I doan know why Rodney is so worshipped. I get it. He fought against a dictatorship and made some good speeches. But he was still never a national figure. He was at heart a Black nationalist and a Marxist. That's not really the makings of the kind of man Guyana needed. What was he gonna do in office? Be truer to marxism/communism than Burnham?
I disagree. I am not Marxist at all...although I am aware of Marxist academic methodologies. If you read the man's work - especially History of Guyanese Working People - you will get a feel for his sincerity through scholarship. The man's politics were rooted in profound scholarship, even if you disagreed with his Marxist methodology. If you read his work you will find nowhere inside the notion of zero-sum distribution. This cannot be said for the African/Indian intellectuals associated with contemporary political parties. These people of today cannot figure out that the destiny of bauxite is intertwined with that of sugar, and so on. If one industry fails all will be worse off. They cannot figure out that we have to grow the sada roti to make everyone better off.
You might be able to critique Rodney on the policy proposals his Marxism would bring and the possible errors emanating, but it is not right to question his intentions as a genuine leader for unity and economic justice. An old dougla man (77 years old) told me yesterday that one of the first things Burnham did was to remove a fuel subsidy for rice farmers. He argues it was to spite Indian rice producers. I doubt Rodney would have ever gone for this kind of zero sum political economy.