Dear Editor,
I write to address the arguments made by Keith Bernard in his 8 September 2024 letter that was published under the title, “Infrastructure has profoundly influenced racial and socioeconomic
dynamics.” He reminds me of a letter that I wrote over a year ago pointing out the limitations in a letter written by Lincoln Lewis. In that letter I noted, “The Guyanese intelligentsia have been fed a good diet of the Black American Experience and their civil rights struggles.
“The debilitating effect on Guyanese scholarship is that the Guyanese intelligentsia view Guyanese society through the prism of the Black American Experience. Their pronouncements are shoe-horned to conform the analytical paradigm of the American Civil Rights movement.”
Analogously, Mr. Bernard has been fed a hefty diet of “redlining” etc. and now seeks to shoe-horn Guyana into the paradigms he
swallowed hook, line and sinker. His letter can be summarized in 2 sentences: In Guyana, infrastructure development has largely been driven by political priorities, often aligning with ethnic voting patterns. And in the current PPP [President Ali] administration there is an “undercurrent of racial and political favouritism in infrastructure
development.” Mr. Bernard’s analysis is pitiful and bereft of intellectual rigour. Let me explain.
First, he fallaciously claims that the Soesdyke-Mackenzie Highway [later the Linden Highway] was driven by PNC political priorities aligning with ethnic voting pattern. Nothing could be
further from the truth. The post-independency economic plan for the newly emergent nation was promulgated by none other than the world-renowned Nobel laureate economist – Sir Arthur Lewis.
The rationale was to link 2 major economic hubs – Mackenzie and Georgetown and simultaneously open the corridor to jump-start development. Furthermore, a careful examination of certain infrastructure projects undertaken by the “Burnham” PNC regime debunks the myth that race was the factor that determined which projects were undertaken. The resurfacing of the Berbice roads from New Amsterdam to “road end” Crabwood Creek and the construction of the “new” Canje Bridge benefitted a PPP stronghold populated primarily by Indians. The construction of the Demerara Harbour Bridge served all regardless of race. One only has to ask the residents of Leonora about the impact of the “Burnham” floating bridge had on their lives. The canal projects that Taylor Woodrow and Halcrow did for the Burnham government opened thousands of acres of rice land [on the Essequibo Coast] benefiting Indians who are primarily engaged in rice farming. The construction of the Timehri Airport serves all Guyanese regardless of race or political affiliation. In Guyana, race is not a factor in determining infrastructure development.
Third, Mr. Bernard calls for a “data-driven” approach but provides none. He insidiously and diabolically alludes that the PPP [President Ali] administration is engaging in “political favouritism linked to infrastructure development.” President Ali has committed to Silica City, housing and other projects [schools, roads, hospitals]. Mr. Bernard has failed woefully to demonstrate a racial bias in the PPP [President Ali] administration. Let us get on with the people’s business-development for all Guyanese. So far, there is no evidence supplied by Mr. Bernard that infrastructure projects undertaken by either the PNC or the PPP is driven by racial calculus. Guyana does not need sophomoric letters stoking ethnic tensions based on Mr. Bernard’s intellectual diet of the Black American Experience.
Sincerely,
Roger Ally
Fort Lauderdale
