Dear Editor,
The contributors to the African discourse are genuinely concerned about the plight of Africans today. I salute these persons’ efforts but in many cases I cringe at some suggestions on the way forward. When this happens, I write letters with the intention of trying to nudge their consciousness, energies and thinking towards paths which I feel have the best possibilities for success.
Therefore after so many letters, one can very well imagine my frustration at the general theme of the letter, “The Alliance leadership is not responding to key African concerns,” by Osafo Modibo. I spent days and sleepless nights thinking. What can I write again about the in-between-the-lines sentiments of disgust, desperation and lack of hope, to help this writer see another way, a new light a different approach?
Then it hit me. My mind drifted to another letter, “Socialists shouldn’t behave like this” by Vishnu Bisram. Mr. Bisram wrote, “Chavez, who prides himself as a Socialist, should not have beaten up on a little brotherly socialist nation.” Yes. Guyanese are socialist to the bone. Almost every single Guyanese, in or out of Guyana is socialist.
Before I mention how this relates to Osafo Modibo’s letter I would first give you a background to my observations, which have contributed to my stance. The world has too many socialists for its own good. Persons looking for an uplifting life are not running to England, Australia, France or New Zealand. Many third world countries are suffering because of socialist Governments. The US has quite a lot of socialists also. If Mrs. Clinton wins the upcoming elections the Capitalist America will have a socialist oriented person at the helm, although I am not particularly afraid for America because of the ability of the pendulum to swing back and forth.
I have found that there is a litmus test for Socialists. When I arrived in the US I was confused about the difference between the Democrats and Republicans. A co-worker made it simple. Let’s say that you are a fisherman and some people ask you for help. A democrat will give each person a fish. That means when they are hungry again they will return and ask for more fish. You will give them more fish and become their God because they are dependant on you for a meal. The republican response will be, “Come people, let me teach you how to catch fish.” The people are taught and soon have more fish than they can personally consume.
Socialism limits your ability to grow. It is based on major Government control and restrictions. It creates dependency on Government. Government tells you how much to eat and when to eat, what to wear and where you can go. When to travel and how to travel. What to wear, how much you can earn and when not to get sick. There are restrictions on the size of vehicle you drive. Check out England. People will have to pay for their carbon footprint.
Mr. Osafo Modibo wrote about, “government refusal to pass the Ancestral Bill so Africans can formalize land ownership, the refusal of government to implement agreements that would positively impact on African lives,” and “my # 1 suggestion is that the government and their agents stop ignoring Africans leaders who are raising these concerns and bringing proposals to their attention since they require political action to address and enforce”. That reflects a strong dependency on Government intervention for the problems even after the government made it clear, in relation to formalizing land ownership, that Africans should utilize the assistance of African Attorneys.
To show the implications and where Mr. Osafo Modibo may have missed the beat I must take you back to the letter, “African Guyanese leaders must be much more development oriented,” by Lin-Jay Harry-Voglezon. Voglezon wrote, “During my last discussion with Cheddi Jagan around 1990, he said that the PNC government was preparing the Afro community to fail. He meant the high concentration of Afro Guyanese in the bloated public service sector, which was unsustainable. He meant that when the system of things changed the community would be uncompetitive for it would by then have nurtured the wrong ethics, expectations, and attitudes. The psyche of dependency on the state would be so ingrained that it would fail to be as resourceful as it is ought to be and was capable of being.”
What should also be gleaned from this is that while the PPP, PNC and AFC are socialist the Indian philosophy for living and generating wealth is strictly capitalist. Look at their development, their lack of restrictive growth, big business mentality, massive properties, fuel guzzling vehicles. Take it from me my friends; Guyana and indeed no country can see “crazy” development under a socialist system. AFC take note. Be the real change. Say you are a capitalist and be mesmerized by the difference.
Another statement in Mr. Osafo Modibo’s letter needs a comment. He wrote, “Within the AFC leadership, the key Indian, Khemraj Ramjattan refuses to ignore glaring transgressions in Tain, Berbice. He was summoned by these Indian supporters, complied, heard their grievances and is now taking their concerns to parliament with the support of the AFC. This is leadership. It strongly suggests a sense of purpose, role and direction which is sadly lacking in the AFC African leadership.”
I do not agree with that move by Mr. Ramjattan and see it as a poor strategy, which can see repercussions. He should have gone with Mr. Trotman to reflect the multi racial stance of the party. Even though I am of the view that the AFC should have appointed Mr. Ramjattan as the head to play on the sensitivity of the Indians they cannot play the game of Indians in the party representing Indians and Africans representing Africans. They have to mix it up. Africans helping Indians, Indians helping Africans. AFC has to respond to the need of the communities without regard for ethnicity.
Yours faithfully,
F. Skinner
