Dear Editor,
Mr. Phillips now has a companion (Barrington Braithwaite) on his scheme to claim Guyana’s land for reparations. I have no philosophical problem with the land for reparation argument, in and of itself. After all, reparations can be obtained by and in many forms. What I have a problem with is falsely bootstrapping and conflating the African land reparation claim rooted in recompense for slavery with patrimonial and inherent land ownership rights of Amerindians. The African land reparation claim cannot use the Amerindian example for parallels for its legitimacy because there is no such parallel and no such juxtaposed legitimacy. African land reparation legitimacy is a completely different animal and is separate and distinct from Amerindian land claim. To even attempt to draw parallels between the two claims is to start a journey of intellectual dishonesty and epistemological chicanery.
Then there are the other fundamental problems with land reparation in the Guyana landscape that make this concept dangerous, divisive, disruptive, impractical and foolish to attempt and implement. It will create claims by every ethnic group for land reparation based on the fact that every ethnic group was oppressed and suffered economic denial or discrimination (wages below rates to Europeans, etc) to varying extents. It will generate significant friction in an already fractious and ethnically divided nation. Throw in the lure of oil wealth and this will get downright ugly and fierce in likely open conflict. More critically, any act of this nature will drive investors away and devastate the oil industry from even taking root.
Then there are the claimants themselves. As I stated and Phillips and his cohorts failed to address, what of the rights of Afro-Mixed individuals? What of those Africans who reject this fiasco out of patriotism? What of African-Guyanese abroad – are they entitled? Are Africans in the wider region who migrated from this country generations ago entitled? What about existing African landowners, especially those with massive tracts of leased land, should they have to relinquish those lands to the state at considerable disruption of their economic activity before the distribution to the entire African ethnic group occurs? How about the problem of fragmentation of this country that will inevitably occur from this exercise of giving one ethnic group a large chunk of this nation’s territory (20% as per Braithwaite), particularly when it is difficult to find such land in a contiguous zone and the cost of economic disruption from this exercise? How about the peril to Guyana’s territorial integrity with this exercise?
When one considers Phillips’ position is inconsistent with Caricom’s financial reparation position (as Guyana’s head of its Reparation Committee, Phillips has an obligation to be consistent with Caricom’s position to not jeopardize it) and considering this PNC-dominated government’s (consider the PNC’s past of ethno-aggrandizement) staggering silence to Phillips who is an advisor to the President, this entire fiasco is increasingly appearing an ethnic land grab masquerading under the guise of land reparations. One has to wonder if this is deliberate and sinister telegraphing or testing of the waters here. The reference to the Jews is pathetic because if there is ever an example of why this country should balk at these hare-brained reparation land claims charlatanism, it is the current madness that stalks Palestine.
Land reparation in the land the slaves inherited is an easy way out for Europeans. They don’t have to pay or if they pay, they will argue they are only required to pay significantly less now that Africans are claiming land at home.
I made no such contention that Forbes Burnham should have fixed three centuries of African problems. I simply and correctly stated that the PNC under Burnham engaged in ethno-favouritism that gave Africans massive access to resources including lands personally and through the cooperative system. That is a fact. It has nothing to do with expectations of fixing anything. For some strange reason, Stabroek News continues to refuse to publish my views on the following matter notwithstanding the fact that it is historical truth. There are three watermark opportunities that Africans had to alter their destinies by accessing and productively using lands to build wealth. They are the wage labour system, the sharecropping/labour or land tenancy system and under the PNC rule. All three failed because of dreadful leadership, low participation, rejection, poor and wrong choices and failure to see the potential to build wealth. The constitution requires that land goes to the tiller because it is the tillers who will feed the nation and prevent its starvation. In this age of exploding world population growth and increasing food scarcity and with the expected surge in immigrants here if oil takes off (particularly with our lax immigration system), it is ridiculous for any already ethnically fractured country to consider land reparation as a solution. When are Phillips and Braithwaite going to demand land in Europe? If Africans can collectively pool their resources today and submit a plan to engage in large scale farming covering 20% of Guyana, this government is obligated to provide that land to them.
Yours faithfully,
M. Maxwell
