Skip to main content

Django posted:
caribny posted:
seignet posted:

Immigration stopped because Gandhi felt the treatment of Indians were poor in the colonies yet many Indians went to Africa working in building the railroads.

You all cannot have your cake and eat it too.  You scream that indenture was as bad as slavery which is why India stopped it.  The BGEIA tried to fool the gov't of India that life in BG was great and that Indians should migrate there, even when not needed for work on the estates.

The goal of the BGEIA was to have an Indian population which outnumbered the African and colored populations. They wanted this so that they would dominate BG if universal suffrage were to be implemented.

If Venezuelans swamped Guyana in 2018 and then demanded to dominate that country because of higher numbers I bet you will object.  So try to see it from the point of view of those who were in BG in 1924.  They were NOT going to allow their interests to be compromised and to be ignored because an immigrant group outnumbered them.

Carib,

You on to something that have some merit,the Luckhoo-Noonan Scheme may have triggered the division,between the two major ethnic group of Guyana.

I haven't got time as yet to read up on the old documents during that period.

Bull shit or yuh falling for this chap koolaid. Drink it and you are dead to good reasoning just like him. Don't go where angels fail to tread.

seignet posted:
Hatred for Indian ppl caused you all to be robbed by the Putagees. Now, you claiming the Indians forever has a scheme to marginalize blacks. 

i saw what you did there

but i jus move the goal post back to its original place

lol

Last edited by Former Member
caribny posted:
Labba posted:
 

Hey hey hey...soh ayoo bringin in dem Haitian blackman dem or wa? Ayoo plannin and schemin? And seeing coolie jumbie, bacoo, moon gazer, doopy and all dem? Hey hey hey...

I have said many times that "creole Guyanese" (Africans, mixed and Portuguese) have a different sense of ethnicity and nationhood than do Indians.  We see ourselves first and foremost as Guyanese.  We define our ethnicity within the context of Guyanese.  Our ethnic identities are also fluid. 

The majority of Indians put an emphasis on their "Indian" identity.  There are conversations about the degree to which they connect with India and the degree to which they are accepted by Indians.  I have NEVER seen any conversation about similar levels of identifications of "creole Guyanese".  To the contrary most Indians do not seem to understand this concept of a creole culture and in fact see it as a form of ethnic genocide.

So black people aren't interested in populating Guyana with Haitians.  I bet if thousands of Haitians suddenly arrived, with their foreign language and customs many Afro Guyanese will not be happy.  We don't see our salvation in setting up some "African kingdom".   On the other hand whether Indo Guyanese agree or disagree with the concept of Indesh (and I will not opine on which will be the dominant opinion) they can certainly Understand the concept of some "Indian homeland" whether or not they agree with this notion.

We on the other hand cannot even agree as to whether David Granger and Raphael Trotman are "black" or "mixed.   We don't have a mutually agreed upon notion as to what is "African" culture in Guyana.  There is way more fluidity in creole identities.  Ravi Dev and Prashad view this as a weakness. I on the other hand view this as a strength in that we aren't locked tightly into some box and have more freedom in individually defining ourselves as we wish.

Hey hey hey...ohhh...yu is a big bad culture bully? Yuh doan tink dem coolie people gat equal right foh see demselves how dem want? BTW...Granger sure know he gat foh pack de civil service wid he mattie. Hey hey hey...yu can argue if he blackman...he know powah and de can connive...hey hey hey

caribny posted:
Labba posted:
 

Hey hey hey...soh ayoo bringin in dem Haitian blackman dem or wa? Ayoo plannin and schemin? And seeing coolie jumbie, bacoo, moon gazer, doopy and all dem? Hey hey hey...

I have said many times that "creole Guyanese" (Africans, mixed and Portuguese) have a different sense of ethnicity and nationhood than do Indians.  We see ourselves first and foremost as Guyanese.  We define our ethnicity within the context of Guyanese.  Our ethnic identities are also fluid. 

The majority of Indians put an emphasis on their "Indian" identity.  There are conversations about the degree to which they connect with India and the degree to which they are accepted by Indians.  I have NEVER seen any conversation about similar levels of identifications of "creole Guyanese".  To the contrary most Indians do not seem to understand this concept of a creole culture and in fact see it as a form of ethnic genocide.

So black people aren't interested in populating Guyana with Haitians.  I bet if thousands of Haitians suddenly arrived, with their foreign language and customs many Afro Guyanese will not be happy.  We don't see our salvation in setting up some "African kingdom".   On the other hand whether Indo Guyanese agree or disagree with the concept of Indesh (and I will not opine on which will be the dominant opinion) they can certainly Understand the concept of some "Indian homeland" whether or not they agree with this notion.

We on the other hand cannot even agree as to whether David Granger and Raphael Trotman are "black" or "mixed.   We don't have a mutually agreed upon notion as to what is "African" culture in Guyana.  There is way more fluidity in creole identities.  Ravi Dev and Prashad view this as a weakness. I on the other hand view this as a strength in that we aren't locked tightly into some box and have more freedom in individually defining ourselves as we wish.

Yuh know the putagees claimed European status to escape Guyana from Burnham whilst the UF helped dem removed their wealth. 

How good is your education. Are yuh blinded by hating cooolie ppl.

Labba posted:

Hey hey hey...ohhh...yu is a big bad culture bully? Yuh doan tink dem coolie people gat equal right foh see demselves how dem want? BTW...Granger sure know he gat foh pack de civil service wid he mattie. Hey hey hey...yu can argue if he blackman...he know powah and de can connive...hey hey hey

banna you trying to hide from the topic

have some pride lil

Last edited by Former Member
ronan posted:
 

for context . . . there was a bestial pogrom against Indian people by afro terrorists at Wismar in 1964

i have NEVER heard any Afro-Guyanese here characterize that event as a "lie" or cuss those referencing it as KKK or racists

thanks

This is it.  The narrative of "black man bad, Indian good, so black man must apologize" is what dominates the narrative.

Look at all of those people screaming that Granger must be inclusive when the same ones had NOTHING to say when the PPP was running Guyana as if it was a province of India.  Not only did they deny that this was happening but the screamed "Indian Holocaust".

So where there is evidence that, contrary to what the narrative in Guyana is, that Burnham started racism in Guyana, we see that it was the BGEIA which began the ethnic competition for dominance.  When thus fact is pointed out where hear screams of "Indian Genocide".

There is a DIRECT line between the behavior of the BGEIA in 1924 and that of the PPP between 2000-2015.

caribny posted:
ronan posted:
 

for context . . . there was a bestial pogrom against Indian people by afro terrorists at Wismar in 1964

i have NEVER heard any Afro-Guyanese here characterize that event as a "lie" or cuss those referencing it as KKK or racists

thanks

This is it.  The narrative of "black man bad, Indian good, so black man must apologize" is what dominates the narrative.

Look at all of those people screaming that Granger must be inclusive when the same ones had NOTHING to say when the PPP was running Guyana as if it was a province of India.  Not only did they deny that this was happening but the screamed "Indian Holocaust".

So where there is evidence that, contrary to what the narrative in Guyana is, that Burnham started racism in Guyana, we see that it was the BGEIA which began the ethnic competition for dominance.  When thus fact is pointed out where hear screams of "Indian Genocide".

There is a DIRECT line between the behavior of the BGEIA in 1924 and that of the PPP between 2000-2015.

Found another Report of Balancing the GPF and Public Service,Forbes Burnham requested which the PPP boycotted from attending the Inquiry.

good read,will post later.

It was mentioned Racism was exacerbated in the 60's by both the PNC and PPP.The two major races weren't so much polarized before that period.

Also mentioned after India got Independence,Nehru said, East Indian Immigrants of British Colonies shouldn't look to India,pledge allegiance to the Country they reside.

Our Historians fail to mention such in their narratives.

Last edited by Django
Django posted:
 

It was mentioned Racism was exacerbated in the 60's by both the PNC and PPP.The two major races weren't so much polarized before that period.

Also mentioned after India got Independence,Nehru said, East Indian Immigrants of British Colonies shouldn't look to India,pledge allegiance to the Country they reside.

Our Historians fail to mention such in their narratives.

The mere fact that Guyana descended into a violent civil war shows that people were very polarized.  Their feelings were subjugated but it was a quick trigger for all of this distrust to quickly manifest into dehumanizing violence.   The trigger was the impending departures of the colonialists, which opened up space for Indian vs. black (and maybe mixed) conflict to occur.  The colonial authorities kept both subjugated but their absence then meant that conflict began to occur. Each seeing Guyana as a zero sum game.

It is clear that the BGEIA did NOT see British Guiana as a multi ethnic/cultural/religious space where various groups should engage in mutually beneficial interactions.  They saw BG as a colony which Indians must numerically dominate.  And there were even wiling to pretend as if horrendous abuse of Indian indentures wasn't occurring.  This so that they could entice more Indians to migrate, not necessarily as indentures.

The fact that India felt compelled to tell Indo Caribbean people (and others) to shift their gaze from India in fact strengthens my contention that Indians did NOT see their place within a context of a multi ethnic/cultural/religious society.  Instead saw themselves as a separate "nation" sharing some "real estate" with other groups, but not having any interest in cooperation.  In fact continuing to see their role as carving out a piece of India in a piece of real estate located in South America.

D2 wanted an in depth discussion of Indo Guyanese cultural and ethnic identities, and how these melded into that of a diverse nation. He was called an Indian Hater, and a man who demanded an Indian Holocaust.

Why is it that the same people who will call Granger and Indian Hating Racist and daily scream that he is turning Guyana into an African nation, become hysterical whenever issues of Indian attitudes towards non Indians is raised. Attempt to discuss the Indian role in our ethnic tensions and people melt down into irrationality.

Well until Indians start having an intelligent debate on this we will not move forward.

So just as people demand that the PNC and blacks as a whole cease their paranoid behavior towards Indians you need to discuss what Indians should be doing to enable them to stop doing this.  It is as clear as day where the root causes of black paranoia towards Indians came from. 

Labba posted:
Granger sure know he gat foh pack de civil service wid he mattie. Hey hey hey...yu can argue if he blackman...he know powah and de can connive...hey hey hey

And Jagdeo ensured that the Indian oligarchs benefitted by dominating top level positions/contracts  in state owned entities.

So what is your point?  Now I know that you are the type of Indian who cannot see outside of your "Indianness" and that you don't give a damn about Guyanese who aren't Indian.

caribny posted:
Labba posted:
Granger sure know he gat foh pack de civil service wid he mattie. Hey hey hey...yu can argue if he blackman...he know powah and de can connive...hey hey hey

And Jagdeo ensured that the Indian oligarchs benefitted by dominating top level positions/contracts  in state owned entities.

So what is your point?  Now I know that you are the type of Indian who cannot see outside of your "Indianness" and that you don't give a damn about Guyanese who aren't Indian.

Tribalism more like it-there are no such persons as Guyanese.

Leh meh hear yuh sey "leh bygones be bygones."

Instead yuh black fellas will search heaven and earth to find wah the cooolieman sey and duh to justify the hatred.

caribny posted:
Labba posted:
Granger sure know he gat foh pack de civil service wid he mattie. Hey hey hey...yu can argue if he blackman...he know powah and de can connive...hey hey hey

And Jagdeo ensured that the Indian oligarchs benefitted by dominating top level positions/contracts  in state owned entities.

So what is your point?  Now I know that you are the type of Indian who cannot see outside of your "Indianness" and that you don't give a damn about Guyanese who aren't Indian.

You full of shit, the same shit over and over.  Your dunces in Govt keep coming up empty!  You can go to hell with "our" Indianness!!

caribny posted:

It is clear that the BGEIA did NOT see British Guiana as a multi ethnic/cultural/religious space where various groups should engage in mutually beneficial interactions.  They saw BG as a colony which Indians must numerically dominate.  And there were even wiling to pretend as if horrendous abuse of Indian indentures wasn't occurring.  This so that they could entice more Indians to migrate, not necessarily as indentures.

The British Plantations Owners treated the East Indian Indentured laborers poorly,they had no real representation,up to the early 1920's they were considered to be a inferior race,an Indian on official documents described as "cooly race" .Every East Indian high or low,rich or poor is a "cooly"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is a paragraph taken from The "Report on the SCHEME FOR INDIAN EMIGRATION TO BRITISH GUIANA"

"We asked Mr. Lukhoo in the course of his evidence whether the following statement made by the non-official members of the Imperial Legislative Council in their letter addressed to Sir Barnes, the then Member of the Viceroy Executive Council in 1917" was,true of British Guiana or not,it is known fact that the general body of Europeans in the colonies consider Asiatics as racially and fundamentally inferior to them. When therefore such men obtained privileged control over ,Asiatics, the position of the latter is reduced to that of mere cattle, and even the most humane planter does not succeed lifting his Asiatic employees in the social  and moral scale. Mr. Luckhoo stated "Of course "cattle" is a strong word to use,but that is exactly but that is exactly what is thought of Indians here.He added that Indians were considered to be inferior in intelligence to others,including Africans [ change from the derogatory N word]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read and wrote this with a heavy heart,i can picture how my ancestors were treated by the British Colonial Planters.

Last edited by Django
Django posted:
caribny posted:

It is clear that the BGEIA did NOT see British Guiana as a multi ethnic/cultural/religious space where various groups should engage in mutually beneficial interactions.  They saw BG as a colony which Indians must numerically dominate.  And there were even wiling to pretend as if horrendous abuse of Indian indentures wasn't occurring.  This so that they could entice more Indians to migrate, not necessarily as indentures.

The British Plantations Owners treated the East Indian Indentured laborers poorly,they had no real representation,up to the early 1920's they were considered to be a inferior race,an Indian on official documents described as "cooly race" .Every East Indian high or low,rich or poor is a "cooly"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is a paragraph taken from The "Report on the SCHEME FOR INDIAN EMIGRATION TO BRITISH GUIANA"

"We asked Mr. Lukhoo in the course of his evidence whether the following statement made by the non-official members of the Imperial Legislative Council in their letter addressed to Sir Barnes, the then Member of the Viceroy Executive Council in 1917" was,true of British Guiana or not,it is known fact that the general body of Europeans in the colonies consider Asiatics as racially and fundamentally inferior to them. When therefore such men obtained privileged control over ,Asiatics, the position of the latter is reduced to that of mere cattle, and even the most humane planter does not succeed lifting his Asiatic employees in the social  and moral scale. Mr. Luckhoo stated "Of course "cattle" is a strong word to use,but that is exactly but that is exactly what is thought of Indians here.He added that Indians were considered to be inferior in intelligence to others,including Africans [ change from the derogatory N word]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read and wrote this with a heavy heart,i can picture how my ancestors were treated by the British Colonial Planters.

Aahh, shaddup, dem mattie in India treated them wuss than dem Whiteman!

Django posted:
Baseman posted:

Aahh, shaddup, dem mattie in India treated them wuss than dem Whiteman!

Bhai,doan mek me get vex an put some cuss pun yuh r@ss.

You rass don't know how to cuss!  You wan alter bai!

Baseman posted:
Django posted:
Baseman posted:

Aahh, shaddup, dem mattie in India treated them wuss than dem Whiteman!

Bhai,doan mek me get vex an put some cuss pun yuh r@ss.

You rass don't know how to cuss!  You wan alter bai!

You think suh !! I man chilling out now.

seignet posted:

Leh meh hear yuh sey "leh bygones be bygones."

is nah you hollering and cussin that FACTS is lie?

now you sand dancin around the subject muttering about "bygones"

dutty-minded, sick mofo

call yourself a "Christian" . . .  g'wan dahside

Last edited by Former Member

Yuh black fellas telling alot of lies, but this Indian knows that all those lies can never emerge as truths. There are ppl who knows, suh doan tink of conjuring up deeper truths from just reading. 

It is a miserable and grotesque fate which has decreed that the East Indian, spending the span of his days in his native Eastern land, should imitate the habits, the vices and the misery, of the scum of distant European cities which has never been seen; of a people with whom he has nothing in common. Born in the East; in the Land of the Sun: the land of minaret and cupola, of the palm tree and the pipal: of the sun-flower and the citron: of marble tombs and crescent-crowned arches: of hidden courtyards and high zenana walls: of  arcades of the orange and lemon, and of fountains scented with jasmine: the land of attar and pan: of finger nails tinted with henna and eyes rimmed with surma: of veiled and secluded women: of durbars and caparisoned elephants: of deverishes, dancing girls, snake charmers and opium eaters: of yataghans and jeweled slippers and praying carpets: the land of Holi and the Fateha: of a people who still pray on the house tops, and offer sacrifices and burn their dead: of temples built before the Parthenon and gods worshipped before Jupiter; in this ancient land in which the East Indian has his heritage, he lives, not the life of the people around , but the life of the gin-drinking, wife-beating, evil smelling, foul minded and foul-bodied denizens of the slums of  London.       

seignet posted:

Yuh black fellas telling a lot of lies, but this Indian knows that all those lies can never emerge as truths. There are ppl who knows, suh doan tink of conjuring up deeper truths from just reading. 

so tell us, what are the "deeper truths" of the matter that you can't get from "just reading"?

instructive to observe a demented race fascist losing his freakin mind

seriously, if i told anyone sane about the panic . . . yes, "panic" engendered by sharing a few lines from Ravi Dev of all people that tinkered with received wisdom about race relations in Guyana, they would not believe

just watch the collective scurrying to ANYWHERE but . . . by this same seignet, baseman, labba, et al

with all the cussin of "black fellas" talking out of turn. . . i wonder if anybody paying attention to the top of the thread and see HOW this all started

smh

Last edited by Former Member
caribny posted:
Django posted:
 

It was mentioned Racism was exacerbated in the 60's by both the PNC and PPP.The two major races weren't so much polarized before that period.

Also mentioned after India got Independence,Nehru said, East Indian Immigrants of British Colonies shouldn't look to India,pledge allegiance to the Country they reside.

Our Historians fail to mention such in their narratives.

The mere fact that Guyana descended into a violent civil war shows that people were very polarized.  Their feelings were subjugated but it was a quick trigger for all of this distrust to quickly manifest into dehumanizing violence.   The trigger was the impending departures of the colonialists, which opened up space for Indian vs. black (and maybe mixed) conflict to occur.  The colonial authorities kept both subjugated but their absence then meant that conflict began to occur. Each seeing Guyana as a zero sum game.

It is clear that the BGEIA did NOT see British Guiana as a multi ethnic/cultural/religious space where various groups should engage in mutually beneficial interactions.  They saw BG as a colony which Indians must numerically dominate.  And there were even wiling to pretend as if horrendous abuse of Indian indentures wasn't occurring.  This so that they could entice more Indians to migrate, not necessarily as indentures.

The fact that India felt compelled to tell Indo Caribbean people (and others) to shift their gaze from India in fact strengthens my contention that Indians did NOT see their place within a context of a multi ethnic/cultural/religious society.  Instead saw themselves as a separate "nation" sharing some "real estate" with other groups, but not having any interest in cooperation.  In fact continuing to see their role as carving out a piece of India in a piece of real estate located in South America.

D2 wanted an in depth discussion of Indo Guyanese cultural and ethnic identities, and how these melded into that of a diverse nation. He was called an Indian Hater, and a man who demanded an Indian Holocaust.

Why is it that the same people who will call Granger and Indian Hating Racist and daily scream that he is turning Guyana into an African nation, become hysterical whenever issues of Indian attitudes towards non Indians is raised. Attempt to discuss the Indian role in our ethnic tensions and people melt down into irrationality.

Well until Indians start having an intelligent debate on this we will not move forward.

So just as people demand that the PNC and blacks as a whole cease their paranoid behavior towards Indians you need to discuss what Indians should be doing to enable them to stop doing this.  It is as clear as day where the root causes of black paranoia towards Indians came from. 

D2 does hate the East Indian.

Burnham considered Pan-Africanism and so did every black person. One could have felt the transformation of the country.

Multi-ethnic society does not mean everybody has to be of the same mind.

seignet posted:

It is a miserable and grotesque fate which has decreed that the East Indian, spending the span of his days in his native Eastern land, should imitate the habits, the vices and the misery, of the scum of distant European cities which has never been seen; of a people with whom he has nothing in common. Born in the East; in the Land of the Sun: the land of minaret and cupola, of the palm tree and the pipal: of the sun-flower and the citron: of marble tombs and crescent-crowned arches: of hidden courtyards and high zenana walls: of  arcades of the orange and lemon, and of fountains scented with jasmine: the land of attar and pan: of finger nails tinted with henna and eyes rimmed with surma: of veiled and secluded women: of durbars and caparisoned elephants: of deverishes, dancing girls, snake charmers and opium eaters: of yataghans and jeweled slippers and praying carpets: the land of Holi and the Fateha: of a people who still pray on the house tops, and offer sacrifices and burn their dead: of temples built before the Parthenon and gods worshipped before Jupiter; in this ancient land in which the East Indian has his heritage, he lives, not the life of the people around , but the life of the gin-drinking, wife-beating, evil smelling, foul minded and foul-bodied denizens of the slums of  London.       

Siege,

You present a piece from British India Society,way back from 1840.

seignet posted:

D2 does hate the East Indian.

Burnham considered Pan-Africanism and so did every black person. One could have felt the transformation of the country.

Multi-ethnic society does not mean everybody has to be of the same mind.

pitiful red herring(s) being dragged around for mediocre men to sniff, follow and bark 

smfh

Last edited by Former Member
Django posted:
seignet posted:

It is a miserable and grotesque fate which has decreed that the East Indian, spending the span of his days in his native Eastern land, should imitate the habits, the vices and the misery, of the scum of distant European cities which has never been seen; of a people with whom he has nothing in common. Born in the East; in the Land of the Sun: the land of minaret and cupola, of the palm tree and the pipal: of the sun-flower and the citron: of marble tombs and crescent-crowned arches: of hidden courtyards and high zenana walls: of  arcades of the orange and lemon, and of fountains scented with jasmine: the land of attar and pan: of finger nails tinted with henna and eyes rimmed with surma: of veiled and secluded women: of durbars and caparisoned elephants: of deverishes, dancing girls, snake charmers and opium eaters: of yataghans and jeweled slippers and praying carpets: the land of Holi and the Fateha: of a people who still pray on the house tops, and offer sacrifices and burn their dead: of temples built before the Parthenon and gods worshipped before Jupiter; in this ancient land in which the East Indian has his heritage, he lives, not the life of the people around , but the life of the gin-drinking, wife-beating, evil smelling, foul minded and foul-bodied denizens of the slums of  London.       

Siege,

You present a piece from British India Society,way back from 1840.

You mean fe say the man tryin fi pass it as he own nuh

seignet posted:
 

Leh meh hear yuh sey "leh bygones be bygones."

 

So you will no longer mention the Wismar massacre or what you claim that Burnham did to Indians.

Hmmm. I see. Only blacks must let bygones be bygones.  Not Indians because no way are you going to forget Wismar.

Funny thing is that I don't hear black people ranting about the 60s even as I hear Indians constantly with it.  BOTH groups suffered.

Django posted:
 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read and wrote this with a heavy heart,i can picture how my ancestors were treated by the British Colonial Planters.

Yes and the BGEIA wanted even more to be cast into this misery. Just so that these elites could then dominate the country.  They were a proto PPP, possessing all of the ideologies of ethnic domination that the PPP espoused once they got the chance.

seignet posted:
 

Burnham considered Pan-Africanism and so did every black person. One could have felt the transformation of the country.

Multi-ethnic society does not mean everybody has to be of the same mind.

Funny how the "Afro centrist" Burnham installed TWO Hindu holidays in Guyana. Hindus got ONE holiday in T&T.   In Guyana Christians only get two (the same as Hindus). In T&T they get THREE.

Now were Burnham the Indian hater that you scream he is Guyana would have NO Hindu holidays.  Ash Wednesday would be a holiday, as in Jamaica.  And to rub it in he would have Whit Monday as in Barbados and Antigua.