Skip to main content

FM
Former Member

The PPP was always only interested in power for power sake

OCTOBER 14, 2013 | BY  | FILED UNDER LETTERS 

 

Dear Editor,


Former longstanding senior PPP executive member Mr. Ralph Ramkarran in his column, “ The PNC, APNU and national unity,” (SN 10-13-13), in criticising Brig. Granger’s use of  some 1977 Burnham quotes  when he rejected Jagan’s call for a National Front Government, wrote that in 1977 the PPP had conceded the Executive Presidency to the PNC. In 1977, we still had the Westminster constitution in effect with Burnham as Prime Minister. It was not until 1980 that the Executive Presidency came into being with the new socialist constitution after the rigged 1978 Referendum and 1980 elections. How then could the PPP concede such presidency to the PNC in 1977 after constantly screaming about rigged elections since 1968. It meant that the PPP was privy to the PNC’s drafting of the socialist constitution in 1977.
It just goes to show that the PPP did not care for democracy and free and fair elections but always had Stalin style communism as its objective. Kicked out of power in 1964 by the USA, the party in 1969 formally declared itself a disciplined Marxist Leninist party affiliated to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and called on the PNC to nationalize the “commanding heights of the economy.” The PNC nationalised the bauxite industry in 1970 and declared itself “cooperative socialist” in 1974. The PPP scoffed at the PNC saying that was not “true scientific socialism.” However, the Communist Party of Cuba felt otherwise and ordered Jagan to join with the PNC to build socialism.


The PPP could not merge with the PNC as it had spent years demonizing Burnham and the PNC along racist lines. So Jagan instead declared “critical support” for the PNC. The ideologues of the PPP disagreed with Jagan, and led by Ranji Chandisingh, defected to the PNC. The cream of the PPP leadership obeyed the Cuban Communist Party. Jagan was in a quandary. How could he could join with Burnham without been seen to betray his supporters and be deemed a traitor?


Jagan could not afford to lose his Indian base by just joining the PNC, so he sought to do so under the guise of national unity by proposing a National Front Government in 1977 and a National Patriotic Front Government in 1979. That at a time when Afro Guyanese led by the WPA were waging street protests to remove the PNC from power. The PPP ordered its base not to support the WPA. Whilst the PNC state was gunning down African opponents, the PPP all along was trying to find a face saving way to join the PNC socialist dictatorship under the guise of national unity.


Jagan believed that world capitalism would collapse and that communism led by the Soviet Union would triumph. He believed that political unity of the PNC and PPP would deter US pressures. Burnham was not ideologically rigid like Jagan and he knew that the US would not tolerate Jagan in power so he could not agree to Jagan’s demands. Jagan’s proposals were flawed because of their ideological and class basis. He further felt that a mere unity of himself and Burnham would unite the races. Hence Brig. Granger’s quote of Burnham  : “…an understanding or compromise between leaders is no guarantee of unity amongst the rank and file unless there is a serious and honest attempt to spread the message of unity further down…” is absolutely in order. Proof of Jagan’s flawed proposals was evident by the fact that Afro Guyanese, led by the WPA, were more interested in democracy than in PPP and PNC socialist dictatorship.


Ralph Ramkarran wants APNU to promote the need for a political solution to free us from the current gridlock in parliament. How about the PPP making the same National Front Government proposals it made in 1977; after all that party has been in power for 21 years now.  It just goes to show that the PPP was always only interested in power for power sake. Ralph Ramkarran omitted to say that Brig. Granger acknowledged that there was racial hatred in the past and that he was prepared to work with all other parties to achieve national unity. The first step is national reconciliation. However, one leader alone cannot engage in national reconciliation. Brig. Granger and the PNC have indicated their willingness to start the process. What about the remainder of Guyanese society.


 Malcolm Harripaul

Replies sorted oldest to newest

In this regard, history will show that the Cubans were right. When you have two left wing parties in Guyana then later three left wing parties in Guyana fighting each other like dogs and cats then no one on the left wins.  No one on the left won when Che cuss out the Bolivian Communist party which led to the party withdrawing its members from his armed group, No one on the left won when Cord took on Bishop and no one on the left won when Kennedy fought Carter in the Democratic primary before the 1980 US Presidential election.

FM
Originally Posted by JB:

The PPP was always only interested in power for power sake

OCTOBER 14, 2013 | BY  | FILED UNDER LETTERS 

 

Dear Editor,


Former longstanding senior PPP executive member Mr. Ralph Ramkarran in his column, “ The PNC, APNU and national unity,” (SN 10-13-13), in criticising Brig. Granger’s use of  some 1977 Burnham quotes  when he rejected Jagan’s call for a National Front Government, wrote that in 1977 the PPP had conceded the Executive Presidency to the PNC. In 1977, we still had the Westminster constitution in effect with Burnham as Prime Minister. It was not until 1980 that the Executive Presidency came into being with the new socialist constitution after the rigged 1978 Referendum and 1980 elections. How then could the PPP concede such presidency to the PNC in 1977 after constantly screaming about rigged elections since 1968. It meant that the PPP was privy to the PNC’s drafting of the socialist constitution in 1977.
It just goes to show that the PPP did not care for democracy and free and fair elections but always had Stalin style communism as its objective. Kicked out of power in 1964 by the USA, the party in 1969 formally declared itself a disciplined Marxist Leninist party affiliated to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and called on the PNC to nationalize the “commanding heights of the economy.” The PNC nationalised the bauxite industry in 1970 and declared itself “cooperative socialist” in 1974. The PPP scoffed at the PNC saying that was not “true scientific socialism.” However, the Communist Party of Cuba felt otherwise and ordered Jagan to join with the PNC to build socialism.


The PPP could not merge with the PNC as it had spent years demonizing Burnham and the PNC along racist lines. So Jagan instead declared “critical support” for the PNC. The ideologues of the PPP disagreed with Jagan, and led by Ranji Chandisingh, defected to the PNC. The cream of the PPP leadership obeyed the Cuban Communist Party. Jagan was in a quandary. How could he could join with Burnham without been seen to betray his supporters and be deemed a traitor?


Jagan could not afford to lose his Indian base by just joining the PNC, so he sought to do so under the guise of national unity by proposing a National Front Government in 1977 and a National Patriotic Front Government in 1979. That at a time when Afro Guyanese led by the WPA were waging street protests to remove the PNC from power. The PPP ordered its base not to support the WPA. Whilst the PNC state was gunning down African opponents, the PPP all along was trying to find a face saving way to join the PNC socialist dictatorship under the guise of national unity.


Jagan believed that world capitalism would collapse and that communism led by the Soviet Union would triumph. He believed that political unity of the PNC and PPP would deter US pressures. Burnham was not ideologically rigid like Jagan and he knew that the US would not tolerate Jagan in power so he could not agree to Jagan’s demands. Jagan’s proposals were flawed because of their ideological and class basis. He further felt that a mere unity of himself and Burnham would unite the races. Hence Brig. Granger’s quote of Burnham  : “…an understanding or compromise between leaders is no guarantee of unity amongst the rank and file unless there is a serious and honest attempt to spread the message of unity further down…” is absolutely in order. Proof of Jagan’s flawed proposals was evident by the fact that Afro Guyanese, led by the WPA, were more interested in democracy than in PPP and PNC socialist dictatorship.


Ralph Ramkarran wants APNU to promote the need for a political solution to free us from the current gridlock in parliament. How about the PPP making the same National Front Government proposals it made in 1977; after all that party has been in power for 21 years now.  It just goes to show that the PPP was always only interested in power for power sake. Ralph Ramkarran omitted to say that Brig. Granger acknowledged that there was racial hatred in the past and that he was prepared to work with all other parties to achieve national unity. The first step is national reconciliation. However, one leader alone cannot engage in national reconciliation. Brig. Granger and the PNC have indicated their willingness to start the process. What about the remainder of Guyanese society.


 Malcolm Harripaul

What new things are you teaching the people? The same old crap retooled in a different garb, that of the PNC.  

FM

the Communist Party of Cuba felt otherwise and ordered Jagan to join with the PNC to build socialism.

The PPP could not merge with the PNC as it had spent years demonizing Burnham and the PNC along racist lines. So Jagan instead declared “critical support” for the PNC. The ideologues of the PPP disagreed with Jagan, and led by Ranji Chandisingh, defected to the PNC. The cream of the PPP leadership obeyed the Cuban Communist Party. Jagan was in a quandary. How could he could join with Burnham without been seen to betray his supporters and be deemed a traitor?

Mitwah
Originally Posted by JB:
Originally Posted by baseman:

PNC is an existential threat to democracy and human rights in Guyana.

 

Why? 


A DUNCE like you will BEVER understand. Gal, stick to clapping Roti and making up Beds.

Nehru
Originally Posted by Nehru:
Originally Posted by JB:
Originally Posted by baseman:

PNC is an existential threat to democracy and human rights in Guyana.

 

Why? 


A DUNCE like you will BEVER understand. Gal, stick to clapping Roti and making up Beds.

 

I run a business. Have an economics degree and will soon get ACCA. 

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:

PNC is an existential threat to democracy and human rights in Guyana.

The PPP is a full functioning industrial strength anti democratic engine operating at full efficiency in Guyana. Hiring a drug lord to murder citizens is not about human rights. Robbing the coffers dry and becoming over night fat cats from sire to dam to siblings to extend kin is not democracy at work. It is nepotism in its most brutal anti democratic expression.

FM
Originally Posted by Nehru:
Originally Posted by JB:
Originally Posted by baseman:

PNC is an existential threat to democracy and human rights in Guyana.

 

Why? 


A DUNCE like you will BEVER understand. Gal, stick to clapping Roti and making up Beds.

 What a lover of women you are...only when they are to be your serf or sex slave!

FM

Malcolm Harripaul was afraid to say NO to Granger, his former boss..

What he is doing is what the others are waiting in line for..

The PNC cannot win an election in Guyana, so Malcolm is begging on behalf of the PNC to start a dialogue so they can take control of the voting machine.

Not going to happen.

R
Originally Posted by Ramakant-P:

Malcolm Harripaul was afraid to say NO to Granger, his former boss..

What he is doing is what the others are waiting in line for..

The PNC cannot win an election in Guyana, so Malcolm is begging on behalf of the PNC to start a dialogue so they can take control of the voting machine.

Not going to happen.

 

Mr Harripaul is educating the people. My mamoo files away his letters. 

FM

Harripaul’s letter on Dr Jagan was spot on

 

Posted By Staff Writer On March 14, 2011 @ 5:01 am In Letters | 

 

Dear Editor,
I refer to a letter from Malcolm Harripaul in your Saturday 11th March issue, captioned `With his adherence to Communism Dr Jagan committed political suicide.’

Had I written a letter on the matter it would have been identical to Malcolm’s letter and I am sure that when the history of this country is finally written, it will be recorded very much as Malcolm has written it, and I want to congratulate him.

 

There is one thing which I would like to tell him however, I have known Joey Jagan since I was a teenager and he never supported his parents’ political beliefs even as a teenager. He has always been supportive of the west and democracy rather than the eastern bloc, the USSR and communism.

 

Yours faithfully,
Tony Vieira

FM

Dr. Jangh Bahadur Singh’s advice to Dr. Cheddi Jagan in early 1948

OCTOBER 21, 2013 | BY  | FILED UNDER LETTERS 

 

Dear Editor,


I first read Dr Cheddi Jagan’s, “ West on Trial,” when I was 14 years old and I was somewhat puzzled by Dr Jagan’s boast that he had put a shovel man named Fred Bowman to run against Dr Jangh Bahadur Singh in the 1953 elections and that Bowman had defeated Dr J B Singh. It was not until I read Dr Mohan Ragheer’s, “The Indelible Red Stain,” that I understood Dr Jagan’s motive.  In an interview with Dr Ragheer in 1950 for Queens College’s Lictor newspaper, Dr Jagan still felt slighted by his first Georgetown host in mid 1930’s for making him cut grass for the goats, his second host for making him sleep on the floor, and resentment for Capt Nobbs, the QC Principal for placing him in First Form. It looked like Dr Jagan was prone to hold grudges, even imaginary ones, and he might have had one against Dr J B Singh.

Dr J B Singh had in early 1948 imparted some advice to the two youngest Indian politicians, Dr Jagan and Jainarain Singh. As regarded the electoral prospects, Dr J B Singh had this to say, “The biggest danger now is for Indians to push too hard, before the Blacks can be conditioned to accept an Indian victory in any future election.

 

Anyone who can command the Indian vote when universal suffrage comes…anyone who gets the rural Indians to vote for him will win the next elections. It’s simple arithmetic. But you must get the Negro vote too, including their middle class; good politicians learn to put pragmatism over more intellectualisms.”

 

Dr J B Singh on race relations, “So go easy; we can bring the Negroes to our side if we act smart..we have four maybe five years to bring them to our side; to do that we have to work smart, have the right platform to grab both Indians and Blacks so that they don’t fight one another, there’s enough in this land for everyone; let’s tell them that, and show them that; show them that we can be ourselves, keep our cultures, yet work and grow together, just as we play cricket together, compete, win and lose and yet have a drink afterwards.”

 

Dr J B Singh on courting the masses only, “True, the masses will make you win. But they won’t make you govern, not if you want to run a successful and prosperous country in which they too can have a fair chance to reach for the top.

 

You need the educated, the men and women with brains and money, thinkers, planners, professionals, men of business…This country is too small to afford to lose even one good brain. So we need all talent on our side. We have to choose our language and ideology accordingly in order to get all races on our side; we must get the Negroes, at least half of them.”

 

Dr J B Singh had some caustic words for Dr Jagan, “I know you left our Association in a huff, but that is your weakness, not the Association’s; the Association is people, many with conflicting views, all legitimate; that’s democracy. It is possible to influence views and direction but you wished to do that by diktat, not reason and discourse; you wanted to manoeuvre a bulldozer as if it is a motorcycle; you wished us to accept overnight your blind belief that Communism answers all questions, and that alignment with Stalin who gets his way by murdering his opponents and dissenters will be superior to dealing democratically with the world. How naïve you are; no wonder thinking people feel you are a mere pawn in somebody else’s chess game!”

 

Dr J B Singh was not done yet,” You’re are fond of using words like ‘imperialism’ ‘reactionary’, ‘struggle’, ‘militant’, ‘dialectic’ and so on , as if you invented them and the rest of us are ignorant. Think of them closely. Life is a series of compromises and adjustments that can go in any direction; so is politics…If we rush to overthrow and radicalize – to use Communist rhetoric- we will win quick in the short term with communist promises of everything for free but that would be a disaster, because we don’t have the money to do that, not unless your superiors in Moscow pay you big to give them a footing here. But you must know that the Brits and Yanks will not tolerate a Communist state here.”

 

I guess Dr Jagan did get his revenge in 1953 when the  shovel man defeated the Indian doyen of British Guiana politics but history had proven that Dr J B Singh was absolutely correct and that Dr Cheddi Jagan was dead wrong in his communist mantras and at what devastating consequences for Guyana even seventy five years later.

 

Malcolm Harripaul

FM

the ppp was and is all about power not the intrest of the guyanese people the ppp never support RODNEY when he try to bring down the pnc jagan report chicken ROHAN when he was trying to overtrow the pnc the ppp never support any group that try to overtrow the pnc including the CANADIAN guyanese that was charge and jail in the USA 

FM

Before Dr Cheddi Jagan entered politics, Dr JB Singh was the pre-eminent champion of East Indian rights in British Guiana.

He represented the East Indian community in the legislature for decades and served as a medical doctor to Indian immigrants, i.e., our grandparents and great grandparents.

While Dr JB Singh looked after his own people, however, he was not a racist. He wanted good relations with Afro-Guianese on the basis of mutual respect.

In the name of fair play, justice and gratitude, we must give Dr Singh his due recognition.

Whatever happened between him and Dr Jagan should not diminish the sterling contribution Dr Singh made to our ancestors' advancement.

FM
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:

Before Dr Cheddi Jagan entered politics, Dr JB Singh was the pre-eminent champion of East Indian rights in British Guiana.

He represented the East Indian community in the legislature for decades and served as a medical doctor to Indian immigrants, i.e., our grandparents and great grandparents.

While Dr JB Singh looked after his own people, however, he was not a racist. He wanted good relations with Afro-Guianese on the basis of mutual respect.

In the name of fair play, justice and gratitude, we must give Dr Singh his due recognition.

Whatever happened between him and Dr Jagan should not diminish the sterling contribution Dr Singh made to our ancestors' advancement.

did he teach the present day ppp indians how to thief or his he turning in his grave

FM
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:

Before Dr Cheddi Jagan entered politics, Dr JB Singh was the pre-eminent champion of East Indian rights in British Guiana.

He represented the East Indian community in the legislature for decades and served as a medical doctor to Indian immigrants, i.e., our grandparents and great grandparents.

While Dr JB Singh looked after his own people, however, he was not a racist. He wanted good relations with Afro-Guianese on the basis of mutual respect.

In the name of fair play, justice and gratitude, we must give Dr Singh his due recognition.

Whatever happened between him and Dr Jagan should not diminish the sterling contribution Dr Singh made to our ancestors' advancement.

 

Thank you for sharing. I did not know. I thought East Indian political history stared and ended with Dr Jagan/PPP. 

FM

“I know you left our Association in a huff, but that is your weakness, not the Association’s; the Association is people, many with conflicting views, all legitimate; that’s democracy. It is possible to influence views and direction but you wished to do that by diktat, not reason and discourse; you wanted to manoeuvre a bulldozer as if it is a motorcycle; you wished us to accept overnight your blind belief that Communism answers all questions, and that alignment with Stalin who gets his way by murdering his opponents and dissenters will be superior to dealing democratically with the world. How naïve you are; no wonder thinking people feel you are a mere pawn in somebody else’s chess game!”

FM

Hamilton Green was against free and fair elections in 1992

 

Posted By Staff Writer On October 23, 2013 @ 5:03 am In Letters | 

 

Dear Editor,

 

Former PNC strongman Mayor Hamilton Green in his letter, `Proposed rotation of mayorship has to be seen in context of PPP obsession with political control of Georgetown,’ (SN 10-21-13), stated that he was expelled from the PNC because he had a serious disagreement with PNC leader Desmond Hoyte over “the political management of the party machinery.”  I seemed to recall that immediately after the 1992 elections Mr Green went on a campaign to PNC groups telling them that Mr Hoyte was “foolish for holding free and fair elections.” Mr Green was certainly against free and fair elections and did all that he could do to derail the 1992 elections.

At the end of poll that day Mr Green’s supporters went to the Elections Commission building and proceeded to stone it. Riots were fomented in other parts of the Georgetown, all in an effort to sabotage the elections. Fortunately Mr Hoyte would have none of it and ordered the GDF and Police to restore law and order and protect the electoral process. It was his efforts to stop the process of restoring democracy and bad mouthing Mr Hoyte that caused Mr Hoyte to expel him.

 

Mr Green in his letter also referred to the secret power sharing talks between Burnham and Jagan in the early 1980’s, “… Burnham and Jagan and just a few of us had held secret meetings in an effort to forge a political unity (or a modus vivendi). Things were near fruition when Burnham died, my witness being Elvin Mc David.  After Burnham’s death Hoyte had a strong hostility towards Dr. Jagan, which I did not share.  Hoyte was not aware of the secret Burnham/Jagan talks.  I recall inviting Cheddi Jagan to my home to revive those talks. Hoyte was upset, my witness to this being Dr. Joey Jagan.” I hope PPP supporters, especially the younger ones read and understand this statement.

 

Here was Mr Green, just after the 1980 rigged elections, holding power sharing talks with Dr Jagan. After the 1985 rigged elections Mr Green summoned Dr Jagan and his son Joey to his home to resume power sharing talks. Mr Hoyte was hostile towards Dr Jagan. Mr Hoyte terminated the power sharing talks. But it was the same Mr Hoyte who held free and fair elections in 1992, although he knew it might gave power to Dr Jagan, and it was the same Mr Green who tried to stop free and fair elections. So Mr Green was willing to hold onto power by rigged elections and share some crumbs with Dr Jagan and Joey. What is the point I am making. That Jagan and Green were peas of the same pod. Mr Hoyte was different. He was committed to restoring democracy even if it meant him losing power. This is a man young people must look to as a role model and try to emulate.

When Mr Green was expelled he was left like the proverbial beggar on the street. The once powerful and feared strongman was suddenly a nobody on the streets. But the PPP soon rescued him, helped him set up his Good and Green Party, and released his associates Rabbi Washington and Errol Butcher who were jailed by Hoyte. The “PPP intellectuals” who usually gathered outside Freedom House on Saturday mornings whispered that Green would split the PNC and give PPP victory in Georgetown in the 1994 local government elections. However Mr Green won the largest bloc of votes and Dr Jagan called him in for “power sharing talks,” but Mr Green off course preferred to eat the whole cake.

 

Mr Green gave as his excuse, “With my experience of the PPP I knew that the plan would be to support the third year PPP Mayor with Government resources so that their Mayor would look good and therefore influence voters for the next election.” So Mr Green knew he would not get resources to get the job done but he has held on to it for 19 years. I suppose when you depend on politics to earn a living it does not matter whether you get the job done or not. What matters is the paycheck the job gets you.

 

Yours faithfully,


Malcolm Harripaul

FM

HARRIPAUL: "The “PPP intellectuals” who usually gathered outside Freedom House on Saturday mornings whispered that Green would split the PNC and give PPP victory in Georgetown in the 1994 local government elections. "

 

====

 

Mr Harripaul is indeed a great man. 

FM

Mr Harripaul: "That Jagan and Green were peas of the same pod. Mr Hoyte was different. He was committed to restoring democracy even if it meant him losing power. This is a man young people must look to as a role model and try to emulate."

FM

Harripaul: "But the PPP soon rescued him, helped him set up his Good and Green Party, and released his associates Rabbi Washington and Errol Butcher who were jailed by Hoyte. "

 

Wow imagine the damage the PPP did to security in Guyana.

FM
Originally Posted by Vish M:

This seems to be a naked attack on Jagan.

 

Jagan is an ICON.

 

He is a National Hero.

 

Malcolm and company are seeking to be RELEVANT

Mr Vish M please read and have an education. The truth shall ye free. 

FM
Originally Posted by JB:

Dr. Jangh Bahadur Singh’s advice to Dr. Cheddi Jagan in early 1948

OCTOBER 21, 2013 | BY  | FILED UNDER LETTERS 

 

Dear Editor,


I first read Dr Cheddi Jagan’s, “ West on Trial,” when I was 14 years old and I was somewhat puzzled by Dr Jagan’s boast that he had put a shovel man named Fred Bowman to run against Dr Jangh Bahadur Singh in the 1953 elections and that Bowman had defeated Dr J B Singh. It was not until I read Dr Mohan Ragheer’s, “The Indelible Red Stain,” that I understood Dr Jagan’s motive.  In an interview with Dr Ragheer in 1950 for Queens College’s Lictor newspaper, Dr Jagan still felt slighted by his first Georgetown host in mid 1930’s for making him cut grass for the goats, his second host for making him sleep on the floor, and resentment for Capt Nobbs, the QC Principal for placing him in First Form. It looked like Dr Jagan was prone to hold grudges, even imaginary ones, and he might have had one against Dr J B Singh.

Dr J B Singh had in early 1948 imparted some advice to the two youngest Indian politicians, Dr Jagan and Jainarain Singh. As regarded the electoral prospects, Dr J B Singh had this to say, “The biggest danger now is for Indians to push too hard, before the Blacks can be conditioned to accept an Indian victory in any future election.

 

Anyone who can command the Indian vote when universal suffrage comes…anyone who gets the rural Indians to vote for him will win the next elections. It’s simple arithmetic. But you must get the Negro vote too, including their middle class; good politicians learn to put pragmatism over more intellectualisms.”

 

Dr J B Singh on race relations, “So go easy; we can bring the Negroes to our side if we act smart..we have four maybe five years to bring them to our side; to do that we have to work smart, have the right platform to grab both Indians and Blacks so that they don’t fight one another, there’s enough in this land for everyone; let’s tell them that, and show them that; show them that we can be ourselves, keep our cultures, yet work and grow together, just as we play cricket together, compete, win and lose and yet have a drink afterwards.”

 

Dr J B Singh on courting the masses only, “True, the masses will make you win. But they won’t make you govern, not if you want to run a successful and prosperous country in which they too can have a fair chance to reach for the top.

 

You need the educated, the men and women with brains and money, thinkers, planners, professionals, men of business…This country is too small to afford to lose even one good brain. So we need all talent on our side. We have to choose our language and ideology accordingly in order to get all races on our side; we must get the Negroes, at least half of them.”

 

Dr J B Singh had some caustic words for Dr Jagan, “I know you left our Association in a huff, but that is your weakness, not the Association’s; the Association is people, many with conflicting views, all legitimate; that’s democracy. It is possible to influence views and direction but you wished to do that by diktat, not reason and discourse; you wanted to manoeuvre a bulldozer as if it is a motorcycle; you wished us to accept overnight your blind belief that Communism answers all questions, and that alignment with Stalin who gets his way by murdering his opponents and dissenters will be superior to dealing democratically with the world. How naïve you are; no wonder thinking people feel you are a mere pawn in somebody else’s chess game!”

 

Dr J B Singh was not done yet,” You’re are fond of using words like ‘imperialism’ ‘reactionary’, ‘struggle’, ‘militant’, ‘dialectic’ and so on , as if you invented them and the rest of us are ignorant. Think of them closely. Life is a series of compromises and adjustments that can go in any direction; so is politics…If we rush to overthrow and radicalize – to use Communist rhetoric- we will win quick in the short term with communist promises of everything for free but that would be a disaster, because we don’t have the money to do that, not unless your superiors in Moscow pay you big to give them a footing here. But you must know that the Brits and Yanks will not tolerate a Communist state here.”

 

I guess Dr Jagan did get his revenge in 1953 when the  shovel man defeated the Indian doyen of British Guiana politics but history had proven that Dr J B Singh was absolutely correct and that Dr Cheddi Jagan was dead wrong in his communist mantras and at what devastating consequences for Guyana even seventy five years later.

 

Malcolm Harripaul


Well I learned some thing new here today from Malcolm.  Dr.Jagan literally selected a man from the trenches to shovel out Jang Bahadur Singh.

FM
Originally Posted by Wally:
Originally Posted by JB:

Dr. Jangh Bahadur Singh’s advice to Dr. Cheddi Jagan in early 1948

OCTOBER 21, 2013 | BY  | FILED UNDER LETTERS 

 

Dear Editor,


I first read Dr Cheddi Jagan’s, “ West on Trial,” when I was 14 years old and I was somewhat puzzled by Dr Jagan’s boast that he had put a shovel man named Fred Bowman to run against Dr Jangh Bahadur Singh in the 1953 elections and that Bowman had defeated Dr J B Singh. It was not until I read Dr Mohan Ragheer’s, “The Indelible Red Stain,” that I understood Dr Jagan’s motive.  In an interview with Dr Ragheer in 1950 for Queens College’s Lictor newspaper, Dr Jagan still felt slighted by his first Georgetown host in mid 1930’s for making him cut grass for the goats, his second host for making him sleep on the floor, and resentment for Capt Nobbs, the QC Principal for placing him in First Form. It looked like Dr Jagan was prone to hold grudges, even imaginary ones, and he might have had one against Dr J B Singh.

Dr J B Singh had in early 1948 imparted some advice to the two youngest Indian politicians, Dr Jagan and Jainarain Singh. As regarded the electoral prospects, Dr J B Singh had this to say, “The biggest danger now is for Indians to push too hard, before the Blacks can be conditioned to accept an Indian victory in any future election.

 

Anyone who can command the Indian vote when universal suffrage comes…anyone who gets the rural Indians to vote for him will win the next elections. It’s simple arithmetic. But you must get the Negro vote too, including their middle class; good politicians learn to put pragmatism over more intellectualisms.”

 

Dr J B Singh on race relations, “So go easy; we can bring the Negroes to our side if we act smart..we have four maybe five years to bring them to our side; to do that we have to work smart, have the right platform to grab both Indians and Blacks so that they don’t fight one another, there’s enough in this land for everyone; let’s tell them that, and show them that; show them that we can be ourselves, keep our cultures, yet work and grow together, just as we play cricket together, compete, win and lose and yet have a drink afterwards.”

 

Dr J B Singh on courting the masses only, “True, the masses will make you win. But they won’t make you govern, not if you want to run a successful and prosperous country in which they too can have a fair chance to reach for the top.

 

You need the educated, the men and women with brains and money, thinkers, planners, professionals, men of business…This country is too small to afford to lose even one good brain. So we need all talent on our side. We have to choose our language and ideology accordingly in order to get all races on our side; we must get the Negroes, at least half of them.”

 

Dr J B Singh had some caustic words for Dr Jagan, “I know you left our Association in a huff, but that is your weakness, not the Association’s; the Association is people, many with conflicting views, all legitimate; that’s democracy. It is possible to influence views and direction but you wished to do that by diktat, not reason and discourse; you wanted to manoeuvre a bulldozer as if it is a motorcycle; you wished us to accept overnight your blind belief that Communism answers all questions, and that alignment with Stalin who gets his way by murdering his opponents and dissenters will be superior to dealing democratically with the world. How naïve you are; no wonder thinking people feel you are a mere pawn in somebody else’s chess game!”

 

Dr J B Singh was not done yet,” You’re are fond of using words like ‘imperialism’ ‘reactionary’, ‘struggle’, ‘militant’, ‘dialectic’ and so on , as if you invented them and the rest of us are ignorant. Think of them closely. Life is a series of compromises and adjustments that can go in any direction; so is politics…If we rush to overthrow and radicalize – to use Communist rhetoric- we will win quick in the short term with communist promises of everything for free but that would be a disaster, because we don’t have the money to do that, not unless your superiors in Moscow pay you big to give them a footing here. But you must know that the Brits and Yanks will not tolerate a Communist state here.”

 

I guess Dr Jagan did get his revenge in 1953 when the  shovel man defeated the Indian doyen of British Guiana politics but history had proven that Dr J B Singh was absolutely correct and that Dr Cheddi Jagan was dead wrong in his communist mantras and at what devastating consequences for Guyana even seventy five years later.

 

Malcolm Harripaul


Well I learned some thing new here today from Malcolm.  Dr.Jagan literally selected a man from the trenches to shovel out Jang Bahadur Singh.


Actually a few years later Freddy Bowman quit the PPP party in support of Edward B Beharry.

FM
Originally Posted by Wally:
Originally Posted by Wally:
Originally Posted by JB:

Dr. Jangh Bahadur Singh’s advice to Dr. Cheddi Jagan in early 1948

OCTOBER 21, 2013 | BY  | FILED UNDER LETTERS 

 

Dear Editor,


I first read Dr Cheddi Jagan’s, “ West on Trial,” when I was 14 years old and I was somewhat puzzled by Dr Jagan’s boast that he had put a shovel man named Fred Bowman to run against Dr Jangh Bahadur Singh in the 1953 elections and that Bowman had defeated Dr J B Singh. It was not until I read Dr Mohan Ragheer’s, “The Indelible Red Stain,” that I understood Dr Jagan’s motive.  In an interview with Dr Ragheer in 1950 for Queens College’s Lictor newspaper, Dr Jagan still felt slighted by his first Georgetown host in mid 1930’s for making him cut grass for the goats, his second host for making him sleep on the floor, and resentment for Capt Nobbs, the QC Principal for placing him in First Form. It looked like Dr Jagan was prone to hold grudges, even imaginary ones, and he might have had one against Dr J B Singh.

Dr J B Singh had in early 1948 imparted some advice to the two youngest Indian politicians, Dr Jagan and Jainarain Singh. As regarded the electoral prospects, Dr J B Singh had this to say, “The biggest danger now is for Indians to push too hard, before the Blacks can be conditioned to accept an Indian victory in any future election.

 

Anyone who can command the Indian vote when universal suffrage comes…anyone who gets the rural Indians to vote for him will win the next elections. It’s simple arithmetic. But you must get the Negro vote too, including their middle class; good politicians learn to put pragmatism over more intellectualisms.”

 

Dr J B Singh on race relations, “So go easy; we can bring the Negroes to our side if we act smart..we have four maybe five years to bring them to our side; to do that we have to work smart, have the right platform to grab both Indians and Blacks so that they don’t fight one another, there’s enough in this land for everyone; let’s tell them that, and show them that; show them that we can be ourselves, keep our cultures, yet work and grow together, just as we play cricket together, compete, win and lose and yet have a drink afterwards.”

 

Dr J B Singh on courting the masses only, “True, the masses will make you win. But they won’t make you govern, not if you want to run a successful and prosperous country in which they too can have a fair chance to reach for the top.

 

You need the educated, the men and women with brains and money, thinkers, planners, professionals, men of business…This country is too small to afford to lose even one good brain. So we need all talent on our side. We have to choose our language and ideology accordingly in order to get all races on our side; we must get the Negroes, at least half of them.”

 

Dr J B Singh had some caustic words for Dr Jagan, “I know you left our Association in a huff, but that is your weakness, not the Association’s; the Association is people, many with conflicting views, all legitimate; that’s democracy. It is possible to influence views and direction but you wished to do that by diktat, not reason and discourse; you wanted to manoeuvre a bulldozer as if it is a motorcycle; you wished us to accept overnight your blind belief that Communism answers all questions, and that alignment with Stalin who gets his way by murdering his opponents and dissenters will be superior to dealing democratically with the world. How naïve you are; no wonder thinking people feel you are a mere pawn in somebody else’s chess game!”

 

Dr J B Singh was not done yet,” You’re are fond of using words like ‘imperialism’ ‘reactionary’, ‘struggle’, ‘militant’, ‘dialectic’ and so on , as if you invented them and the rest of us are ignorant. Think of them closely. Life is a series of compromises and adjustments that can go in any direction; so is politics…If we rush to overthrow and radicalize – to use Communist rhetoric- we will win quick in the short term with communist promises of everything for free but that would be a disaster, because we don’t have the money to do that, not unless your superiors in Moscow pay you big to give them a footing here. But you must know that the Brits and Yanks will not tolerate a Communist state here.”

 

I guess Dr Jagan did get his revenge in 1953 when the  shovel man defeated the Indian doyen of British Guiana politics but history had proven that Dr J B Singh was absolutely correct and that Dr Cheddi Jagan was dead wrong in his communist mantras and at what devastating consequences for Guyana even seventy five years later.

 

Malcolm Harripaul


Well I learned some thing new here today from Malcolm.  Dr.Jagan literally selected a man from the trenches to shovel out Jang Bahadur Singh.


A few years later Freddy Bowman would quit the PPP party in support of Edward B Beharry and his disagreements with Dr Jagan and the PPP leadership.

 

FM
Last edited by Former Member

PPP exploits racial fears to enbloc Indo Guyanese votes

FEBRUARY 2, 2011 | BY  | FILED UNDER LETTERS 

 

Dear Editor,


I read Ms Lurlene Nestor’s letter, “KhemrajRamjattan’s Bath settlement call was ill advised,” (KN 01-22-11) in which she dealt with Mr Ramjattan’s request to Indo Guyanese not to fear Afro Guyanese. I write this letter not to defend Khemraj, nor to rebut Ms Nestor, but rather to express my own views on the question of racial fears, and indeed the fear of the all Guyanese people.


There is the general fear by all Guyanese of the criminals, the fear of the Government by all to criticize the regime, the fear of the narco death squads by Afro Guyanese, and the fear of politically inspired violence against Indians by some Afro Guyanese. I shall not go back into the social unrest of the 1960’s. I shall start with the violence against Indo Guyanese in the aftermath of the 1997 elections.


After the PNC lost the 1997 elections it embarked on street protests which degenerated into thuggery against Indo Guyanese on several occasions in 1998 and 1999. Politically inspired kick down the door bandits soon surfaced and in the two years hundreds of attacks against Indo Guyanese were carried out that left scores of businessmen dead.


The perpetuators were identified as Afro Guyanese. The PPP regime, led by Janet Jagan, Moses Nagamootoo, Clement Rohee, Donald Ramotar, Ralph Ramkarran, and Gail Texeira, went into denial mode. They told various audiences in New York that it was not true that Indians were being brutalized and that the businessmen who were killed were drug lords.
The PPP did absolutely nothing to restore law and order. It refused to invite the UN to send peace keeping troops. However at the 2001 elections the same PPP at bottom house meetings and mandirs told the Indians that if they did not vote PPP “ the black man them gun get back power and them gun rob and rape you all.”


The Indo Guyanese voted enbloc in 2001 to retain the PPP in government.  Again violence was unleashed on the hapless PPP supporters. Again the PPP refused to call in UN troops. The 2002 jail break led to war being waged on Indo Guyanese especially on the East Coast of Demerara. Yet the PPP did nothing to protect its supporters and restore law and order.
The PPP did nothing because the regime itself was not threatened and it could afford the Indian casualties so long as it remained in office. By the end of 2002 the police and army came under attack. The PPP now felt threatened and had to take action to protect itself.


The lawful course of action for the PPP was to ask for UN peace keeping troops. However it meant the PPP would have had to relinquish some control of the state and that it was not prepared to do. The regime instead entered into an unholy alliance with the narco lords who then waged war on the Afro Guyanese gunmen encamped in Buxton.
By the time the threat to the government had passed nearly two hundred young Afro Guyanese lay dead. After all the mayhem the PPP has still not taken any lawful and constitutional action to address the concerns of both communities.


Instead, with no threat of insurrection, and an effete opposition, the Jagdeo regime ensconced itself in absolute power. The narco squads were used to assassinate Afro activist Ronald Waddell and Indo Minister Sash Sawh who had held up the major drug lord concessions in the hinterland.
These murders drove fear into the hearts of labour, political, and social activists. The regime also used the treason charge on two groups of Afro Guyanese to imprison them, further invoking fear in citizens. But the fear does not stop there.


Massacres were conducted at Lusignan, Bartica, and Lindo Creek. Only the political elite knows the identity of the murderers. The crime pandemic just got larger and larger under the Jagdeo dictatorship. Today all the ethnic groups are being affected by common gun toting criminals with murders and robberies being the order of the day. Guyana is one big camp of fear at all levels.


Yet the Jagdeo/PPP government has done nothing to stop the crimes and allay the fears. In fact the regime has refused British aid to the Police Force and it has denied the US DEA permission to operate in Guyana.
Compare the PPP’s actions with those of other Caribbean countries which have accepted police aid from the British, Canadians, and Americans. What is the motive of the Jagdeo/PPP government in refusing aid to our Police Force? Who benefits from the rampant crime? Who benefits from a fearful society? Who are building mansions and amassing fortunes? Certainly not the sugar workers, nor the bauxite workers, nor the poor civil servants, nor the Amerindians.
But come election time the very PPP will once again give Indo Guyanese voters the ultimatium: “either yuh vote PPP or the black man gun get back power and rob and rape you all.”


The exploitation of Indo Guyanese fears by the PPP will have to be addressed at the next elections by all opposition parties. Indians will have to be educated about how the PPP has been exacerbating their fears. They have to be told that they must not let fear of Afro Guyanese cause them to vote PPP because the PPP is really the cause and beneficiary of such fears.
Allow me the opportunity to say to the current PPP executive, “ I told you so.” If the PPP had accepted and implemented the national security plan that I designed in 1990 at Dr Jagan’s request then Guyana would have been spared all the social unrest and wanton political killings. I had proposed to replace the Police Commissioner with Mr Paul Slowe, seek UN and British help in rebuilding the Police Force, expand the People’s Militia into every district, amend the law to enable the Militia to do policing duties, from a special anti terrorist squad to deal with armed bandits, give the US DEA full scope to operate in Guyana, enact a Freedom of Information Bill to help fight corruption.


My plan was given to Dr Jagan and Mr Clinton Collymore who for years was the PPP’s shadow Minister of Defence and Home Affairs in Parliament. I am aware that Messrs Rohan Singh, ex GDF Captain Ronald Sami, and ex GPM captain Neville Sami also read the plan. All were in high praise of my proposals. However the capable and competent Clinton Collymore was side lined by Ms Janet Jagan who was vehement in keeping the police status quo, especially the Commissioner. Only she, Laurie Lewis, and God know why she wanted it that way.


It was under Mr Lewis’s reign over the Police Force that the violence in the latter 90’s and early 2000’s unfolded.


Malcolm Harripaul

FM

India’s space programme is an investment in the future

NOVEMBER 13, 2013 | BY  | FILED UNDER LETTERS 

Dear Editor,


I write in response to my good friend Freddie Kissoon’s Sunday column, “Some world leaders are heartless,” (KN 11-10-13), in which he sought to show that the leaders of India were heartless because they were spending money on a mission to Mars instead of spending it to alleviate poverty.
He quoted a BBC journalist as asking, “But when a country is home to millions of people in extreme poverty, why do they feel the need to explore other worlds.”  Freddie himself asks, “ Why does India want to spend that humongous amount on space exploration when such knowledge can be obtained from American, Russian and European research?”
Freddie loves to write about “ Freudian slips” and I am wondering if he has unwittingly betrayed an inferiority complex by proposing that India should rely on the White people who not so long ago had conquered, colonized, enslaved, and decimated the peoples of the Americas, Africa, Asia, and Australia. Surely Freddie is not proposing a new form of colonisation of India.


Freddie , like me and the billion plus Indians including the millions of impoverished , should take pride in the achievements of Indian science and technology. For a lesson in national pride I recommend Freddie look at the short film, “Children of the pyre,” which documents the lives of five boys aged nine to 15 years and who make a living cremating bodies in India.
They are considered the untouchables of the untouchables. They do not attend school but they are very street educated as evidenced by their views of politicians as rogues and scamps, and of the “high caste” as fools because in death “it is we who have to handle them.” Those boys do have respect for their country, national flag and anthem and great pride in India’s space programme and that was before the Mars mission launch.
Perhaps Freddie should have seen the faces of the poor children all over India as they looked skywards at the time of the launch to the see the national joy and pride it brought them.


I know that $75M is a “humongous amount” to the poor. It can indeed buy pizza for the millions of poor kids for a few days. But that $75M is an investment in the future of those kids. Think how many millions of poor children will be inspired to attend school and aspire to be scientists, engineers, and technologists.


And what about the millions of current scientists and students, doesn’t the Indian government have an obligation to their needs for development, advancement, and fulfillment too. It would be ideal to have equal development of all the peoples simultaneously but unfortunately the world does not work like that.


Development has and will always be unequal so governments will spend on poverty reduction and “ the need to explore other worlds.” In fact the Indian Mars mission is an investment in poverty alleviation.
Apart from inspiring millions of kids to get an education, the Indian space programme is an economic investment. In the next 10 years the space exploration industry will be at $350 Billion.


Indian space research costs about one-tenth that of the USA. India’s Mars mission cost $75M as compared to the USA’s next mission that will cost $675M. It means that India can position itself to capture a fair share of the industry by offering less costly services.
It can translate as much as $100 Billion in earnings for India. And that Freddie is one of the main reasons for the Indian Mars probe. Spend $75M today and earn $100 Billion in the next couple of decades. Of course India has to catch up USA, Europe, Russia, and China in space in order to be able to defend itself. That is a harsh reality, too, Freddie.


And as for depending on the White folks for knowledge Freddie might want to find out how many Indian scientists work at the USA’s NASA. They comprise 36 per cent of the staff and in fact the USA’s next Mars mission was designed by Indians. And this just 65 years after white colonialism! I am proud to be of Indian origin and so should you Freddie.
Malcolm Harripaul

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:

PNC is an existential threat to democracy and human rights in Guyana.

ANd the PPP are what????? a fake threat with their grasping for autocratic power and denial of local elections?

FM
Originally Posted by JB:

The PPP was always only interested in power for power sake

OCTOBER 14, 2013 | BY  | FILED UNDER LETTERS 

 

Dear Editor,


Former longstanding senior PPP executive member Mr. Ralph Ramkarran in his column, “ The PNC, APNU and national unity,” (SN 10-13-13), in criticising Brig. Granger’s use of  some 1977 Burnham quotes  when he rejected Jagan’s call for a National Front Government, wrote that in 1977 the PPP had conceded the Executive Presidency to the PNC. In 1977, we still had the Westminster constitution in effect with Burnham as Prime Minister. It was not until 1980 that the Executive Presidency came into being with the new socialist constitution after the rigged 1978 Referendum and 1980 elections. How then could the PPP concede such presidency to the PNC in 1977 after constantly screaming about rigged elections since 1968. It meant that the PPP was privy to the PNC’s drafting of the socialist constitution in 1977.
It just goes to show that the PPP did not care for democracy and free and fair elections but always had Stalin style communism as its objective. Kicked out of power in 1964 by the USA, the party in 1969 formally declared itself a disciplined Marxist Leninist party affiliated to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and called on the PNC to nationalize the “commanding heights of the economy.” The PNC nationalised the bauxite industry in 1970 and declared itself “cooperative socialist” in 1974. The PPP scoffed at the PNC saying that was not “true scientific socialism.” However, the Communist Party of Cuba felt otherwise and ordered Jagan to join with the PNC to build socialism.


The PPP could not merge with the PNC as it had spent years demonizing Burnham and the PNC along racist lines. So Jagan instead declared “critical support” for the PNC. The ideologues of the PPP disagreed with Jagan, and led by Ranji Chandisingh, defected to the PNC. The cream of the PPP leadership obeyed the Cuban Communist Party. Jagan was in a quandary. How could he could join with Burnham without been seen to betray his supporters and be deemed a traitor?


Jagan could not afford to lose his Indian base by just joining the PNC, so he sought to do so under the guise of national unity by proposing a National Front Government in 1977 and a National Patriotic Front Government in 1979. That at a time when Afro Guyanese led by the WPA were waging street protests to remove the PNC from power. The PPP ordered its base not to support the WPA. Whilst the PNC state was gunning down African opponents, the PPP all along was trying to find a face saving way to join the PNC socialist dictatorship under the guise of national unity.


Jagan believed that world capitalism would collapse and that communism led by the Soviet Union would triumph. He believed that political unity of the PNC and PPP would deter US pressures. Burnham was not ideologically rigid like Jagan and he knew that the US would not tolerate Jagan in power so he could not agree to Jagan’s demands. Jagan’s proposals were flawed because of their ideological and class basis. He further felt that a mere unity of himself and Burnham would unite the races. Hence Brig. Granger’s quote of Burnham  : “…an understanding or compromise between leaders is no guarantee of unity amongst the rank and file unless there is a serious and honest attempt to spread the message of unity further down…” is absolutely in order. Proof of Jagan’s flawed proposals was evident by the fact that Afro Guyanese, led by the WPA, were more interested in democracy than in PPP and PNC socialist dictatorship.


Ralph Ramkarran wants APNU to promote the need for a political solution to free us from the current gridlock in parliament. How about the PPP making the same National Front Government proposals it made in 1977; after all that party has been in power for 21 years now.  It just goes to show that the PPP was always only interested in power for power sake. Ralph Ramkarran omitted to say that Brig. Granger acknowledged that there was racial hatred in the past and that he was prepared to work with all other parties to achieve national unity. The first step is national reconciliation. However, one leader alone cannot engage in national reconciliation. Brig. Granger and the PNC have indicated their willingness to start the process. What about the remainder of Guyanese society.


 Malcolm Harripaul

More horse sh!t from another PNC kind who does not understand the political reality because he is blindly in love with an OLD OLD man, Granja.

FM

Add Reply

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