Dear Editor,
Mr Lalu Hanuman‘s letter published in the Monday, April 20th 2020 edition of Stabroek News under the caption, `A Government of Ethnic Unity is needed’ caught my attention, and after reading, prompted me to make a response.
Mr Hanuman informed his readers that at present he supports no political party in Guyana and he is a disaffected member of the PPP and a disaffected associate of the WPA. He is, therefore, no stranger to Guyanese politics. And his continuing interest in Guyana despite the great disappointment with the two political parties he had previously supported, gives him the credentials of a worthy commentator on the country’s political situation. Hanuman’s proposal to address the racial divide should not be ignored. While I agreed with many points raised by Hanuman, I also disagree with much of what he wrote. However, my main reason for pending this letter is to highlight what in my view is a major omission in his analysis contained in his support of his Bosnia and Herzegovina-type solution for Guyana’s historical political/racial divide.
But before I address the above-mentioned omission I want to say that I have no problem with Mr Hanuman‘s criticism on a political position taken by the WPA or comrade David Hinds. However, in the context of this response, it would be remiss of me not to point out what I perceive to be political “mean-spiritedness” on his part in relation to the WPA and Hinds. He wrote: “Ironically when I lived in London, I was involved in the funding discussions that brought the very same David Hinds to England to address public meetings about Guyana, on the behalf of the WPA Support Group (UK).“ I now ask, what is the point here?
It is not my intention to comment on the merits or otherwise, of Hanuman’s proposal for a “government of ethnic unity”. I welcome the proposal as another serious one coming from a Guyanese patriot. I ask readers who have not read his letter to do so for the details of the proposal. In advancing his proposal among the suggested reforms, he contends that for a government of ethnic unity to work the following is necessary: “There is also an urgent need to reform the Civil Service and the so-called “Disciplined Services” to make them demographically representative of the general populace….”
I recall that when Dr Jagan returned to power in 1992 he made a similar call and stated commitment to correcting ethnic imbalances in both the Civil Service and the Disciplined Services. I wrote a letter at the time in which I publicly agreed with President Jagan on the need to correct imbalances in those services. At the same time, I called for correcting imbalances in the economy and the distribution of wealth in Guyana. As was expected there was no response from Jagan or anyone in the PPP/C. It is this omission in the menu of messages put forward by Mr Lalu Hanuman that I find “interesting”. Since he is a “ committed socialist” it is reasonable to assume that he is a student of “theory” and is aware of the importance of the economy/base vs the superstructure. I hope that he will address this matter in a reply.
While making an important observation on the condition of the working class/ working peoples’ consciousness Hanuman also failed to comprehend that the same concern for class consciousness informs the WPA‘s politics. He wrote, “I would have liked to have seen class consciousness in Guyana, but that is nowhere on the horizon for the foreseeable future.” So correct.
Mr Lalu Hanuman also wrote, “On the occasion of the fortieth anniversary this year of Dr Walter Rodney’s murder at the hands of the PNC, this critical constitutional reform would be the most appropriate way to mark this anniversary, given Rodney’s firm opposition to ethnically divisive politics.”
I end this response to Mr Lalu Hanuman by acknowledging his misplaced optimism for a government of ethnic unity before the next commemoration of Walter Rodney’s assassination.
Yours faithfully,
Tacuma Ogunseye
