RiffRaff posted:

PNC had 28 years...PPP had about 24...

neither could come up with a real leader for all of Guyana and Guyanese...maybe the fault is with the people

It is not the people's fault. They are being manipulated by politicians.

Bibi Haniffa posted:

They should devote a few sessions of parliament to address constitutional reform and get an independent team of lawyers headed by Ramkarran to draft a new consititution and vote on it.  Now is a good time to do that as no one party has huge dominance in Parliament.

Other than Ramkarran are they any other lawyers with strong understanding of the constitution living in Guyana?  Back in the day, there were a few like JOF Haynes and Lionel Luckhoo.

I think you are real wacky. Ramkarran is a no visionary in this area. The necessity is to formalize a panel of accademics, laypeole, and legal scholars to craft it not specifically a team of lawyers. One needs philosophers, social scientists among others integrally as a part of t he process.

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Anil is also an expert on the constitution but the PNC guys would not want him on the team.  Or you can have Anil and Basil Williams each representing their party's interest with a few more neutral lawyers, if you can find!!!  Maybe Sridath Ramphal can be on there too???  Or even lawyers in diaspora living abroad.  You need a good mix up.

You are enamored with the great man concept without looking to the good man concept. Ramphal is a pariah. He should not be let near the constitutional congress. The same for Anil and Williams.

You need people focused their lives on examining the field and not political charlatons. I would admit fellows like Batyoram, Ravi Dev. Hinds, Lewis... at the first row before any of those partisan and opportuinistic political hacks.

Hughes is Convener of Steering Committee on Constitutional Reform

Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo yesterday announced that attorney-at-law, Nigel Hughes, has been appointed Convener of the Steering Committee on Constitutional Reform (SCCR).
Hughes has been pushing for constitutional reform.
Other members include Professor Harold Lutchman; former Minister, Haslyn Parris and attorneys-at-law, Geeta Chandan-Edmond and Gino Persaud.

Attorney Nigel Hughes

“I am most pleased that Nigel Hughes has agreed to kick start this stage to come up with modalities and timeframe for the actual reform process,” said Prime Minister Nagamootoo at a simple ceremony at the Office of the Prime Minister.
The SCCR will be tasked with the critical work of setting up the framework for a substantive Constitutional Reform Body which Government says will be broad-based and inclusive of all major stakeholders.
Nagamootoo made it clear that the Steering Committee would not undertake any change to the existing constitution but will mainly define the scope of the actual reform process and establish the terms of reference and mechanisms for consultation to establish a Constitutional Reform Commission.
The Steering Committee was announced in the presence of Vice President and Minister of Public Security, Khemraj Ramjattan; Attorney General, Basil Williams; Minister of Governance, Raphael Trotman and Minister of Social Cohesion and Government Chief Whip, Amna Ally.
The SCCR will have a four-month lifespan, commencing on September 1, 2015.
There have been complaints over the Constitution- the laws that govern Guyana, with top of the list being the wide-ranging power of the Presidency.

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Anil is also an expert on the constitution but the PNC guys would not want him on the team.  Or you can have Anil and Basil Williams each representing their party's interest with a few more neutral lawyers, if you can find!!!  Maybe Sridath Ramphal can be on there too???  Or even lawyers in diaspora living abroad.  You need a good mix up.

Constitutional reforms require two-thirds support.  How we can get the PPP/C to vote along?

I would like to see the country divide into ridings and let the people have the power to elect/select or recall the President.

The PPP is an Indo party and PNC an Afro party. We need a third party that can take 20% of the votes regularly.

VishMahabir posted:

Huh...interesting. Is he saying that only Indians are welcome into the party? What about the others like Afros, Amerindians, coloreds, etc?

This adds a whole new dimension to politics in Guyana....its throws national unity out the window.

 

And you just discovered that this is the attitude of the PPP, and has been since the late 50s?

yuji22 posted:

Mitwah is scraping the barrell on Nonsense. That artice is dated March 15.

And has the policy changed over the past 8 months?  Rohee was being honest.  The PPP is the Indo KKK.

TK posted:

The PPP is an Indo party and PNC an Afro party. We need a third party that can take 20% of the votes regularly.

Not going to happen.  Guyana is Indian/Amerindian vs.  African/mixed.  Until underlying ethnic insecurity issues are dealt with, this isnt going to change.

Stormborn posted:

Here is where Bayto is right. There is no necessity in sacrificing cultural identity to forge a meaning communitarian sharing and sense of social responsibility to each other.

Is any one suggesting that Indians give up their culture, because this is what it really is? Indians maintain that Africans have no culture.

No we are merely asking that they prioritize being Guyanese ahead of veing Indian, so that we can begin to develop that sense of communitarian sharing, and social responsibility to each other. 

This is NOT going to happen if being Guyanese is only a passport and a birth certificate.

TK posted:

The PPP is an Indo party and PNC an Afro party. We need a third party that can take 20% of the votes regularly.

But you predicted and certified that is what we will get with this coalition?  Your predictions are all the same.

Nehru posted:

TK posted:

The PPP is an Indo party and PNC an Afro party. We need a third party that can take 20% of the votes regularly.

But you predicted and certified that is what we will get with this coalition?  Your predictions are all the same.

What if Rohee, Ramotar and Jgdeo are removed from the executive body and replaced by young folks from the grass roots?

Bibi Haniffa posted:

They should devote a few sessions of parliament to address constitutional reform and get an independent team of lawyers headed by Ramkarran to draft a new consititution and vote on it.  Now is a good time to do that as no one party has huge dominance in Parliament.

Other than Ramkarran are they any other lawyers with strong understanding of the constitution living in Guyana?  Back in the day, there were a few like JOF Haynes and Lionel Luckhoo.

Yes get a politician to draft a new constitution, without the input of the population.  Then demand that they vote on it.  Without input and an educated discussion the population will stay away as they did in 1980.   And then we will wonder what went wrong.

Why not let Guyanese, who are NOT politicians, band together and develop something.  We have thousands of people fully capable of this.  We even have civic organizations, which can be used to mobilize these people and their ideas.

Until we seriously dialogue about the ROOT cause of our ethnic problem AND of our passivity/lack of engagement in the political systemm we will NOT develop a constititution which addresses the problem. This because we will NOT have agreed as to what the problem is.

yuji22 posted:

RiffRaff posted:

PNC had 28 years...PPP had about 24...

neither could come up with a real leader for all of Guyana and Guyanese...maybe the fault is with the people

It is not the people's fault. They are being manipulated by politicians.

It is the people's fault if they allow themselves to be manipulated by the politicians.

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Anil is also an expert on the constitution but the PNC guys would not want him on the team.  Or you can have Anil and Basil Williams each representing their party's interest with a few more neutral lawyers, if you can find!!!  Maybe Sridath Ramphal can be on there too???  Or even lawyers in diaspora living abroad.  You need a good mix up.

And here you indicate what the problem is.  The PPP and the PNC have been waging a battle for 60 years, even though the founders are now DEAD.

You then put the ball into the hands of the same charlatans and expect that they will develop  a  consititution that will allow more participation in governance by the population?

If you do what you have always done, why be shocked if nothing changes.

caribny posted:

Stormborn posted:

Here is where Bayto is right. There is no necessity in sacrificing cultural identity to forge a meaning communitarian sharing and sense of social responsibility to each other.

Is any one suggesting that Indians give up their culture, because this is what it really is? Indians maintain that Africans have no culture.

No we are merely asking that they prioritize being Guyanese ahead of veing Indian, so that we can begin to develop that sense of communitarian sharing, and social responsibility to each other. 

This is NOT going to happen if being Guyanese is only a passport and a birth certificate.

 

I know you have heard this from me a thousand times before...the ask is not that someone should be Guyanese first. That is nonsense. Guyanese is a statal designation and without a social ethos as a summoning creed is vacuous.

One must be free to exercise ones right to be one’s self in a social space. That existential freedom to be as one wants to be and the specificity of it as a social ethos emanating from a place is  what we call nationalism.

To be Guyanese is to feel pride that one’s nation state ( a new concept  sitting above an ancient concept similarly designated and pertaining to a unique people hood)  is not only geography but assumes the quality of confirming being.

This sense of being is circumscribes by the place where one is happy to be, because it is in that place one can be whatever one conceives themselves to be; a place one is compelled by being from it to defend and gladly identify with via cherished  symbols ( flags, coat of arms, songs land marks animals etc).

One can be Indian, or a Wapishana, or lucono or whatever human self designation with all its complexity and trappings  and still be proud to proclaim one is an a Guyanese. It is a communitarian ambiance that allows ones sense of self to be expressed freely.

Lately, I have been observing all over the world, people are more concerned about ethnicity, tribal affiliation and clans.  Maybe, we all waking up to the fact that in 1763 Britain sliced up the world for her dominions. Forcing tribes together. Now that the world is at the point of WW 3, people are staking out their claims on tribalism. None a dis coming together to kill people dey doan care to know. Middle-East is a good example-the Kurds been doing dat since the British took away their identity.

Guyana's tragedy is its see-saw, tit-for-tat, dead-end, race-based politics.

Race is firmly embedded in the two major political parties, the PPP and PNC.

Race gave APNU+AFC a slim margin of victory in the May 11 elections as the overwhelming majority of Indos rallied around the PPP.

Race is the sole reason why Moses Nagamootoo and Khemraj Ramjattan are currently victims of a strident hate-and-smear campaign among PPP Indos.

Sadly, in the foreseeable future, race will continue to be the dominant factor in Guyana's politics.

In my opinion, constitutional changes will not solve the race problem. You cannot legislate national unity.

Guyana is crying out for fresh race-blind political leaders with the charisma and skill to rally Indos and Afros to a common cause for real economic development, social progress and national unity.

The present political parties always proclaim from their pulpits that they are for national unity but their deeds haven't matched their words.

Gilbakka posted:

Guyana's tragedy is its see-saw, tit-for-tat, dead-end, race-based politics.

Race is firmly embedded in the two major political parties, the PPP and PNC.

Race gave APNU+AFC a slim margin of victory in the May 11 elections as the overwhelming majority of Indos rallied around the PPP.

Race is the sole reason why Moses Nagamootoo and Khemraj Ramjattan are currently victims of a strident hate-and-smear campaign among PPP Indos.

Sadly, in the foreseeable future, race will continue to be the dominant factor in Guyana's politics.

In my opinion, constitutional changes will not solve the race problem. You cannot legislate national unity.

Guyana is crying out for fresh race-blind political leaders with the charisma and skill to rally Indos and Afros to a common cause for real economic development, social progress and national unity.

The present political parties always proclaim from their pulpits that they are for national unity but their deeds haven't matched their words.

The power of instutitions has been the only remedy to racial divisions. Everywhere that was once plagued by ethnic violence has been saved by some constitutional reform strategy or legislation.

Initiating Constitutional Reform and the Steering Committee

The Guyana Bar Association welcomes the announcement of the establishment of a Steering Committee for Constitutional Reform. While the membership of the Committee has been announced under the chairmanship of attorney-at-law Mr. Nigel Hughes, the Terms of Reference have not been publicised. Indeed, we have learnt that there are just broad generalities announced by the Prime Minister but no Terms of Reference.

There has been some criticism of the Government for its failure to consult on the persons to be appointed to the Committee, including the Guyana Bar Association. Constitutional reform is a matter that involves every citizen and is arguably the best protection of citizens against excesses by the Government. While the Association believes that the contribution of wider interests helps to arrive at more informed results, not only is the legal profession more than adequately represented on this Committee, but the current process is simply “to lay the groundwork for a new constitutional reform process”.

The Guyana Constitution is an incomplete document. Some of the Amendments made under Herdmanston Accord were required to be taken to a referendum. Around twelve years later, that has not been done, a reflection of how seriously our parliamentarians, the Guyana Bar Association and the rest of civil society treat the country’s most sacred document.

Constitutions are often described as living documents to be read, and altered, in the context of prevailing circumstances. As the Preamble to the 1980 Constitution states in its closing paragraph:

“As citizens of Guyana, we adopt these fundamental laws and make provision for their amendment to reflect changes in our society, inspired by our collective quest for a perfect nation, whose characteristics include the commitments, concepts, and other principles proclaimed in this preamble.”

The Reform process itself recognised the importance of keeping the Constitution under constant review with provision for the establishment of a Parliamentary Standing Committee for Constitutional Reform “for the purpose of continually reviewing the effectiveness of the working of the Constitution …” That too has not functioned effectively and the new Committee must now see their task as a fresh start to the constitutional reform process. The country has a lot of catching up to do when it comes to constitutional reform.

A constitution is a national document to which, at least in theory, all the people subscribe. In the polarised and politicised Guyanese environment in which the Government and the arms of the State operate, the constitution itself is affected by those extraneous considerations. The members of the Committee will no doubt address their collective minds on how best to overcome such formidable obstacles.

Constitutional reform is also a time consuming process. While it is a continuous process, it is not a good thing to be tinkering with a Constitution every time there is some tension or strain. There have been really only two major constitutional changes since Independence: the 1980 Constitution and the Herdmanston Reforms between 2000 and 2003.

Prior to the major reforms of 1980, Guyana had two forms of the Westminster constitution viz, monarchical Westminster (1966 -1970) and republic Westminster (1973 – 1980), both of which had in common the separation of the Head of State from the Head of Government. On August 29, 1969 a motion of the National Assembly was passed for Guyana to become a Republic which it duly did on February 23, 1970.

The 1980 Constitution had its roots in a Referendum in 1978 and is described as the Socialist Constitution because it was supposed to take the country from capitalism to socialism. But equally important was the move from Governor General to President in which the offices of Head of state and Head of Government became one. Constitutional writers such as Professors Rudolph James and Harold Lutchman have written very critically of that development and its abuse.

In their book Law and the Political Environment in Guyana, Professor Lutchman, who is now close to the Government, and Professor James, wrote that “In a real sense the Presidential system, as indeed the Constitution of which it is a part, is a product of the political and economic crises now existing in Guyana. As such it is more likely to be an instrument for the exercise of absolute power than one of social cohesion and for solving the many problems facing the nation.”

The Committee need not worry itself about this. But we as citizens need to start giving some thought to this important feature of the Constitution.

http://www.stabroeknews.com/20...-steering-committee/

Nigel Hughes has too much political baggage. Please try again.

yuji22 posted:

Nigel Hughes has too much political baggage. Please try again.

Be that as it may, Some of the Amendments made under Herdmanston Accord were required to be taken to a referendum. Around twelve years later, that has not been done, a reflection of how seriously our parliamentarians, the Guyana Bar Association and the rest of civil society treat the country’s most sacred document.

Constitution Reform Committee

The Constitution Reform Committee continually reviews the effectiveness of the working of the Constitution, consider any matter referred to it by the Assembly and make periodic reports thereon to the National Assembly with proposals for reform as necessary.

Chair of the Committee:

Brigadier Ret’d David Granger

Members of the Committee:

Hon Mr. Basil Williams

Hon Dr. Rupert Roopnarine

Ms Africo Selman

Ms Priya D. Manickchand

Hon Moses Nagamootoo

Hon. Brindley H.R. Benn

Mr. Mohabir A. Nandlall

Dr. Leslie S. Ramsammy

 

http://parliament.gov.gy/commi...ion-reform-comittee/

Mitwah posted:

Rohee endorses Jagdeo statement that PPP is a ‘coolie people’ party

March 10, 2015 | By KNews | Filed Under News 

–    Says Afro Guyanese should welcome statement
General Secretary of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), Clement Rohee, yesterday supported the statements made by his comrade, Bharrat Jagdeo, to the effect that the incumbent party is a “coolie people” party.

PPP General Secretary, Clement Rohee

As he hosted the PPP’s weekly press conference at Freedom House Robb Street, Georgetown, Rohee said that he saw nothing wrong with former President Jagdeo’s allusion to the PPP as a coolie people party.
Jagdeo made this statement on Sunday when he spoke at the memorial service held in honour of former President and founder member of the PPP, the late Dr. Cheddi Jagan at Babu Jaan, Corentyne, Berbice.
Jagdeo, who is known to speak rashly at this yearly forum, told thousands who gathered at the event that the “opposition” whispers to its supporters, “Let us throw out the coolie people.”
Jagdeo added that the opposition “consistently shouts about the racism of the PPP but they practice racism. They whisper campaigns. In the last elections they went to some of the Afro villages and beat some drums at six in the morning and say let us throw out these coolie people. Get up and go out and vote.”
Yesterday Rohee was questioned as to whether he supported the statements made by his comrade and he responded in the affirmative.
Rohee said that PPP is indeed a “coolie people” party as it is “overwhelmingly supported by Indians.”
Asked if he considered the impact such a statement can have on PPP supporters who are of another race, Rohee said that he doesn’t see that any harm can be caused.
He even told media operatives that PPP supporters who are Afro-Guyanese should welcome the statement as it is forthright.

Rohee said that PPP is indeed a “coolie people” party as it is “overwhelmingly supported by Indians.”
Asked if he considered the impact such a statement can have on PPP supporters who are of another race, Rohee said that he doesn’t see that any harm can be caused.

Mitwah posted:

Constitution Reform Committee

Makes you want to throw in the towel and forget all of these people. What the ***.k has selman ever written on the constitution, or priya or basil or ramsammy, That is an political elite jamboree not a constitution commission. Why did they not invite the gadfly Ravi Dev, or Batyoram, or even Lewis? Those fellows made the topic popular and argued it across the press for over a decade. The Dev group even had an example developed at their own expense in conjunction with other scholars. I don’t like it but the fact is they have insight that this group needs and do not have.

Committee set up to prepare for constitutional reform

August 15, 2015

A steering committee has been appointed to lay the groundwork for a new constitutional reform process.

Attorney Nigel Hughes has been named the convener of the committee, which also comprises attorneys Gino Persaud and Geeta Chandan-Edmond, Professor Harold Lutchman and constitution expert Haslyn Parris.

During a briefing on the work of the committee on Thursday at the Office of the Prime Minister, Attorney-General Basil Williams said it would have four months to complete its work from September 1st.

Its work would entail formulating proposals on the manner, nature and conduct of the constitutional reform process.

The steering committee, Williams added, will have to determine the parameters of the constitutional reform. Asked about priority areas, Williams said he did not want to preempt the steering committee but noted that constitutional reform was a “major plank” in the government’s elections campaign and areas highlighted included the presidency, governance and the term limits. With regards to the latter, he said that although it is addressed in the constitution, “you see the difficulty you are having with it now in terms of interpretation.”

Last month, acting Chief Justice Ian Chang ruled that the presidential term-limit, which was put in place through an amendment to the constitution approved by a two-thirds majority of the members of the National Assembly, was unconstitutional without the approval of the people through a referendum.

Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo, who chairs a Cabinet sub-committee on parliamentary affairs, emphasised that the steering committee would not be responsible for formulating the reforms, only the modalities and the terms of reference of the broader Constitu-tional Reform Commission.

Whatever recommendations are made, Nagamootoo said, will have to be taken to the Cabinet sub-committee on parliamentary affairs and then subsequently cabinet will be briefed.

“I don’t think the opposition [PPP/C] would be right to perceive that they could be left out of the process because this is not in fact the constitutional reform process. This is the preparatory stage to define the scope of the work as well as certain timeframes and modalities… the opposition parties and civil society, I am sure, will be fully involved in the work of the Constitutional Reform Commission,” he added.

Williams was asked whether there is a plan in place in the event that the opposition PPP/C does not support the proposed constitutional reforms. With a two-thirds majority of members of the National Assembly needed to alter the constitution, the PPP/C’s support would be crucial Williams pointed out that while the reforms could also be effected through a majority vote at a referendum, no decision in this regard has been taken.

At the conclusion of the steering committee’s work, he said, “we will have an idea by that time of the shape of the constitutional reform process and the matter of execution, whether… should we entertain a referendum, should we look to the parliamentary process, which would require two-thirds majority… and of course certainly would require the signing on by the main opposition party,” he said.

Williams was, however, hopeful that government will not be faced with the politicising of the referendum process, if one is to occur. “I think all would welcome constitutional reform… because, as you know, we have a constitution that has a lot of incomplete and inchoate matters that need to be resolved and that is what the steering committee also has to deal with,” he said, while also noting that a standing parliamentary committee for constitutional reform has been unable to making any headway on the reform front.

Nagamootoo said the government is not interested in an “unending” process, although he noted that as a “living thing” the constitution should be periodically reviewed.

“We don’t want an unending process. We want to be able to set up some time limits and to decide on the issue of the form of any commission’s work,” he said.

“But going forward, I don’t anticipate that this would be the end all and be all of constitutional reform. The constitution is quite a living thing and it ought to be subjected to periodic review and, if necessary, changes and reforms to suit evolving political and other conditions,” he added.

Hughes, in brief comments, said the members of the steering committee had an opportunity to take advantage of the institutional knowledge they have of the constitutional reform process. He said that his role as the convener is to try to efficiently facilitate the process.

http://www.stabroeknews.com/20...nstitutional-reform/

They need to broaden the scope. We need some religious leaders. Some lay people and a grab bag of agitators who will probe any presentation for its effecacy and its flaws. We need the Ravi Dev types.

Stormborn posted:

They need to broaden the scope. We need some religious leaders. Some lay people and a grab bag of agitators who will probe any presentation for its effecacy and its flaws. We need the Ravi Dev types.

I agree with you. What we might likely see are steering committee after steering committee to steer the other steering committee and five years will go by and nothing gets done.

Stormborn posted:

caribny posted:

Stormborn posted:

Here is where Bayto is right. There is no necessity in sacrificing cultural identity to forge a meaning communitarian sharing and sense of social responsibility to each other.

Is any one suggesting that Indians give up their culture, because this is what it really is? Indians maintain that Africans have no culture.

No we are merely asking that they prioritize being Guyanese ahead of veing Indian, so that we can begin to develop that sense of communitarian sharing, and social responsibility to each other. 

This is NOT going to happen if being Guyanese is only a passport and a birth certificate.

 

 

I know you have heard this from me a thousand times before...the ask is not that someone should be Guyanese first. That is nonsense. Guyanese is a statal designation and without a social ethos as a summoning creed is vacuous.

One must be free to exercise ones right to be one’s self in a social space. That existential freedom to be as one wants to be and the specificity of it as a social ethos emanating from a place is  what we call nationalism.

To be Guyanese is to feel pride that one’s nation state ( a new concept  sitting above an ancient concept similarly designated and pertaining to a unique people hood)  is not only geography but assumes the quality of confirming being.

This sense of being is circumscribes by the place where one is happy to be, because it is in that place one can be whatever one conceives themselves to be; a place one is compelled by being from it to defend and gladly identify with via cherished  symbols ( flags, coat of arms, songs land marks animals etc).

One can be Indian, or a Wapishana, or lucono or whatever human self designation with all its complexity and trappings  and still be proud to proclaim one is an a Guyanese. It is a communitarian ambiance that allows ones sense of self to be expressed freely.

 

So why will an Indian hire an African, if he sees the African as an outsider?

Why will an African trust an Indian in a leadership position, of he thinks that the Indian is only going to ensure that Indians benefit?

A constitution will NOT solve that problem, unless you really think that the best interests of Africans are represented by the PNC, and that the PPP is really interested in ensuring the welfare of grass roots Indians.

Until Guyanese develop a true sense of inter connectedness, and a true feeling of a bond that links people of disparate cultural, ethnic, and social identities, we will remain what we are.  And Guyanese will continue to flock to Antigua for a better life.

We have to have a sense of "unity within our diversity", with a bonding as a Guyanese being a connecting factor.  Remaining a tribal society gets us no where, especially as the two dominant tribes now account for only 70% of the population.

The best hope for the Amerindian, is when the Indian or the African sees him first as a Guyanese, and therefore entitled to all the rights that being Guyanese entitles one to have. People do NOT bond around a passport!

In any case this discussion is moot as an "Indian" or an "African" culture doesnt exist any more.  The socalled "town coolie" are seen by their rural fellow ethnics as having more in common with Africans than they do with "true" Indians.  They are called self hating, neemakaram, and on GNI "Dirty Indians". 

There are no monolithic ethnic groups left. Diversity in Guyana can no longer be limited to the three main races.  What connects an Amerindian living in Charity with one in Lethem?

Gilbakka posted:

.

Guyana is crying out for fresh race-blind political leaders with the charisma and skill to rally Indos and Afros to a common cause for real economic development, social progress and national unity.

 

The days of the charismatic leader have gone.  Granger won, even though he doesnt possess one ounce of charisma.  Jagdeo rallied his tribe around him, even though he is an angry and bitchy person, having long lost what ever charisma that he once had.

Looking around the Caribbean, the only charismatic leader left is Gonsalves of St Vincent.

Guyanese will not grow beyond tribe until they develop an identity and an interconnectedness which transcends tribe.

So let us see how Guyanese think. They will look and see who is on the Steering Committee with tribal eyes to see how many Africans/mixed, Indians, and others who are there. 

.

The power of instutitions has been the only remedy to racial divisions. Everywhere that was once plagued by ethnic violence has been saved by some constitutional reform strategy or legislation.

The USA is a land of institutions, and yet racism is still rife.

The problem with Guyana isnt the politically instigated racism, which rarely occurs. Its the fact that it remains a tribal society dominated by two groups who FEAR each other. 

Yes we do need a new constitution, because we need to have a more bottom up approach to governance.  We need to find ways to give Guyanese more ability to impact how the nation is governed. We need to give talented Guyanese more opportunities to prove that they are capable to lead.  We need to change our political culture, where a few MEN (almost never women) make all the decisions, and every one else is so disempowered that they feel forced to scramble for soup.

But to think that this alone is going to solve our ethnic problems is naive.  If Indians and Africans don't trust each other, they will use the constitution in a manner that continues to express their ethnic fears.

Stormborn posted:

They need to broaden the scope. We need some religious leaders. Some lay people and a grab bag of agitators who will probe any presentation for its effecacy and its flaws. We need the Ravi Dev types.

This remains a process centered around the elites of two tribes (using "their" parties as proxies), trying to carve up the cake.

But then I am not shocked, given that the only people who matter are politicians.

CIVIC society should not only be involved, but should CONTROL the process.

But this will not happen, once we remain a tribal society, because we "need" the PPP and the PNC to be our security blankets.

We don't have a sense of us as Guyanese, so CANNOT engage in activities which transcend tribe.

caribny posted:

Stormborn posted:

caribny posted:

Stormborn posted:

Here is where Bayto is right. There is no necessity in sacrificing cultural identity to forge a meaning communitarian sharing and sense of social responsibility to each other.

Is any one suggesting that Indians give up their culture, because this is what it really is? Indians maintain that Africans have no culture.

No we are merely asking that they prioritize being Guyanese ahead of veing Indian, so that we can begin to develop that sense of communitarian sharing, and social responsibility to each other. 

This is NOT going to happen if being Guyanese is only a passport and a birth certificate.

 

 

I know you have heard this from me a thousand times before...the ask is not that someone should be Guyanese first. That is nonsense. Guyanese is a statal designation and without a social ethos as a summoning creed is vacuous.

One must be free to exercise ones right to be one’s self in a social space. That existential freedom to be as one wants to be and the specificity of it as a social ethos emanating from a place is  what we call nationalism.

To be Guyanese is to feel pride that one’s nation state ( a new concept  sitting above an ancient concept similarly designated and pertaining to a unique people hood)  is not only geography but assumes the quality of confirming being.

This sense of being is circumscribes by the place where one is happy to be, because it is in that place one can be whatever one conceives themselves to be; a place one is compelled by being from it to defend and gladly identify with via cherished  symbols ( flags, coat of arms, songs land marks animals etc).

One can be Indian, or a Wapishana, or lucono or whatever human self designation with all its complexity and trappings  and still be proud to proclaim one is an a Guyanese. It is a communitarian ambiance that allows ones sense of self to be expressed freely.

 

So why will an Indian hire an African, if he sees the African as an outsider?

Why will an African trust an Indian in a leadership position, of he thinks that the Indian is only going to ensure that Indians benefit?

A constitution will NOT solve that problem, unless you really think that the best interests of Africans are represented by the PNC, and that the PPP is really interested in ensuring the welfare of grass roots Indians.

Until Guyanese develop a true sense of inter connectedness, and a true feeling of a bond that links people of disparate cultural, ethnic, and social identities, we will remain what we are.  And Guyanese will continue to flock to Antigua for a better life.

We have to have a sense of "unity within our diversity", with a bonding as a Guyanese being a connecting factor.  Remaining a tribal society gets us no where, especially as the two dominant tribes now account for only 70% of the population.

The best hope for the Amerindian, is when the Indian or the African sees him first as a Guyanese, and therefore entitled to all the rights that being Guyanese entitles one to have. People do NOT bond around a passport!

In any case this discussion is moot as an "Indian" or an "African" culture doesnt exist any more.  The socalled "town coolie" are seen by their rural fellow ethnics as having more in common with Africans than they do with "true" Indians.  They are called self hating, neemakaram, and on GNI "Dirty Indians". 

There are no monolithic ethnic groups left. Diversity in Guyana can no longer be limited to the three main races.  What connects an Amerindian living in Charity with one in Lethem?

 

 

 

You are on a rant to nonsense. If the laws preclude discrimination and an active judiciary is in place one will see less of this. One has to have the rules that coerce the best behavior in place.  

A group of monads do not get together and decide to construct a just society. Societies are organic. There would be no need for a constitution if our people were historically together from time immemorial. As transplants most Guyanese one has to learn to live together by definining the terms of communal spaces.

A just society has no snot nosed prejudicial position on tribes. Tribal people are more in tuned to kind than others so why destroy one thing in hope you can build the same thing elsewhere? The fact is you cannot, you can only create the condition for it to develop organically.

I do not argue culture. I care little who argue culture. I care that if they do their right to do so is enshrined in the society and seen as a human right and not as an impediment.

I spoke nowhere of deference to groups. The fact remains that we cannot argue there are no mono cultural groups left and we are trying to formalize something called Guyana where Guyanese live. That is paradoxical. Humans naturally form groups whenever they get together, that are what they are hard wired to do.

Everywhere there is spontaneous group creation from debate teams to soccer teams to bridge teams to liming buddies and even thugs get together. The is need to formalize the rules of the space where the group formation can emerge on its own with no limits to it except what acts to abrade communal existence.

Stormborn posted:

caribny posted:

So why will an Indian hire an African, if he sees the African as an outsider?

Why will an African trust an Indian in a leadership position, of he thinks that the Indian is only going to ensure that Indians benefit?

 

You are on a rant to nonsense. If the laws preclude discrimination and an active judiciary is in place one will see less of this. One has to have the rules that coerce the best behavior in place.  

A group of monads do not get together and decide to construct a just society. Societies are organic. There would be no need for a constitution if our people were historically together from time immemorial. As transplants most Guyanese one has to learn to live together by definining the terms of communal spaces.

A just society has no snot nosed prejudicial position on tribes. Tribal people are more in tuned to kind than others so why destroy one thing in hope you can build the same thing elsewhere? The fact is you cannot, you can only create the condition for it to develop organically.

I do not argue culture. I care little who argue culture. I care that if they do their right to do so is enshrined in the society and seen as a human right and not as an impediment.

I spoke nowhere of deference to groups. The fact remains that we cannot argue there are no mono cultural groups left and we are trying to formalize something called Guyana where Guyanese live. That is paradoxical. Humans naturally form groups whenever they get together, that are what they are hard wired to do.

Everywhere there is spontaneous group creation from debate teams to soccer teams to bridge teams to liming buddies and even thugs get together. The is need to formalize the rules of the space where the group formation can emerge on its own with no limits to it except what acts to abrade communal existence.

 

It is illegal to discriminate, based on race, religion, gender, or skin color in Guyana and in the USA, and yet this occurs daily.  The USA has a very active judiciary, and yet employment based racism is more the norm than the exception.

If the USA and the UK havent been able to develop institution which remove the ability of different subsegments of the population to discriminate, I doubt that Guyana will.

If some one wants to hire only Indians, using blacks for the bottom jobs, how does a black person who feels that he was discriminated against prove that this was the case?  Given that Guyana is a culture where people do transactions within their social circles.

There are no monocultural ethnic groups in Guyana, and there is not even agreement as to who is, and who is not a member of a tribe. Look at the ease that so many in the PPP will scream that people like Moses, Rupnarain, and others arent Indian.

Trotman says that he is NOT a member of the African/black tribe, yet the more mixed looking Granger insists that he is.  And what of Granger's kids, who are Chinese, African, European, and maybe something else.  To what tribe do they belong?

You and Ravi Dev love to see Guyana as a Balkan land of tribes with traditions, and heritages going back thousands of years.  FACT.  We are people dragged, some unwillingly, others who came willingly and then were trapped when what they found wasnt to their liking.  Others voluntarily migrated thousands of years ago, but were driven to the margins by the new arrivals.

Ironically those who fashioned Guyana into its modern shape, and who were responsible for the manner that most Guyanese arrived, or were treated by those who arrived, NO LONGER live in Guyana.

The rest of us, have fashioned a variety of ways of identifying, and of cobbling together the continuum of cultural boundaries that we pass every day.  We also must negotiate with people whose cultural identifies and cultural continuums align differently from ours......leading to further cultural continuums and modifications.

To pretend as if distinct fully separate cultures exist in Guyana is pure foolishness.

The alignment of the cultural continuums and alignments that each of us have is a function of what we want, how we identify, and howw we were raised.  Guyana is NOT the Balkans, where each group occupies different pieces of territory, and can therefore ignore others when they see fit.

Until we develop a sense of being GUYANESE which aligns with how we actually operate on a daily basis, we will remain a nation traumatized in fear and distrust of people, who often only differ from us in how they look, what their hair texture is like, or what their skin color is.

caribny posted:

Gilbakka posted:

.

Guyana is crying out for fresh race-blind political leaders with the charisma and skill to rally Indos and Afros to a common cause for real economic development, social progress and national unity.

 

The days of the charismatic leader have gone.  Granger won, even though he doesnt possess one ounce of charisma.  Jagdeo rallied his tribe around him, even though he is an angry and bitchy person, having long lost what ever charisma that he once had.

Looking around the Caribbean, the only charismatic leader left is Gonsalves of St Vincent.

Guyanese will not grow beyond tribe until they develop an identity and an interconnectedness which transcends tribe.

So let us see how Guyanese think. They will look and see who is on the Steering Committee with tribal eyes to see how many Africans/mixed, Indians, and others who are there. 

 

 

Point taken, Carib. Actually, I had wanted to edit my post and add the word "enlightened" to "fresh race-blind" but the 15-minute window had passed. It would be nice if Admin reverts to the oldtime one-hour editing window.

The fact is that the afc/apnu has been playing the race card by selling the PPP as an indian party to their supporters while they themselves are viewed as a Black party. 

Gilbakka posted:

caribny posted:

Gilbakka posted:

.

Guyana is crying out for fresh race-blind political leaders with the charisma and skill to rally Indos and Afros to a common cause for real economic development, social progress and national unity.

 

The days of the charismatic leader have gone.  Granger won, even though he doesnt possess one ounce of charisma.  Jagdeo rallied his tribe around him, even though he is an angry and bitchy person, having long lost what ever charisma that he once had.

Looking around the Caribbean, the only charismatic leader left is Gonsalves of St Vincent.

Guyanese will not grow beyond tribe until they develop an identity and an interconnectedness which transcends tribe.

So let us see how Guyanese think. They will look and see who is on the Steering Committee with tribal eyes to see how many Africans/mixed, Indians, and others who are there. 

 

 

Point taken, Carib. Actually, I had wanted to edit my post and add the word "enlightened" to "fresh race-blind" but the 15-minute window had passed. It would be nice if Admin reverts to the oldtime one-hour editing window.

I agree with your request for the 1 hour, instead of 15 minute time limit to edit.

Guyanese will get good leadership when they stop expecting that a MLK/Gandhi like figure will emerge to lead them.

Guyanese politics will cease to be tribal, when Guyanese cease being tribal.

As we can see the multi ethnic coalition that emerged to remove the PNC, this forged largely by Rodney, though he died long before, didnt result in Guyana no longer being subjected to tribal politics.

Politicians are tribal because that is what their supporters are. Do you think that Jagdeo would have engaged in his Grand Wizard of the Indo KKK screams, if he thought that this would cost him the votes that he needed? No.  He knew that he would galvanize his base, and win back some who fled to Moses in 2011.

What Jagdeo underestimated is that this tribal scream also motivated the other tribe out to the polls, and 2,000 more of them showed up, inclusive of the sliver (less than 5%) of the Indians who no longer wanted to be tribal.  Or whose animosity towards the PPP exceeded their desire to be tribal.

Even now tribal considerations factor in certain actions by APNU/AFC, given the various tribal constituencies which must be placated.

caribny posted:

It is illegal to discriminate, based on race, religion, gender, or skin color in Guyana and in the USA, and yet this occurs daily.  The USA has a very active judiciary, and yet employment based racism is more the norm than the exception.

If the USA and the UK havent been able to develop institution which remove the ability of different subsegments of the population to discriminate, I doubt that Guyana will.

If some one wants to hire only Indians, using blacks for the bottom jobs, how does a black person who feels that he was discriminated against prove that this was the case?  Given that Guyana is a culture where people do transactions within their social circles.

There are no monocultural ethnic groups in Guyana, and there is not even agreement as to who is, and who is not a member of a tribe. Look at the ease that so many in the PPP will scream that people like Moses, Rupnarain, and others arent Indian.

Trotman says that he is NOT a member of the African/black tribe, yet the more mixed looking Granger insists that he is.  And what of Granger's kids, who are Chinese, African, European, and maybe something else.  To what tribe do they belong?

You and Ravi Dev love to see Guyana as a Balkan land of tribes with traditions, and heritages going back thousands of years.  FACT.  We are people dragged, some unwillingly, others who came willingly and then were trapped when what they found wasnt to their liking.  Others voluntarily migrated thousands of years ago, but were driven to the margins by the new arrivals.

Ironically those who fashioned Guyana into its modern shape, and who were responsible for the manner that most Guyanese arrived, or were treated by those who arrived, NO LONGER live in Guyana.

The rest of us, have fashioned a variety of ways of identifying, and of cobbling together the continuum of cultural boundaries that we pass every day.  We also must negotiate with people whose cultural identifies and cultural continuums align differently from ours......leading to further cultural continuums and modifications.

To pretend as if distinct fully separate cultures exist in Guyana is pure foolishness.

The alignment of the cultural continuums and alignments that each of us have is a function of what we want, how we identify, and howw we were raised.  Guyana is NOT the Balkans, where each group occupies different pieces of territory, and can therefore ignore others when they see fit.

Until we develop a sense of being GUYANESE which aligns with how we actually operate on a daily basis, we will remain a nation traumatized in fear and distrust of people, who often only differ from us in how they look, what their hair texture is like, or what their skin color is.

It is illegal to discriminate because there are rules. It is a benchmark for how we respond not as preventative. In time the rule produces the desired effect because that is what rules do. If residual racism remains it is inconsequential as long as it does not invade social and political decision making without the potential for severe social and legal sanctions. That is all one can do minus killing racists as remedy to racism

Who say what they decide is their ethnic designation is inconsequential to me and not my business. Me liking or disliking tribalism is also irrevalent. They exist as cats have wiskers and will persist because they have meaning and whether you think it is unnecessary is also besides the point. It has nothing to do with allegience to state or communal harmony.

Again, to be Guyanese is not to coform to some esoteric conception of some insipid homogeniety. To be Guyanese is to be comfortable in a social space. It is what is called a vision of dame kind. It is the sentiment of belonging, a sense that of identity a that penetrates the senses and mingles the the soul.

It is contentment that there in that place in that natural world one is at peace. It is not any bullshit enforced order conceptualized in a class room and thaught as precepts to nationalism. One does not teach a samon to swim back to its place of birth. It just does. To be is personal, to belong is to embrace and be commnal. It is that simple.

Drugb posted:

The fact is that the afc/apnu has been playing the race card by selling the PPP as an indian party to their supporters while they themselves are viewed as a Black party. 

Druggie you are an idiot so stay off this thead.  Rohee was the one who agreed that the PPP is a "coolie party" and that this shouldnt be a problem.

Drugb posted:

The fact is that the afc/apnu has been playing the race card by selling the PPP as an indian party to their supporters while they themselves are viewed as a Black party. 

General Secretary of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), Clement Rohee, yesterday supported the statements made by his comrade, Bharrat Jagdeo, to the effect that the incumbent party is a “coolie people” party