Dear Editor,
In his retort to a letter I penned, Mr Nigel Bacchus appeals, `We must reject the demons of racism’ (Nov 28). Who would disagree? But his letter has evidence of shades of racism (against Indians) and therefore hypocritical.
He said he learnt a lot of history from Hamilton Green and that the split in the PPP had nothing to do with race. That claim is not accurate or at a minimum is biased. It is curious why a Mixed African-Indian person goes to an African nationalist to learn Guyanese history of the tragic period of the 1950s onwards.
Bacchus accuses me of trying to divide the country by merely mentioning the names of Indian villages in a retort. What stretch of imagination and logic and reasoning can be invoked to reach such an absurd conclusion? This selective critique of my writing out of context perpetuates racism rather than addresses it.
He said he was told by Green that the names of Ankerville, Leonora, Bath, and other villages led to a “call for partition”. Can he cite literature substantiating that contention! Who called for partition, when, where, why? My readings referenced one Sydney King suggesting ‘partition’ if the leaders of two main races and the followers could not agree on governance and power sharing. I didn’t call for partition.
And contrary to what Bacchus pens, I didn’t introduce the demon of racism. In fact, I have campaigned against racism.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Vishnu Bisram
