Dear Editor,
The letter by Emile Mervin captioned “Party Paramountry and the 1980 Constitution combined to give Burnham something close to absolute power” (07.05.10) has not only given sound support to, but has also combined with Lloyd King’s letter captioned “Burnham was a dictator in his ideological pursuit” presenting palpable and stubborn evidence, thereby drawing the noose tighter around the necks of those who stand in brazen denial.
The plinth on which these two letters stand, studded with evidence. is solid and indelible.
They were frank, straight-up, plain and simple truth, that does not call for any research from those who lived through the Burnham era, for there is nothing mysterious or puzzling to them about the things that were done, as pointed out by King or Mervin. What has been done cannot be washed away, and those in denial are only trying to insult our intelligence.
Where the average/ordinary person is concerned, a dictator is defined as one “who wields absolute power,” is responsible to no one, is answerable to no one, and according to Walter Rodney, the rule of law is replaced by arbitrary conduct and orders from above – end of story. So what is all this mumbo jumbo and semantics about “My preferred definition
