Citizens must commit to holding those in authority accountable without fear of being deemed a traitor to any ‘identity’

Dear Editor,

The letter from Swami Aksharananda `Who in the coalition will speak for Indians?’ in the May 4 2015 SN opens up a discussion about Indian ethnic interests and possibly other interests and representation of those interests in the political parties.

Identity politics is always interesting and complex – ethnic identities, religious identities, money making identities, gender identities and there are often varying positions taken by groups claiming to represent the different identities.

There is an article in Sunday’s SN on women who question the parties’ commitments to the rights of women. Other women might believe that their parties’ commitments are sound.

And so it probably is with “Indian interests”.

Elections in Guyana have been characterized by tensions and violence and persons of Indian origin have been targeted in this violence regardless of whether they voted or how they abbreviate, declare or reject their ‘Indian’ identities. In between elections, persons of Indian origin have also experienced violence, by criminals of various identities, by the family members and close associates of various identities and by the state. Some Indians prefer to talk only about elections and related ethnic violence, while others talk about all forms of violence regardless of the perpetrators.

There are persons of Indian origin who believed that Sherlina Nageer did no wrong in questioning the Minister of Health, and that she was not rude or offensive.

There are other Indians who believe the Minister of Health was provoked and they feel sorry for the Minister of Health.   There are Indians who are horrified that the public health system is not accountable to the people who have to use it, while other Indians have invested in private health care. There are Indians who thrive on the alcohol industry, while others who witness the horror of alcohol are trying to change the culture which would limit the industry. There are Indians who would prefer better schools with working toilets, health centres, hospitals rather than the Marriott. There are Indians who think the Marriott is a great idea.

Some Indians are in the APNU+AFC coalition, others are supporting the PPP/C.

There are Indians who believe that brahmin, chamar identities are assigned at birth,   there are others who claim as Swamiji notes about the Hitopadesha that brahmin/chamar are assigned due to behaviours and there are others who reject the ideas of caste completely.

There are Indians who appreciate, and hold on to various identities and preserve that difference as a way of survival and in rejection of the systems which mocked Indians and Indian culture. Other Indians use their religious teachings which talk about the illusion of self/other to dispel difference based on identity even as they advocate for difference to be appreciated, and to use those religious teachings to deal with injustice when and wherever it occurs.

In a decent system of inclusive governance, every citizen should demand that their interests are represented. There must be fair ways to resolve competing interests.

Every citizen, Indian or otherwise, regardless of their identity should be able to question, speak up, be heard and not have to wait on ‘community representatives’ or others to do so. Every citizen, regardless of whether they vote or not, or who they vote for must commit to holding those in authority accountable without fear of being deemed rude, racist or a traitor to any ‘identity’.

 

Yours faithfully,
Vidyaratha Kissoon