Dear Editor,
I thank Joey Jagan for his letters, ‘Letter tried to damage good name of late Dr Jagan’ (SN, March 5), and ‘AFC is following a path of sure oblivion,’ (KN, March 6). Joey must be commended for his letters because they are invaluable to those who seek the truth about Dr Cheddi Jagan’s iron grip on Indian Guyanese, and how Cheddi dealt with dissenting views. So confident is Joey of Indian support for Cheddi that he wrote, “As a matter of fact, even in death, Jagan would get more votes than the AFC if his name was placed on the ballot for the upcoming election.” I am aware that dead people ‘voted’ for Burnham in rigged elections. But now Joey informs us that Indians will vote for the deceased Cheddi Jagan.
As much as it is true that Cheddi and Janet Jagan had hypnotic-like control of Indians it is stretching it a bit too far to expect us to vote for a dead Cheddi. Or is it? Does Joey think we are still in the logies of the 1940s, when a white woman adorned in a white sari and visiting a mandir, would be treated as a deity? And that her handsome, charismatic, innocent-looking Indian husband dressed in the white man’s jacket would also be seen as a deity? Maybe Joey is right. Maybe some Indians will vote for a dead Cheddi. The smart thing for Joey to do is form his own party, put Cheddi’s name on the ballot, and voilà! Joey would win the elections.
Joey also wrote of Cheddi, “he was for all Guyanese at all times, never for… Indian interests alone… he knew how to involve cross sections of the Guyanese people.” If that was so, how come Cheddi only got Indian votes? How come he never had organisations to represent Africans as he had representing sugar workers, rice farmers, dairy farmers, provision farmers, Hindus and Muslims? If he were great to the point of being beyond reproach, how come he could not get African votes after 1964? How come the Jagans did not try to organize Africans? Just imagine how great Guyana would be today if only Janet Jagan had organized African workers.
History has shown that the Jagans’ work on the sugar estates in the 1940s was the means to building a political base from which to launch their ambitions, and pursue their communist cause. Both Cheddi and Janet arrived in British Guiana with Lenin’s little red books on how to build communist organisations, but Janet Jagan wore a sari and carried a copy of the Bhagavad Gita when visiting the logies. She even read verses in the Mandirs. She and Cheddi endeared themselves to Indians by eating and sleeping in the humble dwellings of the rural Indians. However, when the Indian base was guaranteed, Janet Jagan dispensed with the sari and Gita. It was time for Marxism-Leninism and the Soviet Union.
Joey further wrote of Cheddi: “he was revolutionary and embraced ideas even if imminent danger or destruction came his way.” This is very true. Cheddi embraced communism regardless of the “imminent danger.” In so doing he took an insignificant small colony into the Cold War. The consequences were his removal from office in 1953 and the split of the PPP along racial lines. Cheddi continued on the communist path even when “imminent destruction” faced British Guiana. The consequences were the racial violence in the early 1960s, his removal from office by the USA and UK in 1964, Guyana’s descent to dictatorship under Burnham’s PNC, and his 28 years in opposition.
In opposition Cheddi had to keep his Indian base intact. In pursuit of his ambitions and his communist agenda, he had maligned and discredited all the independent Indian political and union leaders. He destroyed all independent Indian organisations such as the British Guiana East Indian Association. Even the Indian professionals, doctors, and lawyers were ridiculed. He tolerated no challenge to his leadership. The PPP elections were rigged to shut out Balram Singh Rai. His one-man dominance of the PPP caused that party to be intellectually and morally weak.
That the current PPP regime is the most corrupt in the Caribbean is no accident. It was set on such a course by Cheddi and Janet when they weeded out party members who were independent thinkers and of strong moral character. The late ex-GDF soldier, Mr Gopicand, who was employed by the party in the ’70s and ’80s, always tried to highlight corruption in the PPP, but they always hushed him. No action was taken against corruption in the PPP, and so it permeated into the post-1992 government. One-man dictatorship also made its way into government.
Yours faithfully,
Malcolm Harripaul
