Prologue
Mark Cuban talks about walking on the other side of the road when seeing a black youth with a hoodie in the darkness of night. You then hear the retort that a white guy in a suit can be more harmful as well as a white bald-headed dude with a tattoo. We are all too familiar with racial distrust because of unfamiliarity, and the Korean/Black stand-off in LA and New York in the 80s is a case in point. Then of course Indians with Turbans felt it just after 9/11.
.......
. It will make them a better party. Heck, we may even have a governing party and Presidency other than the reckless meandering one we are forced to subscribe to.
You began confused and ended likewise. There is a false equivalency in Cuban's equating the danger of the black kid in the hoodie and the tatted white skinhead. The Kid in the hoodie is a kid in a hoodie. He is seen as a threat because of the ontology of prejudice. It is prejudicial to ascribe properties of criminality on every and any kid.
The white kid on the other affirms something. He wears his epistemological grasp of the world on his skin and in his garb. He says I hate you in unshakable terms as a tatoo is etched with considerations of permanency. He is a racist and openly so given his pride in his preening and plumage. There is real danger in him because he tells you he is dangerous.
The suited white man can represent the agencies of power, the police, the judicial system, the educational system and the economic system which are all weighted against minorities and especially black. If a police is as Cuban he will likewise not give the kid in a hoodie the benefit of the doubt. The result is as it is that he will poll over black kids in hoodies more often than not so they end up in the system in larger numbers. If Cuban represents the financial system his prejudices will percolate through that as well etc etc.
In Guyana, we have the same as the above with the added a post colonial burdens clanking loud. Sons and daughters of slaves are competing with sons and daughters of indentured and neither came with long traditions of accepting the mufti ethnic pluralities. Neither have any tradition in leadership so they mimic the colonials in part or in instances whole cloth. We have contented ourselves with being proxy Englishmen so we imagine their traditions can be mirrored in a constitution without grasping the dangers of people with only ethnic based allegiances having total power.
It matters not if the PNC goes on its knees and begs for forgiveness. Black people will not wake up with a color Indians trust or think is capable of trust. We see that ever so often spouted by idiots like Yugi, Skeldon ape, Basedrum and Rev dickhead. "Black people cannot run a cakeshop". That is not because they have evidence than indians can. They neglect the corruption and incompetence of the PPP and see only the fruits of their corruption as evidence of progress. That is the reality we face.
Can we do better, yes we can. But first we have to avoid the sententious appeal for apologies for supposed egregious wrongs. Beyond doubt indians will go one dog whistling about the insubstantial nature of the black man. It is the same reason Caribj and I are at odds. He also asks for apologies for Indian prejudices. I do not give a damn who is racist or not. I care their racism does not impinge on my life. I therefore will prefer to rely on systems of government to constrain racist and crooks and there are those in abundance.