Dear Editor,
I am not at all surprised that Mr Vishnu Bisram has finally come under attack for his dual role of pollster and political commentator/analyst. Just over a year ago in a letter captioned ‘Good pollsters seek neutrality’, (KN 06.02.12) I suggested to Bisram that in the interest of professionalism, he should decide whether he wanted to be a pollster, a political activist or a political commentator.
Reacting to my suggestion, he said:
“I will give serious consideration to Carryl’s advice to refrain from political commentary as some people would feel that the commentaries may colour my objectivity.” (KN 14-02-06)
He said also that his political commentaries were fair, unbiased and professional and while I would not ponder the veracity of such a postulation, I must say that I am terribly troubled by at least two statements he recently made in his discourse.
First, in his letter of 15-03-07 KN, he said:
“On the issue of our “imperialist link” with Mother England, Guyanese express-ed strong disapproval of the break with the Privy Council.”
It is pointless revisiting the astute wisdom behind our separation from the privy council, but I would wish that Bisram would come to understand that enlightened people from this part of the world, have long banished the concept of ‘Mother England’ from their liberated minds.
Anyone who has studied the complexities of underdevelopment would agree that England is not to be consciously regarded as the Mother Country or Mother England.
Clearly, by embracing the concept of Mother England, Bisram is saying to us that he does not -in the scheme of thought of Franz Fanon – understand the coordinates of colonialism which has conspired with the remnants of slavery and indentureship to instill in us mental decadence and dependency.
Secondly, I have questioned the accuracy of Bisram’s polls, in so far as current political issues were concerned, but when he said that “the findings consistently showed Guyanese prefer to return to rule under the British” serious doubts were cast on the conduct of his experiments.
For any poll to conclusively conclude that Guyanese prefer to return to British rule, the sample would have to contain an overwhelming majority of persons who once lived under the British system. I don’t think that that is possible in Guyana today. Therefore, on this rare occasion I would – with the greatest of respect – invite Mr. Bisram to advise us on the composition of the sample he used.
I am doubtful that any properly selected sample, which is representative of the total population today, can contain a majority of people who once lived under British rule in this country.
Mr Bisram seems to have a passion for a return of the Privy Council as our final court of appeal and he seems to revel in the situation where no other Caricom state but Guyana and Barbados has signed on to the CCJ. Be that as it is, I must once again remind him of the speech of Dr. Francis Alexis former AG of Grenada who in support of the CCJ has said:
“
