Dear Editor,
Guyana experienced another protest march for “justice” that ended up in a riot where Indian Guyanese were beaten, robbed, brutalized and their property destroyed. Now commonplace since the 1960’s, the organizers again claimed with straight faces that it “Wasn’t us; infiltrators did it”. Yet have never managed to produce an “infiltrator”. The same for a Police Force that by now should have their protest-riot response plan as part of basic training for new recruits. After the PNC violently protested the Dec 1997 election results with hundreds of Indian Guyanese assaulted, I did an analysis, “Aetiology of an Ethnic Riot” to which I refer after every protest-riot. It is a well-worn document. This pattern is so predictable it was reduced to a formula by an ethnic conflict expert, which I have explained ad nauseum: Group Worth + Group Comparison + Group Legitimacy = Politics of Entitlement.
Since the APNU/PNC lost the elections of March 2020, there has been a constant bombardment from activists on social media platforms claiming that Indian Guyanese, “who own everything because of past advantages”, were again getting preferential treatment from the PPP Govt; while Africans were being deprived. For instance, on food assistance, school vouchers and everything distributed since the change of government. As we had warned back in 1998, “…a feeling of deprivation is exacerbated when, as in Guyana, the group which is perceived to be moving ahead (Indians) was previously seen as “backward” by the group which is now told it is lagging (Africans).”
The assertion that African Guyanese have a greater legitimacy to the patrimony of Guyana is flouted continuously on social media. This argument is based on a claim that they suffered more during slavery than Indian Guyanese during indentureship; arrived earlier; westernized (read “civilized”) earlier, Christianized earlier; educated all late comers and finally, that the Caribbean including Guyana is an African nation. All of these trump the modern norm of equality through citizenship. The educational system also reinforces the claims of Africans’ greater legitimacy by silencing Indian contributions to Guyana. For instance, the Indian counter assertion that they rescued the colony as a viable proposition by saving and expanding the sugar industry after the abolition of slavery, to justify the extraordinary outlay on hydraulics, are dismissed. “With the state as the arbiter of who gets what, when and how, the perception of being denied their ‘earned greater share’ precipitates a struggle to control that state. Elections become flashpoints.”
Where the group that has severe questions about its worth also has entrenched claims to legitimacy to rule, as African Guyanese do in Guyana, but this claim is contested by the other groups (Indian Guyanese), the potential for extreme behaviour is greatest. This is exacerbated when the groups are of comparable size as Indian and African/ Mixed Guyanese are here. And this is why the possibility of extreme behaviour is omni-present here during heightened group contestations. This possibility is increased when the group, here African Guyanese, are convinced that Indian Guyanese and “their” PPP government are frustrating them from achieving their legitimate expectations. In general, the emotional response to frustration is anger and there was much anger in that march from Golden Grove. But the expression of this anger depends greatly on the strategy of the group’s leadership. Back in 2004, one WPA MP who sat next to me in Parliament, told me of her disappointment with Corbin who was supposed to “manners” the PPP. This is also why Aubrey Norton is now PNC leader.
A major factor in the likelihood of an aggrieved group leader choosing violence to achieve their thwarted goals is the perception of the retribution that may be unleashed against it. As I wrote in 1998, and which remains true today, “In Guyana the PNC has repeatedly declared that the members of the Disciplined Forces which were built up during their Burnhamite dictatorial regime, are its “kith and kin”. Its strategy has been to test the Forces through escalating forays and protests marches so as to expose the troops to the fact that the protesters are actually and literally their “kith and kin”. The PNC knows also that if African Guyanese’s frustration and anger are addressed only by sanctions or fear of retribution, eventually the forces will refuse to use violence against their “own”.” The social media activists seeking to outflank Norton have been stressing this angle ever since Pres Granger accepted his defeat.
Sincerely,
Ravi Dev
