Dear Editor,
Ms Parvati Persaud-Edwards, in her letter captioned “Religion and race should not be the bases for protesting an appointment” (SN, Feb 1), misunderstands me and the problem of race. My concern is with achieving racial parity. In that concern, I gave more credit in my letter to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr for visualising racial parity more vividly than Mahatma Gandhi who was constrained by the difficulty of including the Dalits in the caste system. The caste system is an impregnable fortress that will take centuries to accept racial parity in its entirety. Residues of notions of superiority will persist even in those East Indians who accept that we are all equal. The fact that the Mahatma could not assail the rigidities of the caste system does not mean that he was not great. He led a movement that liberated India from colonial rule and he did so while sticking to his principles of non-violence. That was an astonishing achievement.
Unfortunately the appointment of Shri Prakash Gossai is about race. Presumably the intention is to see how he can improve race relations. Given the history of racial strife in Guyana, it is legitimate to ask how he will go about that task.
It is also legitimate to ask if an African sage, and an Amerindian captain and a Portuguese saint and a Confucian philosopher will also be appointed. Will Gossai establish an ashram in the President’s office and will he aim to raise the level of spirituality of all Guyanese?
Mrs Persaud-Edwards wonders whether I am not psychologically challenged. I would say that I am intellectually challenged in relation to the difficult task of achieving racial parity while maintaining racial diversity. Dealing with that intellectual challenge requires intellectual honesty from all Guyanese. But intellectual honesty is a scarce commodity, even among Guyanese intellectuals who prefer to assassinate individuals rather than articulate the values that will hold diverse peoples together as a nation.
Yours faithfully,
Clarence F Ellis
