Dear Editor,
Dave Martins could have adopted a more enlightening approach to the issue of ethnic separation. He objects to Guyana being a prime target of criticism where the issue of ethnic separation is concerned. His response can be paraphrased to read: ‘Ethnic separation is no big deal. It is a worldwide phenomenon that has been a characteristic of human social evolution since the days of Homo erectus.’ He rejects the opportunity to urge protagonists that because of our unique circumstances in the Caribbean it is possible to demonstrate to other societies that ethnic separation can evolve into ethnic integration, and why attempts at ethnic supremacy are foolhardy.
Social biological concepts are helpful here. Put simply, in any given population of living organisms and for various reasons, changes in their genetic pool may occur over periods of time. These changes, providing they are non-lethal, can result in, among other things, differences in the physical features of succeeding generations.
The darkness of the human skin is an indication of the concentration (amount per unit of surface area), of melanin in the skin. Melanin offers protection from harmful solar radiation. This is a successful adaptation that helps humans to survive in hot climates.
Those human organisms which moved from hot climates to inhabit the cooler or colder climates where there is less harmful solar radiation lost melanin. Hence from the one human race (out of Africa) – Homo sapiens, several lighter complexioned varieties or ethnicities (not races), of Homo sapiens have evolved and are scattered around the globe. The separation of ethnicities which confronts the human race today was definitely not a case of one ethnicity being superior to the other.
What’s so disappointing is that the two major ethnicities in Guyana have far more in common than there are differences. But we have allowed those differences to be exploited by a few self-serving persons.
Mr Martins suggests that “In Guyana and the Caribbean generally, we have found a measure of acceptance or accommodation other than the outright rejection that has been the response in many lands.” The accommodation of which he speaks is essentially a buyer-seller relationship. That is not social integration. Wealth flows in one direction only – from us to them.
If the various social and economic policies in Guyana (both private and public), were put under the microscope, it would soon be evident that instead of being designed for social justice, and to build a Guyanese nation, the ‘deck’ is being increasingly stacked in the interest of augmenting certain existing power relationships, particularly partisan political power.
This is what critics who are patriotic Guyanese find most disappointing, distressful, and depressing.
Yours faithfully,
Clarence O Perry
