc.” (Chronicle on November 27, 1959). His words proved to be prophetic.

Rai rejected Jagan’s dogmatic, rigid ideological socialist construct as the methodology that monopolized and defined the “truth” and as the only social paradigm from which to analyze and understand the reality of the environment in which he lived. While declaring the Second Annual Convention of Aryan Youth open in the late 1950s, he noted that “the rich do not have a monopoly over truth, honesty and good character; poverty is no barrier to a good life. Rich and poor alike, therefore, can equally lead clean and good moral lives” [Rai, “Song of the Soul”, no date]. So strong were his views on moral behavior that after delivering a lecture at a seven-day Srimad Bhagavad Yagna on Hindu religion and philosophy at De Kinderen, Demerara, on September 9, 1962, several months after his expulsion from the PPP, he twice refused to be garlanded. While eventually accepting the garlands “as a token of religious and social esteem,” he expressed alarm at the lip service and lack of interest being shown to the Hindu religion by devoted followers. He stressed the importance of performing sanskars and the need for Hindus to educate their children about their tradition. According to him, without the aid of these practices and ceremonies, a Hindu is apt “to grow undisciplined, like a wild weed or animal” [Interview with Rai].

Rai’s cultural and religious orientation had an even more profound impact on his political views. He felt that any government which is not spiritually motivated “is bound to fall”and “people who deny their spiritual nature were ungrateful to their Creator and were only half-alive.” Man’s actions, he felt, must “conform to Dharma,” one’s sacred duty to mankind, and the Law of Karma. “The Law of Karma is immutable and eternal, and as such, consonant with justice. It is the principle on which God or the Supreme Atma created this universe and other universes and it is the principle by which He sustains them. God is not an arbitrary Being; although Omnipotent, He is himself subject to this Law. Were it otherwise, it would have been impossible to know him and unreasonable to worship Him. It would not have been possible to make progress in the material and other sciences and would have afforded no encouragement for persons to lead moral lives. Virtue is thereby its own reward in the sense that every act of ours yields its own dividends or otherwise, irrespective of the patronage of anyone” [Rai, “Karma, Justice, Reincarnation”, no date]. It was this doctrine which he found incompatible with the Christian doctrine of “forgiveness,” which to him was “religious bribery.” In his reasoning, “if an evil doer, by mere prayers and repentance can succeed in escaping punishment therefrom, I say there will be no real deterrent to evil doing. But the Law of Karma requires such persons to make restitutions either to the injured party or to his family or to Society generally before such wrongs can be accounted washed away; while by prayers and repentance the Supreme Being assists in overcoming recurrences.” [Rai, “Karma, Justice, Reincarnation”, no date].

There was no compromise in his belief that one’s duty towards society must be fueled by moral principles. Dharma was “the motor force, the rule of guidance and conduct in happiness or misery, in pleasure or pain, in joy and sorrow.” In Dharma, Rai saw “the principles on which the moral order is based, regulating not only one’s private life, but also one’s relation to his fellow-men as well as to his Creator” [Rai, Dharma and Sri Rama”, no date]. As a Hindu, he accepted that Sri Rama was incarnated with the characteristics of Dharma (fortitude, forgiveness, self-command, honesty, purity, control of senses, wisdom, knowledge, truth and absence of anger). Drawing from the exemplar life experiences of Rama and Swami Dayanand, Rai fully accepted that truth and right action must be upheld at all times, regardless of consequences.

For Rai, the Rajput, caste origin was a source of pride rather than a position from which to ascertain and flaunt his superior social status among his peers. According to Pandit Ramlall, a New York-based member of the Arya Samaj and a long-time PPP supporter, “Rai’s reference to being a Rajput when he campaigned for office in 1964 was an attempt to portray himself as a fighter, a warrior…He did not believe in caste distinctions” [Interview with Ramlall]. Pandit Birbal Singh, another prominent member of the Arya Samaj, suggested that some people may have misjudged Rai’s references to being a Rajput because “he was an independent thinker and he was very militant about what he had to do and what he had to say. He would argue and debate issues whenever such challenges arise” [Interview]. Moses Bhagwan, a former PPP member, concurred, but suggested that “Bal was not arrogant, but he may have seen himself as an elevated Hindu” [Interview]. In essence, his references to his social background on several occasions during the political campaign in 1964 was an attempt to convey to Indians that he was not going to sacrifice their political and security interests. The PPP, concerned about Rai’s political influence among Indians, and the potential threat the Justice Party posed to the PPP and its Indian base, seized upon Rai’s references to his caste origins as an opportunity to further ridicule him. For instance, in a letter to the Guyana Stabroek News (July 17, 1999), Minister Moses Nagamootoo of the PPP, recounting the 1964 electoral campaign, wrote that Rai “had exploited racism and religion as an ideological appeal to mask his political opportunism and betrayal…” Paul O’Hara, a journalist and a close friend of Rai explained that “Rai may have had a touch of arrogance because of his ‘chatri’ background, but he was over-confident. However, he was never afraid of Burnham…It was not surprising that Burnham intended to have Cheddi as his opposition” [Interview].

RAI-JAGAN SPLIT

The Rai-Jagan split was a much-publicized event, which followed the 1962 PPP election for Party Chairman, in which Rai was challenging Brindley Benn for that position. According to Rai, the chronicle of events leading up to his removal as Minister of Home Affairs were documented and presented to the public to make it clear that he “never resigned” from his appointment as Minister of Home Affairs. The events, judging by the reaction of PPP groups and religious leaders throughout the country disappointed many supporters of Rai and many protested his dismissal from the government and subsequent expulsion from the PPP. Several public meetings were held following the election and the PPP and its executive leadership embarked on a campaign to discredit Rai’s position and credibility as it became clear that he was unwilling to withdrew his statements about the “rigging of the election” held in April 1962 [Rai, “Democracy Betrayed”, December 7, 1964].

To be sure, this was not the first time that controversy developed over internal PPP elections. The August 1959 elections to elect officers and General Council members were also declared null and void by the election officer. In October 1959, Abdul Kayum, a member of the PPP’s General Council and the Chairman of the Progressive Youth Organization (PYO) was expelled by Janet Jagan for “causing racial disharmony.” In January 1960, five top PPP members faced expulsion, George Bowman (son of Fred Bowman), Karim Juman (party activist in north Georgetown, Shivsankar Sadhoo (a field secretary and activist from Vigilance), Patrick Alleyne (candidate elected in 1957 for the South Georgetown seat), and Pandit Siridhar Misir (a field secretary). The irregularities were viewed with much suspicion. On September 11, 1959, Cheddi Jagan issued stern warnings to persons who he described as “disruptionists” in the Party and threatened expulsion. He accused them of trying to split "the African comrades from the Indian comrades." (Chronicle, September 12, 1959). According to Leo Despres, a cultural anthropologist who studied nationalist politics in colonial Guiana in 1959, Pandit Misir, Bashir Khan, Abdul Cayum and Karim Juman backed Balram Singh Rai for the party chairmanship. The elections were declared “null and void,” and Janet Jagan filed charges against Rai’s backers and accused them of “racialism” and tampering with election boxes. All but Khan was expelled. Khan was probably exonerated of charges because “he not only owned a sawmill in Rosignol, but he has considerable local influence among East Indians in West Berbice” (Despres, 1967: 219).

Leo Despres further argued that this experience, as well as the expulsion of Rai in 1962, clearly demonstrated that the organizational structure and ideological character of the PPP were firmly established. The PPP Constitution placed “almost absolute” power in the hands of the Executive Committee of the party and it was difficult to remove a delegate who was supported by the Executive Committee of the PPP. What Despres was referring to was the authoritarian control the Executive Committee members maintained within the party through democratic centralism and commitment to an ideology that provided legitimacy for their actions. The basic units of the party were the local cells, which are aggregated into larger units throughout the country and represented by constituency committees. However, while the officers of all the members at both of these levels were directly elected, the nomination of candidates by local groups was subject to the approval of the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee was comprised of the officers of the party and seven members of the party’s General Council. The members of the Executive Committee were directly elected at the Party Congress by delegates who were sent there by the local groups, who were themselves approved by this committee. This system of control from the top-down means that “the possibility of unseating a member of the latter group [Executive Committee] is rather slim, short of a rebellion within the party…the Executive Committee of the PPP tends to be a self-perpetuating group responsible for all the party’s policies and political activities (Despres, 1967:189). Cheddi Jagan and Janet Jagan, the founding members, no doubt were the two most powerful members of the Executive Committee.

Rai was the Senior Vice-Chairman of the PPP from 1961 to 1962. He stood for election as Chairman of the Party because he felt the current Chairman, Brindley Benn, given his communist orientation, had been making some “irresponsible statements” and the executive committee was not meeting as scheduled to address important issues [Interview]. It was clear that the Party was being run by a few people which included Cheddi Jagan, the leader, Janet Jagan, the General Secretary, Brindley Benn, the Chairman, and Ram Karran, the Treasurer. The latter two were faithful and loyal supporters of the Jagans. Rai was hoping that as Party Chairman he would have been able to steer the course of the party and influence the ideological orientation of its leadership. He had already made it clear to the PPP leadership that he was opposed to its Marxist notions of “class struggles” and “dictatorship of the proletariat” and he held fundamentally different positions on Guyana's’ relationship with the former Soviet Union and the United States.

On the first day of the meeting to elect the Party Chairman, the delegates met at the Plaza Cinema, where group members and delegates congregated from various parts of the country. The voting was scheduled on the second day at the Guyana Oriental School, a school headed by Sruti Kant, an Arya Samaj missionary from India who was also an assistant to the Presiding Officer at the election. Birbal Singh, who went with the Leonora group, was the constituency chairman representing supporters from Blankenburg to Boeraserie. He recalled the incident very well [Interview]. He said he was greeted by Jagan briefly upon his entrance and handed a list of candidates. Jagan told him “vote for the people on this list, and show it to other delegates.” Singh, who was aware that Rai was challenging Benn for the number two position within the PPP, was disturbed when he saw that the list contained the names of Brindley Benn and others, but not that of Rai. He observed also that Ranji Chandisingh, Jack Kelshall and other PPP supporters were meeting delegates and “pressuring” them to vote for Benn. Clearly disobeying Jagan’s request, Birbal Singh crossed out Benn’s name on the list. When the final tally was counted and Benn was declared the winner, “there was a whole lot of noise and confusion, especially from Corentyne people. Jagan and Janet remained quiet and appealed for calm.” Fenton Ramsahoye came up to Rai and Rai complained to him. His response was that “the party works in devious ways” [Rai, “Democracy Betrayed”, December 7, 1964]. Birbal Singh, like many other delegates left because they were very “disappointed” in the way the election was conducted and questioned the role the PPP leader played in the whole affair.

Rai explained that while several persons, some non-delegates, were given ballot papers to vote, the Party Leader, Cheddi Jagan, the Party Secretary, Janet Jagan, and Jagan’s Personal Secretary, Jack Kelshall openly campaigned against him. Jagan injected “race” into the election by attacking the delegates who supported Rai for doing so on “racial” ground, and then, proceeded to advise his followers to vote “not according to race but according to their opinion of who was better qualified” to serve in that position. Jagan proceeded to “insult, humiliate and slander” Hindus and Muslims and their organizations, namely, the Hindu Maha Sabha, the Latchmee Sabha (the Hindu Ladies’ Organization), the Pandits’ Council and the Sad’r Islamic Anjuman, presumable for supporting Rai [Rai, “Democracy Betrayed”, December 7, 1964]. Brindley Benn, the then Party Chairman, refused to allow Rai to address the delegates “after the Party Leader Dr. Jagan, had castigated everyone and praised the communists,” while his wife, Mrs. Benn, directed and “assisted” about forty members of the Women’s Section with their ballots. Neville Annibourne, the Progressive Youth Organization (PYO) Secretary also directed about sixty delegates outside the hall on how they should vote [Rai, “Democracy Betrayed”, December 7, 1964].

The battle between Rai and Jagan on this issue raged for 52 days and finally came to an end on June 15. At the time of his expulsion, Rai said “neither the revocation of my portfolio nor my expulsion from the Peoples Progressive Party can mitigate the moral defeat inflicted upon Dr. Jagan and the General Council by Party and public opinion throughout the country…history will prove that in relieving me of my portfolio, Dr. Jagan had committed the greatest political blunder of his career…” [Rai, “Democracy Betrayed”, December 7, 1964]. Several resignations by party group members also followed Rai’s expulsion from the PPP.

Recognizing the genuine concern and protest against the possible removal of Rai from his position in the PPP government, as well as his influence among party supporters, the PPP began to construct a response which painted Rai as an opportunist whose ideas were inconsistent with those of the PPP leadership. In response to questions at a meeting in early June 1962 with the East Demerara Constituency Group of the PPP at Mahaica, Jagan offered six reasons why Rai was expelled, without providing details. One, Rai was accused of “corrupt practices.” Two, Rai was accused of pursuing policies not in conjunction with top party executives because he had a different ideological perspective than that of the party. Three, Rai failed to comply with party orders and regulations. Four, Rai did not provide sufficient protection to certain Ministers of the Government and the Party’s executives during the 1962 February disturbances. Five, Rai refused to speak at party meetings during the Budget crisis. Six, Rai was becoming the “darling” of the opposition parties and press (Chronicle, June 7, 1962). Rai had already stated publicly that he had disagreed with the PPP on some aspects of the 1962 Budget, and relations with America, Cuba and Eastern bloc countries, but had abided by the majority decision within the party. In defending his actions during the 1962 riots, he explained that he, along with Commissioner of Police, W.R. Weber, was able to avert a strike by the police on Black Friday (February 16, 1962). This was done after Premier Jagan had failed to settle the problem of a revised emolument with the police.

The question that must be answered was why did the PPP leadership support the less popular candidacy of Brindley Benn, and opposed that of Rai, particularly since Janet Jagan, the General Secretary the PPP, had indicated that Rai was “an efficient and hard-working Minister?” [Interview with Janet Jagan]. There were a number of reasons why the Jagans threw their support behind Benn. One, Brindley Benn was a loyal supporter of the PPP and had accepted the party’s socialist ideology wholeheartedly. However, he had parted company with the PPP when it was in the opposition and formed a Maoist political party. A close friend of Janet Jagan, he was brought back as part of the “civic” component to serve in the PPP administration after the 1992 election. Two, given the split and the subsequent departure of the radical African Marxist element from the PPP, the party was badly in need of “token” Africans to enable the PPP to present a multi-racial image to the public and thereby pursue its socialist agenda for Guyana. With Benn as the second powerful person within the PPP, there was a possibility that the PPP could stave off criticisms by opposition forces that the PPP was a party of Indians. The political leadership was unwilling to confront the fact that the PPP was an Indian-based party and it was assuming that the African population would view its authority to govern and the implementation of public policy as legitimate.

From the African perspective, Benn’s position in the PPP was certainly not sufficient to pacify the fears of the African population. Moses Bhagwan noted that “Brindley Benn was not a charismatic or independent fighter, had no real standing within the party, and was never very popular with Africans. He was there because Jagan wanted him” [Interview with Bhagwan]. On the other hand, Rai was an independent thinker and the hardcore Marxist elements within the PPP wanted to minimize his involvement at such a high level within the party. As a result, as Bhagwan explained “Bal had to be expelled because of his direct confrontation with other members of the PPP” [Interview]. In order to address the fallout from this event, namely the rigging of the elections in favor of Brindley Benn, the PPP had to consistently defend its position, particularly since the matter was now in the public domain. The PPP, through its General Secretary, Janet Jagan increased its propaganda campaign against Rai. Rai was labeled a “racialist” because he opposed Jagan’s choice, the African candidate, Brindley Benn. Ironically, part of the reason the Jagans preferred Benn as the Party Chairman was because of his African ethnicity. Interestingly, no responsible member of the opposition parties had ever leveled such a charge against Rai.

RAI AND THE JUSTICE PARTY
With the possibility of independence looming in the air, the 1964 General Election was hotly contested. In 1953, 74.8% of the registered voters participated in the election, compared to 89.4% in 1961 and 96.9% in 1964 (Horowitz, 1985:327). The PPP found itself being opposed by the PNC, the UF, GUMP, JP, PEP and the NLF. The JP, along with the PNC, UF, and GUMP received support from the United States and local big business, while the PPP received assistance from the former Soviet Union. Rai’s campaign strategy was to cut into the base of the Indian support of the PPP. As part of the strategy, the JP attempted to convince Indians that the PPP was anti-Indian and anti-religion. Rai also addressed the issue of proportional representation (PR) and balance in the various institutions of power. He had condemned Jagan’s blunder when he gave total freedom to the British to determine the type of electoral system the 1964 election would be fought under, and had called for a referendum to allow the population to decide whether they want a PR electoral system or not. He reminded Guianese, particularly Indians, about his role in the PPP as Minister of Education and as Minister of Home Affairs.

He presented a scenario to Indians whereby he argued that the new electoral system of proportional representation meant that Jagan and the PPP could not and would not get a clear majority of the votes to enable the PPP to form the next government. Given this reality, he predicted that the next government would be a coalition of the People’s National Congress (PNC), the party supported by the majority Africans and the United Force (UF), the party representing the business interests. Rai predicted that Jagan, because of his ideological orientation, and external manipulations, would be left out of the next government. He warned that this political arrangement would create a dilemma

FM
Originally Posted by seignet:

Old boy, iz wah razz yuh talking. Was apan jhaat at play when one african sold another african to the arabs and baccra.

 

In India, our people doan SELLLLLLLLLL ANYBODY. We have a well organized system of apan jhaat. We all know we place. And the intelligent ones, willingly leff India for the unknown places of the world. If u doan know, leh me tell u how dey recruit indentured servants. A group of men go to the remote villages, dey beat the drums, people gather, dey tell dem the lies. And those who fall for it fallow dem to Calcutta. There! It is a different story at Garden Reach-the waiting and the tiefing chokdars(Jagdeo family) robb and beat the people.

 

Do u know how nice dem black people threat indians when dem arrive in the wilderness of BG. Dem Black folks were more than happy to receive them-right up the Forbes Burnham. Then, Forbes forget about the Apostle James and he used his tongue to set strife.

 

Here we go.   

When the indians arrived our ancestors lived together. There was intermarriage, mostly indian men marrying or living with african women because there were fewer indian women than indian men. Then the battle cry of the 50's. LFS didn't set strife. He might've been a lot of things, but a dunce he was not.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by seignet:

Old boy, iz wah razz yuh talking. Was apan jhaat at play when one african sold another african to the arabs and baccra.

 

In India, our people doan SELLLLLLLLLL ANYBODY. We have a well organized system of apan jhaat. We all know we place. And the intelligent ones, willingly leff India for the unknown places of the world. If u doan know, leh me tell u how dey recruit indentured servants. A group of men go to the remote villages, dey beat the drums, people gather, dey tell dem the lies. And those who fall for it fallow dem to Calcutta. There! It is a different story at Garden Reach-the waiting and the tiefing chokdars(Jagdeo family) robb and beat the people.

 

Do u know how nice dem black people threat indians when dem arrive in the wilderness of BG. Dem Black folks were more than happy to receive them-right up the Forbes Burnham. Then, Forbes forget about the Apostle James and he used his tongue to set strife.

 

Here we go.   

When the indians arrived our ancestors lived together. There was intermarriage, mostly indian men marrying or living with african women because there were fewer indian women than indian men. Then the battle cry of the 50's. LFS didn't set strife. He might've been a lot of things, but a dunce he was not.

Were u barn den wid nuff sense to know wah was going on in 1955-after Forbes and Cheddie Split.

S
Originally Posted by Stormborn:

I know him also...growing up. We went to the same high school for a bit. He was an introverted awkward kid. He had to come to his Hinduism in the US.

 

Anyways, here is a bit he posted about 15 years ago on  rai.

Thank you for the article. I better understand Rai's appeal to the indo surpremacist, whether Mr. Rai intended for it to be so or not.

FM
Originally Posted by seignet:

Were u barn den wid nuff sense to know wah was going on in 1955-after Forbes and Cheddie Split.

I lived through it. My family lived through it. It wasn't pleasant for black man and it wasn't pleasant for Indians either. But of course you only interested in one side.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Stormborn:

I know him also...growing up. We went to the same high school for a bit. He was an introverted awkward kid. He had to come to his Hinduism in the US.

 

Anyways, here is a bit he posted about 15 years ago on  rai.

Thank you for the article. I better understand Rai's appeal to the indo surpremacist, whether Mr. Rai intended for it to be so or not.

 

You and your partisans keep using this term "Indo supremacist." I usually ignore it because it's a load of bull to me. What exactly makes one an "Indo supremacist"?

 

The radical notion that the PNC should not be beating and murdering innocent Indos as was their hallowed custom until circa 2006?

FM
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
You and your partisans keep using this term "Indo supremacist." I usually ignore it because it's a load of bull to me. What exactly makes one an "Indo supremacist"?

 

The radical notion that the PNC should not be beating and murdering innocent Indos as was their hallowed custom until circa 2006?

Not at all mein herr. Indians, like everyone else, have rights including the right to defend themselves. Not all black man out to murder and slaughter alyuh. Black police in the 60's, including my relatives, defended indians from racial attacks. More than a few black man died to depose LFS. You don't know jack shit about guyana other than what you've heard at the feet of Ravi and his clan so don't ask me shit about indo supremacist. Go ask them. You know damn well what I'm referring to.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
You and your partisans keep using this term "Indo supremacist." I usually ignore it because it's a load of bull to me. What exactly makes one an "Indo supremacist"?

 

The radical notion that the PNC should not be beating and murdering innocent Indos as was their hallowed custom until circa 2006?

Not at all mein herr. Indians, like everyone else, have rights including the right to defend themselves. Not all black man out to murder and slaughter alyuh. Black police in the 60's, including my relatives, defended indians from racial attacks. More than a few black man died to depose LFS. You don't know jack shit about guyana other than what you've heard at the feet of Ravi and his clan so don't ask me shit about indo supremacist. Go ask them. You know damn well what I'm referring to.

 

My maternal grandfather recounts a fairly balanced picture of the 50s and 60s. He recounts Indian on Black violence. Black on Indian violence. Black heroism at Mackenzie/Wismar. So I think I'm fully au fait with the history. I don't get my history from Freedom House.

 

My grandfather recounted to me how a Black man (his friend) threw Indian kids into sacks to hide them and then ferry them on the pretense of carrying away pigs in bags away from Wismar during the massacre.

 

And no I don't think the overwhelming majority of Black people wanna do anything more than live in peace and quiet with their Indo countrymen.

 

You have in your head this idea of ROAR you project onto me. That's where you go wrong. Just as the PNC is a diverse organization so was ROAR. Ravi Dev was not some cult leader where we all heard the gospel at his feet.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by seignet:

Were u barn den wid nuff sense to know wah was going on in 1955-after Forbes and Cheddie Split.

I lived through it. My family lived through it. It wasn't pleasant for black man and it wasn't pleasant for Indians either. But of course you only interested in one side.

Which part of Guyana you from?

S
Last edited by seignet
Originally Posted by seignet:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by seignet:

Were u barn den wid nuff sense to know wah was going on in 1955-after Forbes and Cheddie Split.

I lived through it. My family lived through it. It wasn't pleasant for black man and it wasn't pleasant for Indians either. But of course you only interested in one side.

Which part of Guyana you from?

Georgetown. I remember the riots of the 60's. My father was a policeman who had to work in those riots to protect citizens. I think there was a British force called in, the Black Watch or something. My father was also at the stelling when the boats came in from Wismar with victims. He was never the same after that.

FM

1. The British Forces were immediately called to Guyana which secured places and took necessary actions.

 

2. The incidents at Wismar plus the state of those who were brought to Georgetown were indeed a scene to be witnessed.

 

3. At Wismar, four of the individuals who were savagely killed were my cousin, two other family and my godfather.

FM
Originally Posted by VVP:
 

Arite go tell dem fuh stap rabbing dem coolie people and everything gun be all rite.

So I assume that Indians can continue to rob and rape other Indians.  I mean if the end of black robberies means that all will be well that must be your thought process. 

FM
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
 

The radical notion that the PNC should not be beating and murdering innocent Indos as was their hallowed custom until circa 2006?

Yes of course.  In the 60s there wasn't any violence of Indians on Africans. Between 1957 and 1964 and 1992 and 2015 there was never any attempt to politically/economically exclude blacks.

 

Oooh these evil black man beating up all those Indos who so pine to love him, and only refuse because of how he treats them.

 

Your attempt at pretending that all racism in Guyana is from blacks towards Indians is hilarious, and you will be laughed at by blacks old enough to have lived through the Janet/Cheddi regime of the 60s, and young enough to have suffered under Jagdeo/Ramotar.

FM
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
 

 

My maternal grandfather recounts a fairly balanced picture of the 50s and 60s. He recounts Indian on Black violence. Black on Indian violence. Black heroism at Mackenzie/Wismar. So I think I'm fully au fait with the history. I don't get my history from Freedom House.

 

My grandfather recounted to me how a Black man (his friend) threw Indian kids into sacks to hide them and then ferry them on the pretense of carrying away pigs in bags away from Wismar during the massacre.

 

And no I don't think the overwhelming majority of Black people wanna do anything more than live in peace and quiet with their Indo countrymen.

 

You have in your head this idea of ROAR you project onto me. That's where you go wrong. Just as the PNC is a diverse organization so was ROAR. Ravi Dev was not some cult leader where we all heard the gospel at his feet.

And yet knowing all of this you hold on to the notion that Africans/PNC must take the blame for 100% of racism in Guyana, and that Indians/PPP haven't been equally vile, differing only in the methods which they use to ethnically oppress.

FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×