nonsense!

the swami dabbled in gross race politics and is thus fair game

you are free to worship this unholy fraud . . . i will verbally abuse him as i see fit

Redux, I am amazed at how silly you are. How did the Swami promote race based politics? He spoke out against those who attacked Indians as racists because they supported the PPP. You do not apply the same yardstick to David Hinds, ACDA, others. The Swami has an obligation to speak out on behalf of his constituency. Now he is being harassed? And people like yourself are silent about this? In the same manner, I argue that the charges against Jagdeo are frivolous...he was simply relating what he heard or felt was happening in some communities. Your statement means that you have a CLOSED mind. Shame on you brother!

i don't know wtf my post has to do with David Hinds or Eric Philips . . . i don't know these people

the swami created a fake 'issue' to transmit his unholy apan jhaat message

it is called dog whistling u barely-disguised spear carrier

your defense of the execrable Bharrat Jagdeo exposed your scales

so cut the crap! i would be ashamed to claim an operator like you as my "brother"

you are free to worship this unholy fraud . . . i will verbally abuse him as i see fit

There you go again with your nonsense. The words of a closed mind. What makes him "unholy"? Because you said so? You knucklehead. This is nothing more than character assassination...you totally bypassed the gist of the article which pointed out that the Swami was verbally attached by PNC goons. Is that OK? Or is this free speech in your view? 

Its one thing to argue that Jagdeo promoted fear mongering (I have no problem with this) but promoting "racism" because he was reporting what the PNC operatives were doing (and yes, I admit, PPP operatives were doing the same)? The verdict on this matter is still...I guess you are judge and jury...good thing you are not at the helm of power. 

yaaawwn . . . go re-read my previous post and try purchase some proper boots to cover your cloven hooves

Exposing your true colors and mindset, eh? You people are quick to attack people because you have a "groupthink" mentality. You are willing to throw out the baby with the bathwater (meaning all the good deeds the Swami has done: a progressive school, blood drive, etc does not mean anything) and you cannot think for yourself....others do it for you. Just think, if I did not catch you making such silly statements, it might have gone unnoticed... 

Suh, Redux and Caribj is the same fella? At times, I feel Redux is Nuff.  

i don't know your swami

that he has done and continues to do good deeds is much appreciated . . . one does not have to be "holy" to be so inclined

exactly how does all that excuse his racist dog whistling ?

Here the "swami" calling on Indos to remember the part of the PNC history under Burnham but conviently forget to mention it was PNC Hoyte who bring Guyana to a democracy and Jail the same  House of Israel bandits, fire Hamilton Green, Lumbumba etc. He also forget PPP brought them back in OP and freedom house as ministers.

If Mr Ramjattan wanted Indians to forget PNC atrocities the least he could have done was to call for PNC accountability

Dear Editor,

A lot has been already said by politicians on both sides in this current campaign to cause consternation, but the one thing that surpasses them all is the call made by one of the leaders of the AFC, Mr. Khemraj Ramjattan, “to move beyond the history of the PNC,” (SN 4/3/2015). This is like granting unconditional amnesty on the one hand and an invitation to historical amnesia on the other. After all, amnesty is amnesia. The two are related.

The PNC has had a long and chequered history in Guyana since its inception almost sixty years ago, including those tumultuous years in government of party paramountcy, when there was no difference between party, state and government. Since Mr. Ramjattan himself knows only too well this history so it would have been helpful to us if he had stated which specific events and which period in the history of the PNC he has in mind.

We agree that invoking history for the purposes of the present political discourse can be fraught with danger. Olivier Nyirubugara, the author of “Complexities and Dangers of Remembering and Forgetting in Rwanda” speaks of the ways in which “ethnic identities and related memories constitute a deadly trap that needs to be torn apart if mass violence is to be eradicated in that country.” He shows how “memories” follow ethnic lines and lead to a state of “cultural hypocrisy” and permanent conflict.

We see how politicians and demagogues, scholars and intellectuals around the world always want us to remember the “lessons of history” to justify policy, influence opinion and win votes. Americans are reminded of Pearl Harbour as an annual ritual, and China uses every dispute with its neigbours to remind its population of Japanese atrocities.

Having accepted the view that history is often manipulated for propaganda purposes, I am unaware of the call anywhere in the world to forget history without any accountability. To underscore the importance of history, the inimitable George Orwell is reputed to have said: “Whoever controls the past controls the future. Whoever controls the present controls the past.” History is wound up in the very theologies of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. And as far as the Jews are concerned we know no people has insisted more that history has a purpose and humanity a destiny.

We have a duty to remember history. Pope Francis has recently reminded the world of the Armenian genocide much to the annoyance of current Turkish leaders, as the world is marking its 100th anniversary It has been reported that the Chinese President Xi Jinping is calling on Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to take responsibility for Japanese atrocities both before and during the Second World War, and Abe is expected to make a major statement to mark the 70th anniversary marking the end of the war. Nazi war criminals and the perpetrators of the Bosnian genocide are hunted down and brought to justice.

Those of us who follow events in the United States will know that no American politician, including Obama, speaks without invoking, “our founding fathers,” many of whom were slave owners. Only recently, days after Mr. Ramjattan’s bizarre call, President Obama, paying homage to John Lewis and other heroes of the Civil Rights movement, stood on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma to mark the 50th anniversary of Bloody Sunday, the event that was the turning point in the Civil Rights movement.

In Guyana, we have our own version of Black History Month and Guyanese are involved in the struggle for reparations for slavery which hopefully will become a reality one day. We observe Emancipation Day and Arrival Month. We remember the Berbice Slave Rebellion and have set up one of the most imposing monuments, at the Square of the Revolution, in its memory, and we teach our children about the Demerara Martyr, John Smith. We remember the Enmore Martyrs. We never forget the Haitian Revolution that shook empires all around the world.

Mere remembering, however, without healing and closure will only ensure permanent suspicion and conflict. Nelson Mandela has shown how we can remember and heal at the same time. Under the guidance of Archbishop Desmond Tutu, South Africans have been engaged in one of the most momentous experiments in world history aiming at truth and reconciliation. The lesson for us in Guyana is that either we seek reconciliation or live in perpetual fear of one another.

Let us bear in mind that reconciliation is not what Mr. Ramjattan is advocating. He is not calling for us to guard against the “malady of history” in the Nietzschean sense, where it can be manipulated for cheap political gains, nor is he pointing out to us the pitfalls of “historicism” as described by Karl Popper. He is simply urging an arbitrary blanket, ugly one-sided cover-up of a sordid phase of our history. But exactly, which particular events of PNC history he wants us to forget?

Does he have in mind for example the accommodation the PNC had with Britain and the United States to remove the PPP from office? Does he have in mind the rigged elections from 1968 to 1985, with thousands of dead people voting? Does he have in mind the terror unleashed on this nation by the thugs of the House of Israel, or when being “caught” with a loaf of bread was a criminal offence?

Or the terror when a prominent trade unionist was taken aboard a GDF plane and threatened to be thrown overboard? Or, does he have in mind the many political murders culminating in the murder of Walter Rodney?

There are other questions that surround Mr. Ramjattan’s call. Who, for example, is his target audience? He obviously could not be asking the PNC and the authors and perpetrators of that history to move beyond their own history. After all the PNC stands adamantly defiant regarding its history. Time and again, the current leader of the PNC, who himself boasts of the credentials of a historian, has said in no uncertain terms that there is nothing to apologize for. On the contrary, there is talk of building a memorial for the victims of the ill-fated Sun Chapman. What is there to move beyond when there is nothing to apologize for?

So it is reasonable to conclude that he is asking the Indians of this country, who to a large extent perceive themselves as the victims of that history, to forget it. I believe that Mr. Ramjattan lost a golden opportunity. If he wanted Indians to forget PNC atrocities the least he could have done was to call for PNC accountability. After all there is the precedent of Mr. Raphael Trotman who urged the PNC to apologize for its excesses. Had he shown the same courage and fortitude, then the Indians of this country could begin to take him seriously. Otherwise, political ambitions apart, we would simply be piling injustice upon injustice.

It is interesting to note that the coalition campaign fancies success because of the large number of young voters who have no knowledge of the PNC era. Would it not be better for young voters to be educated about our history? To gleefully exploit and prey upon young people’s alleged ignorance is one thing. To conspire to enable ignorance is quite another. This is what Mr. Ramjattan’s invitation to historical amnesia will ensure.

In conclusion, I am not sure whether Mr. Ramjattan’s call reflected a genuine desire for reconciliation in which case, one-sided as it is, it could have warranted some serious consideration It it is obvious that he sees the history of the PNC as a major impediment to his political aspirations. But, in directly calling on Indians to move beyond this history of the PNC, he is asking Indians to negate and deny their own experiences. He could go down in history as yet another Indian politician sacrificing Indians on the altar of political expediency and his personal ambition.

Yours faithfully,

Swami Aksharananda

har har harrr!

Thanks Sachin. The  So-called swami is an Indian supremacist like Indian KKK Ravi Dev.

Do you know what "supremacist" mean? These people are supremacists? You are using the lingo of Freddie Kissoon, that self-hating Indian. You guys get nervous when Indians assert themselves because it destroys the myth of the passive Indian. As far as I remember, the Swami and Ms Shah were reacting to the attacks on Indians by those who objected to their support of the PPP. I read those letters and was in Guyana at the time.  

What's wrong about highlighting past PNC reign of terror and brutality?  Alyuh like to pretend Guyana's history started in 1992.  Well few (5-10%) seem to want to take a chance, well we see if they just unwittingly signed their new "indentureship" contracts.

Good point Base. I guess our history will now be revised and start in 2015.

I don't have a problem with "highlighting past PNC reign of terror". I have a problem when the holi 'swami' forget that the PPP recycle the terrorist...

shucks..even I think you're nuff...but then you say some smart stuff, and I become uncertain

bai, neroo still insists i am TK

seignet once asked me if i wuz David Hinds

now nuff and caribny

i beginning to get confused mehself

heh heh heh heh

Yuh telling me. I am the confused one.

I might not agree with this 100%.

What I know of Swami is that he is focused on the upliftment of the political LOT of the hindus of Guyana.

Hindus make up some 34% of Guyana but shared even under the PPP, less than 10% of the political power.

Today under this new Government hindus now have less than 5% of the political power at the executive level.

This is a socio-political crisis that has to be repaired if Guyana is ever to heal.

Guyana has always been a Georgetown - Christian based ruling class.

People like Cheddi Jagan fought against this urban oppression of the rural people.

Brian...34% hindus a little inflated more like higher 20's.

The swami didn't tell people to vote on issues.  He didn't urge Indians to form cross ethnic alliances.  He urged them to vote PPP because it is an Indian party. 

The fact remains is that the PPP decided on a strategy of ethnic fear and this is what people are responding to.   Did the swami tell the PPP that this strategy was wrong and divisive, and would ultimately hurt Indians, as their numbers continue to dwindle?  NO!  He JOINED the chorus.

And by the way I am unaware that either David Hinds or Eric Phillips have told blacks to support the PNC, only because it is black.  You ought to be aware that David Hinds was part of the Afro Guyanese group which confronted an African dictator.  This at a time when Cheddi was giving Burnham "constructive criticism" and trying to join him in a government of national unity.

Part of his criticism was the blatant racism which that African dictator displayed towards Indians.

I have no problem with some one claiming that the Burnham regime was racist towards Indians, because it was.  I do have a problem when the sole justification raised for voting PPP is because if race.

This becomes anti black because it is tribal.  Any appeals to race as a sole criteria for voting is an appeal for ethnic domination, meaning the domination of the other ethnic groups.

In any case, given the shifting demographics of Guyana appeals to tribal loyalties is a fast way to lose an election.  Now imagine if the PPP hadn't terrified Africans with their blatant tribal screams, the African turn out might have been lower, and they would have won.

So the PPP and the swami failed in their objective and are now left with a PNC dominated government.

Until the PPP becomes able to make some inroads into the black/mixed vote, their future prospects are dim.  The fastest growing part of the population is the mixed, and in 2011 (based on the LAPOP study cited here by TK) almost 80% of this population refused to identify with the PPP.

And here is the rub.  A holy man of any religion is supposed to provide moral leadership.  Appealing to ethnic fear is NOT a sign of morality in a nation which has already been severely damaged by ethnic fear.  It is ethnic fear which gave us Forbes Burnham and Bharat Jagdeo!

Our history is already revised.  The 1960s is described as a slaughter of Indians by Africans.  The part where Africans were slaughtered by Indians is conveniently forgotten.  We hear of Wismar, but the bombing of the Sun Chapman is omitted.

You see in Guyana Indians are special people.  Africans are scum, and any Africans which objects to this characterization is deemed an Indian hating racist.

Guyana has NO where to go with this attitude, because the net result is a severely anxious and stressed African population, who are frustrated by the endless attempts to stigmatize them.

OK. This is a good analysis...a far more sobering one offered by knucklehead Redux. 

However, I feel that if there is one thing the Swami is guilty of it is not speaking out during the Jagdeo/Ramotar presidency. I am still miffed at the vitriol against him, knowing fully well that he did not actually tell Indians to vote for the PPP. He was reacting to those who were attacking Indians as racists because they choose the PPP as their vehicle of choice. As I said, I was in Guyana at the time. 

The content of his letters does not justify the attacks on him in a post-election period, as was done recently. This climate has been created by the likes of Freddie who gets giddy with his unfortunate and unforgivable attacks on the man.

This is my point.

I do not think that every Indian who votes PPP is a racist, even though the PPP did engage in systematic discrimination against Africans.  Just as the PNC did against Indians.  In both instances the supporters moved from denying such racism existed, to justifying it.

But that is the stuff of a society where two radically different groups of almost equal size exist.  Guyana isn't unique and there are many places which are worse off in this regard.

But I expect that some one who holds himself as a leader, and NOT a politician, should rise to a higher standard.  I expect the PPP to engage in a racially divisive campaign as its abuse of the African/mixed population has precluded inroads there.  It is therefore left with the Indian, and to a lesser degree the Amerindian populations.

What I expect from the swami is the same thing that I would expect from the Anglican Bishop. An analysis to take Guyana to some better future.  The future being one where people can feel included, and can feel assured of fair treatment without regard to ethnicity, culture, skin color, geography or social class.  The swami did NOT engage in that level of discussion.

As the Indian population dwindles and as inter ethnic miscegenation increases, it is a mistake for Indo Guyanese to think that they can maintain relevance through engaging in tribal voting.  Now I don't expect semi literate cane cutters to understand this.  I do expect a leader to.

Afro Guyanese do, which is why they openly embraced Moses into their campaign.  They know that without some Indo vote, even if just a sliver, as we got in this election (no more then 10%) guarantees of victory cannot be assured.

And I repeat my caution.  The coalition won with a massive African/mixed turn out, and with a small Indian and Amerindian vote.  This remained an ethnically based election, so they cannot proceed without being sensitive to the fears of the majority of the East Indian and Amerindian populations, 90+% and 65+% rejected them.  The people who are screaming that Moses provided the winning margins are undermining this conversation which needs to occur.

The coalition is NOT cross ethnic in its support. It is HOPED that it will GOVERN in a cross ethnic manner to reduce the fears of those who perceive that an African dominant party leading the coalition ill translate into their exclusion.

Originally Posted by caribny:

"And here is the rub.  A holy man of any religion is supposed to provide moral leadership.  Appealing to ethnic fear is NOT a sign of morality in a nation which has already been severely damaged by ethnic fear.  It is ethnic fear which gave us Forbes Burnham and Bharat Jagdeo!"

Classic..i can't find words to commend you.

OK, but I guess we are on the same page with this but with some nuances. We both seem to accept that this coalition is far from being a government of national unity or multiracial (even with Moses as part of the coalition). We have to judge a government not by who is in position of power but how much power they have and how that power is used to implement policies that will lead to the creation of a multiracial government.

The problem then is this:

If the Granger government cannot establish a government of national unity (hopefully he can by the time the next election comes around), where does this leaves us as a nation divided. A repeat of this election scenario will not solve the problem in 20101. How does the current government bridge the racial gap so to speak? Constitutional changes? Devolution of power? Indian in charge of APNU? Balance police and army? And remember, the PPP still remains the largest party, as of today...

Regarding the Swami,...here we are in disagreement.    

Carib would openly accept the swami if he was black.

I agree with you, I erred and my data was out of date.

The data I was looking at was 15 years old.

The updated date said the HINDUS are 28 percent.

Still having less than 5 % of the executive power is not proportionate.

As Mr. Trotman said as Minister of Governance, we cannot have one group benefiting at the expense of another.

Despite your skepticism we need a conversation on the emerging demographics of Guyana, and on the reality of our ethnic insecurity.  We need to update what is a 1960s version of the roots of this insecurity.

This conversation should NOT be led by the government, nor should any politician be involved.  Now I would have hoped that some one of the swami's stature would have  said two things. 

Firstly, not every Indian who votes PPP does so because he harbors individual animosity towards Africans, nor wishes harm to come to them.

Secondly that it was a pity that the PPP chose to adapt a tribal racially EXCLUSIVE campaign rather than one which sought to unite Guyanese across the boundaries of class, religion, race, and geography.

He should have cautioned Indians that attempting to remain relevant in Guyana only through the tribal vote is futile in the long term as the Indian population has become more complex,  and as the Indian population is dwindling.

He opted not to, instead deciding to use language which the vast majority of Africans/mixed, and even several Indians, saw as being layered on top of an already racial mischievous campaign strategy which Jagdeo, and Kwame McCoy chose to adopt.

Now in terms of the rest.

1. Image is important, which is why I shared Jay's concern that the coalition might be looking "too African", even though it includes 6 Indians, 2 Amerindians and 3 mixed people, meaning that there are 17 Africans.  In the beginning we were not hearing enough from Moses, though this seems to being rectified now. Harmon should not have been so vocal in the beginning.

2.  Engaging society at all levels is important.  Will the coalition gov't protect the rights of the sugar workers as Guysuco attempts to stiff them with their NIS, pensions, and other contributions?  What of the rice farmers?  What of the problems of Linden and Georgetown. What of our disgraceful educational system with the resulting massive youth unemployment.  What of the Amerindian and his being reduced to being a charity case.  Helping people solve their daily problems will go a long way.

3.  We have to move away from the pretense that ethnic groups are monolithic.  What does a highly educated urban person who happens to be Indian have in common with a cane cutter in Berbice.  Ditto a highly educated African professional with the vendors on Regent St.  An ethnically based political party cannot encompass the needs of all of these people. The result being that only the interests of the elites are represented.

4.  Local government.  Guyanese have to become involved in the administration of their communities and the only way to do this is to allow strong governance at the local level with representatives DIRECTLY elected by the people.  There is no Indo or Afro way to collect garbage or keep the drains clean.

5.  Civic society.  Youth groups, business groups, community groups, have to become more active and less dependent on government patronage.

6.  Constitutional reform that is BOTTOM up, and not TOP down.  Meaning that while the gov't will start the process there should be input from civic society and from the population at large.

7.  There has to be a conversation about ethnic insecurity LED by civic society with NO politicians involved.  The Ethnic Relations Commission should be structured as a PRIVATE NGO and not a gov't agency.

The swami should stay out of Politics.

HMM,,,some food for thought here. Good thinking on your part.

Two issues:

1) Why should politicians not be allowed to take part in conversations about ethnic insecurity. They created the problems in the first place. They have to be included in the discussions...they are the ones who will a) give credibility to such discussions and b) they are the ones who have to provide the impetus and give teeth to any changes that are geared towards addressing ethnic insecurity. Besides in our small society, it will be hard pressed to find such "pure" individuals. Kwayana reminded us that "we are all guilty races".; and c)) We cannot simply leave this major issue that has divided us since the birth of the nation into the hands of non-politicians. You are assuming that they are not equipped to deal with this national problem.

2) Your discussion above did not consider another alternative that has worked in such places like Holland and Nigeria where ideological/ethnic/religious parties exists (we cannot simply erase our ethnicity, though we are all Guyanese) and form governing coalition through some grand coalition. This kind of approach will probably be more inclusive, while addressing the insecurities of people.  

1.  The politicians DID NOT create the issue of ethnic insecurity.  The merely exploit it.  And they have every reason to continue as this provides their source of power.  So they should not be involved in this discussion, otherwise we will be bogged with the 60s (Wismar vs Sun Chapman) and Burnham vs, Jagdeo.  Now how productive will that be?

2.  Politicians are our SERVANTS. NOT our MASTERS.  When civic society communicates to the politicians what is expected of them, then they will comply.....or else.

3.  Why does our ethnicity have to be manifested in politics, where it merely creates a potentially violent avenue of conflict.  Yes it does have to be addressed, and I am fundamentally opposed to those simpletons who think that an discussion of race is racist. 

But the notion that I have more in common with a market vendor, only because she is African, than I might have with you, is really simplistic.  The Indo and Afro vendors at Bourda market share loads more in common with each other than they do with either of us.

People are complex beings and ethnicity is only PART of what they are.  And indeed there is a lot more cultural interchange between Guyanese of different ancestries  than we are aware of.  

Creolese is a form of English which was developed by the slaves to fit into their African linguistic systems. Yet it is spoken by Indo Guyanese, who will be more easily understood by a Nigerian than they will be by some villager from Uttar Pradesh.  Yet this same creolese is spiced with all sorts of Hindi origin words, including those that Guyanese aren't even aware of.

Mitwa, the Swami is not an Indian Supremacist. I know him very well. He has done more than the PNC and the PPP put together in educating and graduating children including those who have been orphaned. He is a good and decent man. I know him, I respect him and will stand with him. Whoever attacked him verbally are led by evil politiciand who want power.

No politician attack the swami verbally,some black guys

(ordinary citizens)ask him some questions in distasteful

manner,which he refused to answer.

Carib,

I do not agree with everything you said above, but this is the kind of conversation we need on this site...not the cuss down one liners I have seen elsewhere. Will address some of the issues raised later.

He was not attacked. He placed himself infront of the firing line when attacked Ramjattan. He was confronted verbally and he refused to answer.

He comes across like a Hindutwah. The PPP is known to use religious leaders as stooges to muster support from the Hindu community.  I don't know him. But I do know of so called swamis who use women for free massages and sex. Not because they wear the saffron robe, makes them a man of God.

That is straight up bullshit. Creolese is of any kind is not a creative enterprise of adults. It is a transcription of the universal mentalese, the inner language native to the human intellect, for language. It would emerge if the non English speaker was African or Indian sr Serb because it is what is natural to six years old all over the world....yes any and all creoles are the product of six year olds.  English is a centum language meaning it has influences from hundreds of variants of that branch of the Indo European family tree so there are much to many word  meaning that is oblivious to the ordinary person but firtile soil for linguists. Actually linguistics is a form of paleontology of language!

Also language is not fixed. It constantly evolves. The language contains dutch, Spanish,  Hindi cognates. It also include many words from native peoples. It is not created it is and evolved system. It is what happens when people get together, they talk. If the do not have a common language, they make one up. Every deaf child makes up a complete language on their own if he or she has hearing parents with no sign language experience or outside a sign language community. Creolese is no miracle or genus creation. It is what humans do as naturally as going to the bathroom.