Dear Editor,
I thought it would be prudent to let some of the dust settle before I venture in a personal capacity into the controversy over the now infamous Guyana Chronicle editorial of July 3. It is an editorial that damns itself, and is in no need of further denunciation. Instead, I focus on the Chairman’s apology and subsequent developments.
At the inception I believed that the Chairman did a really honourable thing: He stood up, he bared his breast. I felt he cried his conscience, and the anguish of his brothers endlessly stereotyped, locally demonized, and, in this instance, editorially savaged. I really thought I heard a cry. Perhaps, I wanted to hear one too much.
Editor, I, too, cry for help. There ought to be a quota on how many times I am allowed to be wrong. I know not the Chairman, but know people who speak well of him. In his apology – a rare, if not unprecedented thing in government quarters – I heard the beginning of something new and different and refreshing. I sensed a thread to be touched and followed; something that this nation needs in abundance. Clearly, and with the advantage of hindsight, I heard what I wanted to hear, what was not there, and what was, in all probability, not meant at all. For as apologies go, that particular one is now meaningless and worthless. How so?
It is because I watch, along with the rest of the nation, as the Chairman ducked, sidestepped, and backtracked to defend – maybe justify – two letters that incorporated the same rancorous, combustible thinking as the editorial that went before.
Thus, I now see the apology for what it really was: the sterile, pro forma business of public relations management, and not an olive branch of brotherhood. Stated more pungently – a stream of the vacuous from a vacillator-in-disguise. I saw the Chairman as someone who did possess the intestinal and testicular fortitude and the intellectual honesty, to say that both the editorial and letters are either divisive and problematic, or they are not. Well, he did manifest in no uncertain terms where he stood, and what he represented. Clearly, both editorial and letters are one and the same as to content and intent. Clearly, some damage has been inflicted. And clearly, there is no regret by anyone from anywhere in government circles on this sowing of what could be a self-fulfilling vicious wind.
Editor, there is no amount of money, no title(s), no standing, no peer recognition, no continuity that is worth the compromise of conscience, of dignity, of principle. Or that condones the soiling of the soul. Speaking for myself I say take all of those and shove it. No one should have to be told where. As for the Chairman, only he can know where he stands on any of this, and where he truly stands for what is decent, what is right, and what is civilized.
Having said all of this, I wonder on many occasions what has happened to many of those who lead in this country. I wonder what they see when the look in the mirror, how they sleep at night (or any other time), and most of all, how they live with themselves. Still, they serve a powerful purpose. I look at them and I say this prayer: “Lord, never let me be this way. May I not fall so far, sink so low. Never! Please.”
Yours faithfully,
GHK Lall
