The PPP was always only interested in power for power sake
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