Dear Editor,
The letter by Rev Gideon Cecil, ‘Burnham achieved nothing’ (SN, August 10) has certainly angered many admirers of Burnham; the few writers – Humphrey Charles, Hamilton Green, Barrington Braithwaite, etc, – represent the multitude who still hold the former President in high esteem, and are even more bitter at what the Reverend has penned.
I recalled a letter I wrote a few years gone in support of one Albertina Walker-Byrne, an avid and staunch PNC activist who had written to express her hurt and annoyance over the “many distortions of the past.” Mrs Walker-Byrne stated in part: “I am not amused by Cheddi Jagan being described as the father of the nation while the contribution of Forbes Burnham is being buried in a new interpretation of our history,” and like Barrington Braithwaite she blamed the party leader and historians for this being so.
As will always be with political men/women who have made their impact felt and left an indelible mark on society, their names will be mentioned ever so often until God knows when. It is no different with Burnham and Jagan; after all, they were front runners and harsh or positive remarks will be made when reviewing their work by people who either admire or loathe them. However, that should not prevent us from making assessments in a magnanimous way. Why can’t we examine the contributions of these two political leaders in terms of their worth and learn lessons for avoiding future blunders; their true value should be put in perspective – bury the bad, exploit the good.
Why can’t we analyse the past in an unbiased, open and objective manner, and not with a parochial and partision outlook? We must struggle to give credit where it is due; these men have both played positive roles during their time and we do no good except to aggravate and perpetuate hatreds when Africans condemn Cheddi Jagan as deceitful and condemn everything he did, while Indians paint Forbes Burnham as one who never did one iota of good except to wreck and impoverish this country.
What on earth are we hoping to achieve? What is the message or signal we are sending? Isn’t it high time we come of age? They were both brilliant men of strong personality and ideas and not mere scoundrels. One can forgive the nonsensical talk or ‘poppycock,’ as Mr Burnham was noted for saying, coming from the simple people; but not from learned men. Is there no nexus between learned professional people and decency? Why can’t members/followers of these two parties think beyond the confines of their camps?
I am not an apologist for either of these two parties/ gentlemen; they both have made their contribution within the scheme of things, good and bad, and in no way can we use all of what either of these has done as a prescription for national healing/ progress.
But I can very well understand Hamilton Green’s resentment, and more so that of Barrington Braithwaite as they chastise the Reverend for his “historical vacuum” letter.
While I can understand the recriminations being tossed to and fro, I find it objectionable to hear the constant blatant denials of any positive achievement – mind you not all achievements and development are easily measured.
Can’t we in this day and age strive to be truthful? Was the songwriter talking about us when he sang “honesty is such a lonely word, when everyone is so untrue”? I wonder.
Yours faithfully,
Frank Fyffe
