Has colonialism permanently damaged the Guyanese psyche?

It was not by accident that one of the most profound analysts on the effects of colonialism on the psyche of the non-white colonial subject was a psychiatrist, Franz Fanon (see his two seminal projects; “White Skin Black Mask,” and the “Wretched of the Earth.&rdquo
The continuing argument is that the colonial subject has had his/her psychic structure destroyed by the impositions of colonialism, so that post-colonial society is psychologically dysfunctional.
VS Naipaul thinks that has happened but most outrageously, Naipaul will die and not accept he is one of the most intriguing examples of the mental effects of colonial destruction.
Noam Chomsky, the brilliant philosopher specializing in language, would tell you that Naipaul could not have had an Oxford accent just three years after settling into England. Colour has been inevitably cited as one of the effects colonialism has had on its non-white subjects.
I always remember the story of four women in Guyana who established themselves as experts in Hindu culture, almost everything about Hindu culture, but married Caucasian men, none of whom were from India or the Third World, and all of whom were Western-oriented.
The great Mahatma Gandhi was supposed to be the embodiment of India’s cultural ethics, but was a shameless supporter of the Hindu caste system and was in love with a Caucasian man.
More on this aspect of Gandhi’s homosexuality (and his anti-African racism and admiration of Hitler) in later columns – gleaned from his letters to his homosexual lover, German bodybuilder, Hermann Kallenbach, and put up for auction at Sotheby’s by the great-nephew of Kallenbach but the Indian Government moved in and bought the entire lot days before the auction.
In one of his letters to Kallenbach, Gandhi told his male lover; “How completely you have taken possession of my body, this is slavery with a vengeance.” (Source: Daily Mail (UK), July 25, 2012 by Graham Smith; BBC- South Asia News, online edition, March 30, 2011 and Joseph Lelyveld, “Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle with India.” Lelyveld’s book is devastating to Gandhi; see especially the review by Christopher Hitchens in The Atlantic, July/August, 2011)
India, of course, is a most troubled psychological land. Its ancient religious texts were shameless in their pronouncement on the inferiority of dark skin.
Then colonialism came and put the icing on the cake. India today is a land where skin-lightening ointment is a billion-dollar industry and where white skin is literally worshipped. Only white-skinned actors can make it in leading roles in the Hindu film industry.
Back in Guyana, the colour thing has outlived the efforts of Forbes Burnham. Burnham definitely sought to rid Guyana of this white complexion craze.
He must be turning in his grave with what is happening in the advertisement industry in Guyana today.
If a visitor came from another planet and looked at Guyana’s television and read our newspapers, that visitor would not believe Guyana is a country with citizens with dark and brown complexion.
I remember the great Guyanese poet, Martin Carter, shunned interviews for decades and only granted one interview before his death. It was given to a white Venezuelan journalist.
I was surprised to learn that Major General Joe Singh had given an interview to an English travel writer, John Gimlette.
Most western travel writers are bigoted journalists, blatantly condescending to Third World people and basically racist.
Singh complained in a letter in the Stabroek News that Gimlette twisted his words to suit Gimlette’s biased perspective. What did the Major General expect?
Travel writers see the Third World as an area of darkness. Guyanese, of course, would be more eager to talk to an English travel writer than one from Africa.
If you want to see the effects of colonialism on the Guyanese mind, then read the story of a Guyana-born white guy who is in advanced age.
This guy lives in England and comes often to Guyana. He goes to any social event without being invited and no one would ever ask him to leave. Why? He is white.
He can penetrate the most private occasion hosted by the crème de la crème of Guyanese society with his incongruous sartorial appendage, but no one would ask him to leave.
I remember this guy crashed the wedding of an employee of the US Embassy held at the Georgetown Club. He was dressed in beach clothes (as barefaced as that).
And to gain acceptance, he came to the table where my wife and I were sitting. He said to me; “Can’t you remember me, I met you at the Square of the Revolution.” It was all horse dung.
Our meeting at Cuffy Square never occurred. When he returns this year, he will look for the parties hosted by embassies and the Guyanese rich, and he knows no one will ever approach him to ask if he was invited.
I remember Latchmie Kalicharran walked into a cocktail event hosted by the US Embassy in the late eighties, and the Ambassador’s wife politely told her she was not on the guest list.
Our little white guy when he comes this year is going to have a great time enjoying la dolce vita in Guyana. His whiteness will galvanize his non-white hosts to treat him like a king. After all he is a king. He is not dark-skinned.

"To add insult to injury he blasphemed the Hindu scriptures by stating that Hindu scriptures condone and practice racism".

Interesting! No wonder when I see a Blackman I does feel like my whole world turn upside down. Now I can blame Indo-racism on Hinduism. 

Conservative historian Andrew Roberts says that a new biography of Mohandas Gandhi provides ample evidence to conclude that the revered leader of the Indian independence movement was gay. 

Roberts reviewed the new biography Great Soul by Joseph Lelyveld for The Wall Street Journal. He said the “generally admiring book” would nonetheless support a highly critical opinion of Gandhi, whom Roberts called “a sexual weirdo, a political incompetent and a fanatical faddist.”

Among the charges leveled by Roberts is that the icon of nonviolence slept with young women under age 18, which leads him to the discussion of Gandhi’s homosexuality. 

“Yet as Mr. Lelyveld makes abundantly clear, Gandhi's organ probably only rarely became aroused with his naked young ladies, because the love of his life was a German-Jewish architect and bodybuilder, Hermann Kallenbach, for whom Gandhi left his wife in 1908. ‘Your portrait (the only one) stands on my mantelpiece in my bedroom,’ he wrote to Kallenbach. ‘The mantelpiece is opposite to the bed.’ For some ­reason, cotton wool and Vaseline were "a constant reminder" of Kallenbach, which Mr. Lelyveld believes might ­relate to the enemas Gandhi gave ­himself, although there could be other, less generous, explanations.”

Roberts continues, “Gandhi wrote to Kallenbach about ‘how completely you have taken ­possession of my body. This is slavery with a vengeance.’ Gandhi nicknamed himself ‘Upper House’ and Kallenbach ‘Lower House,’ and he made Lower House promise not to ‘look lustfully upon any woman.’ The two then pledged ‘more love, and yet more love ... such love as they hope the world has not yet seen.’”

The men were parted in 1914, but Roberts concludes based on the biography by Lelyveld that Gandhi dreamed of being reunited with Kallenbach.

Freddie is a dunce and alleged thief. 

you cannot blame freddie that you is a ass you was born stupid and grow a ass 

This clearly illustrates the criteria for pointing out the dull and the ignorant. Gandhi's life like another is to be distilled out in the light of day for its truths. If one say Dr King liked women one would not see black folks taking to the streets. It is the truth as in the record.

Gandhi's racist statements of his youths is in the record. His adoration and words of love for another man is in the record. Why would anyone analyzing a historical figure be a target for a tar and feathering? We do not live in North Korea.

Even Mother Theresa and Rigoberta Menchu came under scrutiny. These are people and not gods. They come with human flaws. And by the way, Gandhi would not be made worse if he is seen to be be gay.

BTW, the Hindu scriptures is full of horrible prescriptions for what to do if the unclean ( blacks and browns by the color coded system) if the dare breach the cast prohibitions. 

Danyael, you need to zip it and have some tolerance for humor.

FREDDIE IS AN INDIAN OUTCAST, HUNGER FOR THE BLACK'S ACCEPTANCE, HE IS LOST,BUT HAS A THIRST FOR ATTENTION.

Woopdeedoo! Here we are with the casteism....the same Freedie is commenting as exist as scriptural imperatives ( and no lie) and here it is in practice...Freddie is for those Blacks....our sudras...

Freddie knows that he can never be at home in your world. As much as  he may have blemishes galore he is in comparison far more pristine in his heart than any believing what you wrote.

There is no joke in racism or attempts at penalizing an individual because he spoke the truth.

It does not matter whether Ghandi was Gay. He is still the Mahatama and will be referred to as "Bapuji".

About two years ago I went to a mall to buy a phone.  The phone store was owned by some India Indians who run the business.  There was a very dark skin india indian man there. He was there to find out which phone to buy.  Those indians working the counter helped me, the white customers, some Chinese and even some African customers and left that very dark skin Indian man until the very end even though he came before most of us.  Then they only spent a few minutes talking to him.  It was as if they did not want his money or business.  I had to show the man which phone I think he should buy. He saw these people as his brothers and sisters from India but it was very clear they did not see him as a brother.

rass if they see nehru they will kick him out of the store

When living in Guyana many years ago I heard stories about how untouchables were treated in India.  I believed that Indian man was recognized by those indians as being an untouchable because of his very dark color. To see this repulsive act being practiced in front of me was something else indeed.  It is something to see men and women who prefer to serve people from other countries and other ethnicities rather than their own flesh and blood.

Gandhi never admired Hitler.  Gandhi was welcomed in Italy by Mussolini as a head of state.  The only European leader to do this.  Yet Gandhi was very critical of Mussolini.  Gandhi was a giant of a man.  He is up there with Bose, Patel, Ambedkar, Nehru and Jinnah as one of the greatest Indian born freedom fighters that ever lived. 

I am waiting for Freddy to write an article about the alleged bisexuality of Malcolm x,

dude, contextualize what the man (Freddie) is doing for a change and stop this gratuitous dragging of blackman into your silliness . . . why should he?

what does the sexuality of Malcom X, or MLK (his affairs) for that matter, have to do with the gravamen of Freddie's piece?

Mahatma Gandhi's tremendous legacy is secure . . . y'all need to stop being so INSECURE!

smh

Redux, both Gandhi and Malcolm x  were allegedly bisexual.  It seems like they may have been both deep in the closet.  Freddy should write about the alleged bisexuality of Malcolm x also because it can help the self-esteem of those gays and bisexual men who suffer from discrimination and hate in overwhelmingly homophobic countries like Guyana.

Judging from all the things I've been reading about Mahatma Gandhi lately, I must say the great man is still a powerful force today, 65 years after his death.

Commentators and analysts on both ends of the ideological spectrum, leftists and rightists, are still criticizing and finding fault with one or another aspect of Gandhi's life.

And Gandhi's admirers and followers have also adopted extreme positions, elevating him to the rank of a deity, faultless and pure.

We must recognize that Mahatma Gandhi was only a man, with human flaws.

There are allegations about his homosexuality based on his own candid written words, but no proof of it.

And while it's true that Gandhi uttered unflattering words about South African blacks very early in his political career, it's also true that his world view evolved continually throughout his later life. Near his death, Gandhi openly deplored the exploitation of blacks in South Africa. He was not a racist as some people allege.

He was constantly criticizing himself for previous views and deeds, always striving to improve himself.

Regardless of Mahatma Gandhi's perceived or real character flaws, he made an indelible contribution to human freedom, equality and fraternity.

One of his last public acts was a fast for Hindu-Muslim unity in India. He paid the highest price for fighting for that goal --- martyrdom.

Does anything else matter, folks?

Well said. Fair and balanced.