Skip to main content

Originally Posted by Itaname:
Here is the gist of apan jhaat as practiced in Guyana in the 50's way before Burnham, as DG confirmed above and pointed out some of the personalities involved.

 

1. Apan jhaat means to vote for your own or keep it in the family. In a political sense - Indians only.

 

2. In the 50's before independence and the PNC, the PPP consisted of both Burnham and Jagan and also Mr. Rai.

 

3. There was a faction of PPP Indians who advocated apan jhaat and did not see black folks having any place in government or even in Guyana. Personally, I do not believe Dr. Jagan was one of those but he had to deal with elements in his party who advocated apan jhaat. Was Mr. Rai one of them? I don't know. Furthermore, remember that his wife Janet came from the US where segregation against black folks was common place. What was her feeling about blacks?

 

4. Forbes got wind of this apan jhaat talk. It was going on at bottom house meetings, screamed loudly that Indians were to vote for Indians only. DG listed some of the names in his earlier post. What effect did calls for apan jhaat  have on black people and Forbes?

 

5. But why Apan Jhaat? Why Indians only when BOTH races struggled against colonialism and massa's whip? It is my opinion that Indian castism brought from India was at the root of it, where the dark skinned (dalits) were considered sub human. The black man, because of his complexion fell into this category. In the view of those who practiced castism, he was a subhuman not worthy to have any role in government or in the country and certainly inferior to the light skinned chatree / rajput Indians who were peddling apan jhaat and wanted to subjugate the black man.

 

6. The average Indian followed along. In that era many people (blacks and Indians) were uneducated and did as they were told. The Indian laborer class followed their light skinned chatree/rajput leaders.

 

7. This Indian only, apan jhaat mentality is what gave rise to the PNC. Burnham, realizing that blacks were outnumbered and would become an underclass in Indian rule, formed coalitions with the UF to gain power. I believe the apan jhaat of the Indians never left his psyche. No excuse for the racism Burnham practiced against Indians, but he experienced their racism first hand.

 

8. The PNC ruled for 28 years. You know the history.

 

So pre dating Burnham was this mindset among the chatree / rajput Indians that they were superior to black people. They and only they deserved to rule and black folks were to survive at their mercy. I concur with Redux when he says this racism among some of these Indians runs deep and has NOTHING to do with Burnham. It all pre dated Burnham!!!!

 

This mindset is still with us today and the reason for this post. As long as we have the basemans, shaitaans, cobras, ramas, skeldon man, sachins, prashads, yugis, revs and sadly now Seignet who feel that black people are an inferior class to them then there will always be another Burnham.

 

The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

Itaname, I have highlighted the relevant parts for my comments.

 

1. In 1953, both Cheddi Jagan and Forbes Burnham were together in the PPP as Leader and Chairman respectively.

 

2. After the constitution was suspended in 1953, the PPP was divided in to two separate political organisations --

   a. PPP-Jaganite, and

   b. PPP-Burnhamite.

 

3. Both political parties contested the 1957 elections under the respective names; PPP-Jaganite and PPP-Burnhamite.

 

4. After the 1957 elections the PPP-Burnhamite change its name to the PNC.

 

5. Cheddi Jagan never got involved with nor promoted the term Apan Jhaat.

 

6. In the early 1950's Balram Singh Rai was never with the PPP, and he not only lost the seat he contested but also lost his deposit. It was only when Balram Singh Rai joined the PPP in the latter part of the 1950's that he won a seat in parliament.

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

The best solution which I have been advocating since in the late 1960's, is a merger / solidification of the progressive elements of the PPP and PNC.

 

Such a merger would provide a solid base of about 70+% for the progressive elements.

 

There indeed will be unhappy and disgruntled members in both parties who may leave and perhaps join other political groups.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

The best solution which I have been advocating since in the late 1960's, is a merger / solidification of the progressive elements of the PPP and PNC.

 

Such a merger would provide a solid base of about 70+% for the progressive elements.

 

There indeed will be unhappy and disgruntled members in both parties who may leave and perhaps join other political groups.

Hi DG, but isn't that merger what we have with the AFC? Or do you consider the AFC guys from the PPP/PNC not progressive enough? Anyway, there has to be a better way than this racial hatred. Granted, it is less than it was but we are still too tribal in our politics.

 

I have heard since teenage years growing up during that period that Dr. Jagan was not part of the apan jhaat message being spread then but other members of his PPP were. Curious as to whether Rai was one of them. My family was very threatened by that message and what it would mean for us. Thanks for the info you provided.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by redux:

look, race voting by Black and Indian is tribal, period! . . . very little to do with caste and Hinduism, especially in the Guyana context

 

let us not overthink this and fall into the Kean-Gibson trap

 

people are constantly defining and re-defining themselves, shaping the categories to suit perceived self-interest

 

Janet Jagan and Cheddi Jagan come out of the post-WWII 'progressive' Communist movement in the USA . . . Chicago then was not Birmingham, Ala.

 

Guyana and the imperatives of its ethnic power politics likely bent and distorted the best of intentions in both Burnham and the Jagans

 

just off the top of my head . . . will return to this important topic when i free up some time later

You may be right Redux, and you are certainly correct when it comes to self interest being involved. My view is just that - a view, an opinion. I cannot prove that the castism of Indians was the root for apan jhaat, but one has to wonder why the reason for it. I think it is more than self interest. 

 

Anyway, what is clear is that there was racist politics practiced by Indians which pre dates Burnham. In fact Indian racism may have given rise to him. This fact is contrary to the Indian victim hood stories being spread here daily about black man in Guyana perpetuating some holocaust against Indians for eternity, raping them, starving them and depriving them of cutlasses and medicine. It is telling that DG is the lone Indian here to contribute to this discussion. Baseman had a comment or 2 but he does "come and go".

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
 

I have provided information on this item a few times.

 

Succinctly ...

 

APAN Jat or apna jat ... was indeed used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's.

 

Note however ...

 

In those days there was the PPP-Jaganite and the PPP-Burnhamite.

 

It was known quite clearly that ...

 

It was NOT - repeat - NOT - started by the PPP-Jaganite.

 

Note also ...

 

It was after the 1957 elections that the PPP-Burnhamite was changed to the PNC.

Not started by PPP-Jaganite but used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's...so are you saying is was started by the PPP-Burnhamite?

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

The best solution which I have been advocating since in the late 1960's, is a merger / solidification of the progressive elements of the PPP and PNC.

 

Such a merger would provide a solid base of about 70+% for the progressive elements.

 

There indeed will be unhappy and disgruntled members in both parties who may leave and perhaps join other political groups.

Hi DG, but isn't that merger what we have with the AFC? Or do you consider the AFC guys from the PPP/PNC not progressive enough? Anyway, there has to be a better way than this racial hatred. Granted, it is less than it was but we are still too tribal in our politics.

 

I have heard since teenage years growing up during that period that Dr. Jagan was not part of the apan jhaat message being spread then but other members of his PPP were. Curious as to whether Rai was one of them. My family was very threatened by that message and what it would mean for us. Thanks for the info you provided.

The AFC is not focused on a progressive approach for Guyana.

 

The merger of the progressive elements must come directly from the PPP and PNC.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

The best solution which I have been advocating since in the late 1960's, is a merger / solidification of the progressive elements of the PPP and PNC.

 

Such a merger would provide a solid base of about 70+% for the progressive elements.

 

There indeed will be unhappy and disgruntled members in both parties who may leave and perhaps join other political groups.

Hi DG, but isn't that merger what we have with the AFC? Or do you consider the AFC guys from the PPP/PNC not progressive enough? Anyway, there has to be a better way than this racial hatred. Granted, it is less than it was but we are still too tribal in our politics.

 

I have heard since teenage years growing up during that period that Dr. Jagan was not part of the apan jhaat message being spread then but other members of his PPP were. Curious as to whether Rai was one of them. My family was very threatened by that message and what it would mean for us. Thanks for the info you provided.

The AFC is not focused on a progressive approach for Guyana.

 

The merger of the progressive elements must come directly from the PPP and PNC.

So what is a progressive approach?

FM
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
 

Wasn't Rai the faction of the PPP that called for apna jat? .

Yes.  It is not true that the Jagans coined that phrase, but it is true that they took full advantage of those sentiments.

 

In fact when the PPP won in 1961 their mainly Indian supporters drove through black villages on ECD hurling racist abuse with threats of sending blacks back into slavery. 

 

A black woman, who loved Cheddi, came on to support that motorcade, and was met by the same racist bile which they hurled at other blacks, who they presumed to be PNC supporters.

 

These facts are considered to be racist on GNI, with the majority of the posters (BOTH PPP and AFC) do NOT want this issue discussed.  But will talk at length about the Wismar massacres and the Burnham "Indian Holocaust".

Now, this all preceded Burnham, who incidentally was also a PPP man under Jagan. So here we have Indians calling for apna jat (keep it in the family). I do not in any way excuse Burnham's racism, but does it not give one reason to ponder why the PNC was racist toward Indians? Afro Guyanese were the minority and here the other side is telling them that they intend to "keep it in the family" (Indians). There is fear on both sides, much of it justified.

 

Again, the narrative being peddled that racism started with Burnham is pure hogwash. We and our young ones need to understand the history of our country and the insecurities that lie on both sides if we are to move forward.

I am not aware anyone on GNI is claiming Burnham invented apan jaat and race voting in Guyana. Since 2011 the PPP has been the undisputed public race baiting party, but it started neither with Forbes nor the PPP. My thesis is the ethnic insecurity is rooted in economics and adverse geography.  All the stereotyping and political mess are the reflection of the history and harsh geography of Guyana.

FM
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
 

Wasn't Rai the faction of the PPP that called for apna jat? .

Yes.  It is not true that the Jagans coined that phrase, but it is true that they took full advantage of those sentiments.

 

In fact when the PPP won in 1961 their mainly Indian supporters drove through black villages on ECD hurling racist abuse with threats of sending blacks back into slavery. 

 

A black woman, who loved Cheddi, came on to support that motorcade, and was met by the same racist bile which they hurled at other blacks, who they presumed to be PNC supporters.

 

These facts are considered to be racist on GNI, with the majority of the posters (BOTH PPP and AFC) do NOT want this issue discussed.  But will talk at length about the Wismar massacres and the Burnham "Indian Holocaust".

Now, this all preceded Burnham, who incidentally was also a PPP man under Jagan. So here we have Indians calling for apna jat (keep it in the family). I do not in any way excuse Burnham's racism, but does it not give one reason to ponder why the PNC was racist toward Indians? Afro Guyanese were the minority and here the other side is telling them that they intend to "keep it in the family" (Indians). There is fear on both sides, much of it justified.

 

Again, the narrative being peddled that racism started with Burnham is pure hogwash. We and our young ones need to understand the history of our country and the insecurities that lie on both sides if we are to move forward.

I am not aware anyone on GNI is claiming Burnham invented apan jaat and race voting in Guyana. Since 2011 the PPP has been the undisputed public race baiting party, but it started neither with Forbes nor the PPP. My thesis is the ethnic insecurity is rooted in economics and adverse geography. 

As Karl Marx affirmed, economics determines politics.

FM
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
 

Wasn't Rai the faction of the PPP that called for apna jat? .

Yes.  It is not true that the Jagans coined that phrase, but it is true that they took full advantage of those sentiments.

 

In fact when the PPP won in 1961 their mainly Indian supporters drove through black villages on ECD hurling racist abuse with threats of sending blacks back into slavery. 

 

A black woman, who loved Cheddi, came on to support that motorcade, and was met by the same racist bile which they hurled at other blacks, who they presumed to be PNC supporters.

 

These facts are considered to be racist on GNI, with the majority of the posters (BOTH PPP and AFC) do NOT want this issue discussed.  But will talk at length about the Wismar massacres and the Burnham "Indian Holocaust".

Now, this all preceded Burnham, who incidentally was also a PPP man under Jagan. So here we have Indians calling for apna jat (keep it in the family). I do not in any way excuse Burnham's racism, but does it not give one reason to ponder why the PNC was racist toward Indians? Afro Guyanese were the minority and here the other side is telling them that they intend to "keep it in the family" (Indians). There is fear on both sides, much of it justified.

 

Again, the narrative being peddled that racism started with Burnham is pure hogwash. We and our young ones need to understand the history of our country and the insecurities that lie on both sides if we are to move forward.

I am not aware anyone on GNI is claiming Burnham invented apan jaat and race voting in Guyana. Since 2011 the PPP has been the undisputed public race baiting party, but it started neither with Forbes nor the PPP. My thesis is the ethnic insecurity is rooted in economics and adverse geography. 

As Karl Marx affirmed, economics determines politics.

And he is right on that count. I would add geography.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
With a combined hundreds of years of guyana history on this board, no one care to share on the roots of apna jat? No one willing to share more on Mr. Rai and his role? The silence is deafening. I reference my earlier post above.

I have provided information on this item a few times.

 

Succinctly ...

 

APAN Jat or apna jat ... was indeed used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's.

 

Note however ...

 

In those days there was the PPP-Jaganite and the PPP-Burnhamite.

 

It was known quite clearly that ...

 

It was NOT - repeat - NOT - started by the PPP-Jaganite.

 

Note also ...

 

It was after the 1957 elections that the PPP-Burnhamite was changed to the PNC.

TK, Re your post above.  What is DG man sehing here?  Me na da brite fuh deciper

FM
Originally Posted by VVP:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
With a combined hundreds of years of guyana history on this board, no one care to share on the roots of apna jat? No one willing to share more on Mr. Rai and his role? The silence is deafening. I reference my earlier post above.

I have provided information on this item a few times.

 

Succinctly ...

 

APAN Jat or apna jat ... was indeed used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's.

 

Note however ...

 

In those days there was the PPP-Jaganite and the PPP-Burnhamite.

 

It was known quite clearly that ...

 

It was NOT - repeat - NOT - started by the PPP-Jaganite.

 

Note also ...

 

It was after the 1957 elections that the PPP-Burnhamite was changed to the PNC.

TK, Re your post above.  What is DG man sehing here?  Me na da brite fuh deciper

Is now I am seeing DG. The conflict did not start in 1957.

FM
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by VVP:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
With a combined hundreds of years of guyana history on this board, no one care to share on the roots of apna jat? No one willing to share more on Mr. Rai and his role? The silence is deafening. I reference my earlier post above.

I have provided information on this item a few times.

 

Succinctly ...

 

APAN Jat or apna jat ... was indeed used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's.

 

Note however ...

 

In those days there was the PPP-Jaganite and the PPP-Burnhamite.

 

It was known quite clearly that ...

 

It was NOT - repeat - NOT - started by the PPP-Jaganite.

 

Note also ...

 

It was after the 1957 elections that the PPP-Burnhamite was changed to the PNC.

TK, Re your post above.  What is DG man sehing here?  Me na da brite fuh deciper

Is now I am seeing DG. The conflict did not start in 1957.

I think he is insinuating that it was Burnham under the PPP-Burnham faction that started it.  Like everything else the prick would not answer my direct question above. 

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Here is the gist of apan jhaat as practiced in Guyana in the 50's way before Burnham, as DG confirmed above and pointed out some of the personalities involved.

 

1. Apan jhaat means to vote for your own or keep it in the family. In a political sense - Indians only.

 

2. In the 50's before independence and the PNC, the PPP consisted of both Burnham and Jagan and also Mr. Rai.

 

3. There was a faction of PPP Indians who advocated apan jhaat and did not see black folks having any place in government or even in Guyana. Personally, I do not believe Dr. Jagan was one of those but he had to deal with elements in his party who advocated apan jhaat. Was Mr. Rai one of them? I don't know. Furthermore, remember that his wife Janet came from the US where segregation against black folks was common place. What was her feeling about blacks?

 

4. Forbes got wind of this apan jhaat talk. It was going on at bottom house meetings, screamed loudly that Indians were to vote for Indians only. DG listed some of the names in his earlier post. What effect did calls for apan jhaat  have on black people and Forbes?

 

5. But why Apan Jhaat? Why Indians only when BOTH races struggled against colonialism and massa's whip? It is my opinion that Indian castism brought from India was at the root of it, where the dark skinned (dalits) were considered sub human. The black man, because of his complexion fell into this category. In the view of those who practiced castism, he was a subhuman not worthy to have any role in government or in the country and certainly inferior to the light skinned chatree / rajput Indians who were peddling apan jhaat and wanted to subjugate the black man.

 

6. The average Indian followed along. In that era many people (blacks and Indians) were uneducated and did as they were told. The Indian laborer class followed their light skinned chatree/rajput leaders.

 

7. This Indian only, apan jhaat mentality is what gave rise to the PNC. Burnham, realizing that blacks were outnumbered and would become an underclass in Indian rule, formed coalitions with the UF to gain power. I believe the apan jhaat of the Indians never left his psyche. No excuse for the racism Burnham practiced against Indians, but he experienced their racism first hand.

 

8. The PNC ruled for 28 years. You know the history.

 

So pre dating Burnham was this mindset among the chatree / rajput Indians that they were superior to black people. They and only they deserved to rule and black folks were to survive at their mercy. I concur with Redux when he says this racism among some of these Indians runs deep and has NOTHING to do with Burnham. It all pre dated Burnham!!!!

 

This mindset is still with us today and the reason for this post. As long as we have the basemans, shaitaans, cobras, ramas, skeldon man, sachins, prashads, yugis, revs and sadly now Seignet who feel that black people are an inferior class to them then there will always be another Burnham.

 

The medium has changed from bottom houses to the internet. And the cry has changed from Apan Jhaat to "daag fuh daaag". Guyanese - take note of the fruits of the racist operators in the 50's because they are still with us today. And their fruits will be just the same. End the vicious cycle of apan jhaat and racism toward blacks just as I implore blacks to abandon any racism against Indians.

Itaname, I have highlighted the relevant parts for my comments.

 

1. In 1953, both Cheddi Jagan and Forbes Burnham were together in the PPP as Leader and Chairman respectively.

 

2. After the constitution was suspended in 1953, the PPP was divided in to two separate political organisations --

   a. PPP-Jaganite, and

   b. PPP-Burnhamite.

 

3. Both political parties contested the 1957 elections under the respective names; PPP-Jaganite and PPP-Burnhamite.

 

4. After the 1957 elections the PPP-Burnhamite change its name to the PNC.

 

5. Cheddi Jagan never got involved with nor promoted the term Apan Jhaat.

 

6. In the early 1950's Balram Singh Rai was never with the PPP, and he not only lost the seat he contested but also lost his deposit. It was only when Balram Singh Rai joined the PPP in the latter part of the 1950's that he won a seat in parliament.


Just some responses to you.

 

1.  The PPP split in 1955, not in 1953.

 

2.  Chedii didnt coin the phrase apan jhat, but he didnt condemn it, and was complicit in the fact that such votingt behavior benefitted him, given that the Indian vote was larger than the African vote, and the orher groups, included mixed people, supported the UF.

 

Why do you think that Cheddi and Janet always insisted that they were trhe rightful rulers at a time when Burnham was rigging the elections.  The elections were moot as actual ballots cast were not counted.  So no one can know for a fact who the winner was. 

 

The Jagans operated with the assumption that a RACE vote is what assured their victory.  Hence Janet's frequent appeals not to split the vote.  What was she talking about?  Obviously a RACE vote.

FM
Originally Posted by TK:
 

I am not aware anyone on GNI is claiming Burnham invented apan jaat and race voting in Guyana. .


Obviously you do not read the majority of the posts on this topic on GNI.

 

To summarize.  All racism in Guyana is because of Afro Guyanese.  Burnham started race voting (a few even claim that he actually used the term apan jhat).  And all the violence in the 60s was Africans on Indians.  There was never Indo on Afro violence.  Sun Chapman wasnt blown up.

 

Any one who disputes this is branded, racist and anti Indian, because it defies the narrative of "baad black man, saintly Indo".

FM
Originally Posted by VVP:
Originally Posted by TK:
Originally Posted by VVP:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
With a combined hundreds of years of guyana history on this board, no one care to share on the roots of apna jat? No one willing to share more on Mr. Rai and his role? The silence is deafening. I reference my earlier post above.

I have provided information on this item a few times.

 

Succinctly ...

 

APAN Jat or apna jat ... was indeed used for the first time and perpetuated by the PPP in the early 1950's.

 

Note however ...

 

In those days there was the PPP-Jaganite and the PPP-Burnhamite.

 

It was known quite clearly that ...

 

It was NOT - repeat - NOT - started by the PPP-Jaganite.

 

Note also ...

 

It was after the 1957 elections that the PPP-Burnhamite was changed to the PNC.

TK, Re your post above.  What is DG man sehing here?  Me na da brite fuh deciper

Is now I am seeing DG. The conflict did not start in 1957.

I think he is insinuating that it was Burnham under the PPP-Burnham faction that started it.  Like everything else the prick would not answer my direct question above. 

Burnham did not start the ethnic insecurity problems in Guyana.

FM

This is what my father told me and it might be hearsay because he was not well connected in the PPP.

 

Jagan and Burnham went to meet Nehru (PM of India).  Burnham later CLAIMED that he heard Nehru mentioned the word Apan Jhaat.  Burnham came back to Guyana and asked an Indian what the word meant.  The Indian  told him that that it meant "Vote for your race." Burnham then started to spread the word that Jagan was preaching Apan Jhaat.  By doing this he was able to siphon some of the Indian vote to D'Aguair who also use to get the Amerindians and Portuguese.  Hence they were able to combine and  get more votes than Jagan.

FM
Originally Posted by VVP:

This is what my father told me and it might be hearsay because he was not well connected in the PPP.

 

Jagan and Burnham went to meet Nehru (PM of India).  Burnham later CLAIMED that he heard Nehru mentioned the word Apan Jhaat.  Burnham came back to Guyana and asked an Indian what the word meant.  The Indian  told him that that it meant "Vote for your race." Burnham then started to spread the word that Jagan was preaching Apan Jhaat.  By doing this he was able to siphon some of the Indian vote to D'Aguair who also use to get the Amerindians and Portuguese.  Hence they were able to combine and  get more votes than Jagan.

This was an era when the govt of India was telling people of Indian descent to integrate into their societies and not expect India to be involved.

 

Why would he instigate race based voting in Guyana?

 

FACT.  Ethnocentric Indians, who joined the PPP after Burnham left, concocted that phrase as they sought Indian DOMINATION of Guyana using their larger voting numbers. 

 

Cheddi did NOT start the phrase, but he DID NOT condemn it either.  This is why it is linked to him.  He knew full well that the easiest way to win was to rely on an Indo race vote, and he continued with this belief until his death.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by VVP:

This is what my father told me and it might be hearsay because he was not well connected in the PPP.

 

Jagan and Burnham went to meet Nehru (PM of India).  Burnham later CLAIMED that he heard Nehru mentioned the word Apan Jhaat.  Burnham came back to Guyana and asked an Indian what the word meant.  The Indian  told him that that it meant "Vote for your race." Burnham then started to spread the word that Jagan was preaching Apan Jhaat.  By doing this he was able to siphon some of the Indian vote to D'Aguair who also use to get the Amerindians and Portuguese.  Hence they were able to combine and  get more votes than Jagan.

The story of the trip to India and the use of "apan jhaat" in Burnham's presence by the PM of Inida was common in the 50's. Racism on both sides intensified after that trip leading to the eventual Jagan / Burnham split. I spoke to my uncle who is now in his 90's and recalls these events.

 

The "elite" Indo Guyanese did not like Jagan because of his Communism (they were business owners and more educated so understood the impact of communism on them). I think these are the folks who DG refers to as the PPP Burnhamites because they viewed LFS as a more moderate leader for the PPP.

 

Nevertheless apan Jhaat came from India to our shores. An Indian man named Debidin (see DG's earlier post) openly called for apan jhaat at bottom house meetings. Burnham's eyes were opened to the racism of a segment of Indians and realized that apan jhaat as practiced by indo Guyanese spelled doom for the African population. And yes, though Jagan never advocated apan jhaat he certainly did not discourage it.

 

Indo Guyanese are equally culpable in our history of racism. Everyday I read these tall tales peddled by racist indians on this site that afro guyanese were racist savages who perpetuated "holocaust" on them. Some even had the nerve to demand an "apology" from the PNC. Why not apologize for "apan jhaat" that indo guyanese started?

 

DG - not sure if I got the names above correct. Was JB Singh not a Burnham supporter and in the early PNC?

 

 

FM
Last edited by Former Member

History of Guyana

PREINDEPENDENCE GOVERNMENT, 1953-66

The PPP'S First Government, 1953

Once the new constitution was adopted, elections were set for 1953. The PPP's coalition of lower-class Afro-Guyanese and rural Indo-Guyanese workers, together with elements of both ethnic groups' middle sectors, made for a formidable constituency. Conservatives branded the PPP as communist, but the party campaigned on a center-left platform and appealed to a growing nationalism. The other major party participating in the election, the National Democratic Party (NDP), was a spin-off of the League of Coloured People and was largely an Afro-Guyanese middle-class organization, sprinkled with middle-class Portuguese and IndoGuyanese . The NDP, together with the poorly organized United Farmers and Workers Party and the United National Party, was soundly defeated by the PPP. Final results gave the PPP eighteen of twenty-four seats compared with the NDP's two seats and four seats for independents.

The PPP's first administration was brief. The legislature opened on May 30, 1953. Already suspicious of Jagan and the PPP's radicalism, conservative forces in the business community were further distressed by the new administration's program of expanding the role of the state in the economy and society. The PPP also sought to implement its reform program at a rapid pace, which brought the party into confrontation with the governor and with high-ranking civil servants who preferred more gradual change. The issue of civil service appointments also threatened the PPP, in this case from within. Following the 1953 victory, these appointments became an issue between the predominantly Indo-Guyanese supporters of Jagan and the largely Afro-Guyanese backers of Burnham. Burnham threatened to split the party if he were not made sole leader of the PPP. A compromise was reached by which members of what had become Burnham's faction received ministerial appointments.

The PPP's introduction of the Labour Relations Act provoked a confrontation with the British. This law ostensibly was aimed at reducing intraunion rivalries, but would have favored the GIWU, which was closely aligned with the ruling party. The opposition charged that the PPP was seeking to gain control over the colony's economic and social life and was moving to stifle the opposition. The day the act was introduced to the legislature, the GIWU went on strike in support of the proposed law. The British government interpreted this intermingling of party politics and labor unionism as a direct challenge to the constitution and the authority of the governor. The day after the act was passed, on October 9, 1953, London suspended the colony's constitution and, under pretext of quelling disturbances, sent in troops.

The Interim Government, 1953-57

Following the suspension of the constitution, British Guiana was governed by an interim administration consisting of small group of conservative politicians, businessmen, and civil servants that lasted until 1957. Order in the colonial government masked a growing rift in the country's main political party as the personal conflict between the PPP's Jagan and Burnham widened into a bitter dispute. In 1955 Jagan and Burnham formed rival wings of the PPP. Support for each leader was largely, but not totally, along ethnic lines. J.B. Lachmansingh, a leading Indo- Guyanese and head of the GIWU, supported Burnham, whereas Jagan retained the loyalty of a number of leading Afro-African radicals, such as Sydney King. Burnham's wing of the PPP moved to the right, leaving Jagan's wing on the left, where he was regarded with considerable apprehension by Western governments and the colony's conservative business groups.

The Second PPP Government, 1957-61, and Racial Politics

The 1957 elections held under a new constitution demonstrated the extent of the growing ethnic division within the Guianese electorate. The revised constitution provided limited selfgovernment , primarily through the Legislative Council. Of the council's twenty-four delegates, fifteen were elected, six were nominated, and the remaining three were to be ex officio members from the interim administration. The two wings of the PPP launched vigorous campaigns, each attempting to prove that it was the legitimate heir to the original party. Despite denials of such motivation, both factions made a strong appeal to their respective ethnic constituencies.

The 1957 elections were convincingly won by Jagan's PPP faction. Although his group had a secure parliamentary majority, its support was drawn more and more from the Indo-Guyanese community. The faction's main planks were increasingly identified as Indo- Guyanese: more rice land, improved union representation in the sugar industry, and improved business opportunities and more government posts for Indo-Guyanese. The PPP had abrogated its claim to being a multiracial party.

Jagan's veto of British Guiana's participation in the West Indies Federation resulted in the complete loss of Afro-Guyanese support. In the late 1950s, the British Caribbean colonies had been actively negotiating establishment of a West Indies Federation. The PPP had pledged to work for the eventual political union of British Guiana with the Caribbean territories. The Indo-Guyanese, who constituted a majority in Guyana, were apprehensive of becoming part of a federation in which they would be outnumbered by people of African descent. Jagan's veto of the federation caused his party to lose all significant Afro-Guyanese support.

Burnham learned an important lesson from the 1957 elections. He could not win if supported only by the lower-class, urban AfroGuyanese . He needed middle-class allies, especially those AfroGuyanese who backed the moderate United Democratic Party. From 1957 onward, Burnham worked to create a balance between maintaining the backing of the more radical Afro-Guyanese lower classes and gaining the support of the more capitalist middle class. Clearly, Burnham's stated preference for socialism would not bind those two groups together against Jagan, an avowed Marxist. The answer was something more basic--race. Burnham's appeals to race proved highly successful in bridging the schism that divided the Afro-Guyanese along class lines. This strategy convinced the powerful Afro-Guyanese middle class to accept a leader who was more of a radical than they would have preferred to support. At the same time, it neutralized the objections of the black working class to entering an alliance with those representing the more moderate interests of the middle classes. Burnham's move toward the right was accomplished with the merger of his PPP faction and the United Democratic Party into a new organization, the People's National Congress (PNC).

Following the 1957 elections, Jagan rapidly consolidated his hold on the Indo-Guyanese community. Though candid in expressing his admiration for Josef Stalin, Mao Zedong, and, later, Fidel Castro Ruz, Jagan in power asserted that the PPP's MarxistLeninist principles must be adapted to Guyana's own particular circumstances. Jagan advocated nationalization of foreign holdings, especially in the sugar industry. British fears of a communist takeover, however, caused the British governor to hold Jagan's more radical policy initiatives in check.

PPP Reelection and Debacle

The 1961 elections were a bitter contest between the PPP, the PNC, and the United Force (UF), a conservative party representing big business, the Roman Catholic Church, and Amerindian, Chinese, and Portuguese voters. These elections were held under yet another new constitution that marked a return to the degree of self-government that existed briefly in 1953. It introduced a bicameral system boasting a wholly elected thirty-five-member Legislative Assembly and a thirteen-member Senate to be appointed by the governor. The post of prime minister was created and was to be filled by the majority party in the Legislative Assembly. With the strong support of the Indo-Guyanese population, the PPP again won by a substantial margin, gaining twenty seats in the Legislative Assembly, compared to eleven seats for the PNC and four for the UF. Jagan was named prime minister.

Jagan's administration became increasingly friendly with communist and leftist regimes; for instance, Jagan refused to observe the United States embargo on communist Cuba. After discussions between Jagan and Cuban revolutionary Ernesto ""Che"" Guevara in 1960 and 1961, Cuba offered British Guiana loans and equipment. In addition, the Jagan administration signed trade agreements with Hungary and the German Democratic Republic (East Germany).

From 1961 to 1964, Jagan was confronted with a destabilization campaign conducted by the PNC and UF. Riots and demonstrations against the PPP administration were frequent, and during disturbances in 1962 and 1963 mobs destroyed part of Georgetown.

Labor violence also increased during the early 1960s. To counter the MPCA with its link to Burnham, the PPP formed the Guianese Agricultural Workers Union. This new union's political mandate was to organize the Indo-Guyanese sugarcane field-workers. The MPCA immediately responded with a one-day strike to emphasize its continued control over the sugar workers.

The PPP government responded to the strike in March 1964 by publishing a new Labour Relations Bill almost identical to the 1953 legislation that had resulted in British intervention. Regarded as a power play for control over a key labor sector, introduction of the proposed law prompted protests and rallies throughout the capital. Riots broke out on April 5; they were followed on April 18 by a general strike. By May 9, the governor was compelled to declare a state of emergency. Nevertheless, the strike and violence continued until July 7, when the Labour Relations Bill was allowed to lapse without being enacted. To bring an end to the disorder, the government agreed to consult with union representatives before introducing similar bills. These disturbances exacerbated tension and animosity between the two major ethnic communities and made a reconciliation between Jagan and Burnham an impossibility.

Jagan's term had not yet ended when another round of labor unrest rocked the colony. The pro-PPP GIWU, which had become an umbrella group of all labor organizations, called on sugar workers to strike in January 1964. To dramatize their case, Jagan led a march by sugar workers from the interior to Georgetown. This demonstration ignited outbursts of violence that soon escalated beyond the control of the authorities. On May 22, the governor finally declared another state of emergency. The situation continued to worsen, and in June the governor assumed full powers, rushed in British troops to restore order, and proclaimed a moratorium on all political activity. By the end of the turmoil, 160 people were dead and more than 1,000 homes had been destroyed.

In an effort to quell the turmoil, the country's political parties asked the British goverment to modify the constitution to provide for more proportional representation. The colonial secretary proposed a fifty-three member unicameral legislature. Despite opposition from the ruling PPP, all reforms were implemented and new elections set for October 1964.

As Jagan feared, the PPP lost the general elections of 1964. The politics of apan jhaat, Hindi for ""vote for your own kind,"" were becoming entrenched in Guyana. The PPP won 46 percent of the vote and twenty-four seats, which made it the majority party. However, the PNC, which won 40 percent of the vote and twenty-two seats, and the UF, which won 11 percent of the vote and seven seats, formed a coalition. The socialist PNC and unabashedly capitalist UF had joined forces to keep the PPP out of office for another term. Jagan called the election fraudulent and refused to resign as prime minister. The constitution was amended to allow the governor to remove Jagan from office. Burnham became prime minister on December 14, 1964.

Guyana History Contents

SOURCE: Area Handbook of the US Library of Congress

FM
Originally Posted by VVP:

As Jagan feared, the PPP lost the general elections of 1964. The politics of apan jhaat, Hindi for ""vote for your own kind,"" were becoming entrenched in Guyana.

 

So Apan Jhaat started in the early 60s?

Apan jhaat came to Guyana after the meeting with Nehru in the 50's. Working class Indians (the majority) were whipped into a frenzy to vote race by men like Debidin at bottom house meetings. Race voting among Indians became entrenched by the 60's.

 

See my post earlier today. The "elite" indo guyanese like JB Singh etc. did not like Jagan because of his communism, so the tended towards Burnham for leader of the PPP. However, the working class Indians supported Jagan heavily and subscribed to Debidin's apan jhaat.

 

Burnham, now conscious of apan jhaat and its implications for afro guyanese countered by forming various coalitions which included the business class Indians like JB Singh. Note the Luckhoos, the Ramphals, Shahabudeen's etc (educated, well off Indians) over time never supported Jagan and were welcomed by Forbes!!!!

 

So it began in the 50's after the India trip and is with us until today. I posit that Burnham's succeeding anti indo racism, while inexcusable, was at least in part shaped by apan jhaat practiced by Indians first.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
DG - not sure if I got the names above correct. Was JB Singh not a Burnham supporter and in the early PNC?

Correct Itaname.

DG, I understand JB Singh even bought Forbes his first car. And something about them singing "I am Jai and Jai is me".

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Itaname:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by Itaname:
DG - not sure if I got the names above correct. Was JB Singh not a Burnham supporter and in the early PNC?

Correct Itaname.

DG, I understand JB Singh even bought Forbes his first car. And something about them singing "I am Jai and Jai is me".

Correct observation, Itaname.

 

It should be noted that the individual is known as J.B. Singh and also J.B. Latchmansingh

FM
Originally Posted by VVP:

As Jagan feared, the PPP lost the general elections of 1964. The politics of apan jhaat, Hindi for ""vote for your own kind,"" were becoming entrenched in Guyana.

 

So Apan Jhaat started in the early 60s?

It started in the 1957 election.  It became entrenched in the 1961 when racial violence began.

 

It has remained ever since, despite the pretense of some that the coalition won a large swing Indo vote.

 

If Amna Ally is supposed to lead the discussion on how to reduce ethnic insecurity, she has a lot of work to do.  Hope she is up to the task.

 

BTW Region 10 has fired its first salvo, reminding Granger that it delivered a recorde vote and almost 17k votes for the coalition, with a winning margin of 14k.  If Granger alienates Linden, as Corbin did, the PPP comes roaring back. 

 

In 2006 the combined APNU AFC vote was uinder 11k.  Had this happened this year, the PPP would have won by a margin of almost 2,000.

 

Granger has to pay close attention to Linden.  His start is quite ominous as he seeks revenge against its PNC leaders.  Does he have others in Linden witrh the credibility.  Or is he risking a protest vote for the PPP in the LGE in Linden.

 

I hope that Jay, Kari and others are watching this.

FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×