Posted August 11th. 2002. - Special Feature by David Hinds

African Guyanese are marginalized, but must fight with dignity

Open Letter to African Guyanese

I have come under some fire-- friendly and unfriendly-- for speaking out against the violence perpetrated by some African Guyanese against Indian Guyanese. Some Africans feel that I have condemned African Guyanese behavior without paying attention to the root causes while others think that by criticizing African behavior I am doing the bidding of Indians. Some Indians on the other hand feel that I have not gone far enough.

I believe that there is a constituency of unreason on both sides of the racial divide in Guyana whose main aim is to directly and indirectly derail any movement toward a national compact. This constituency will always have problems with me because my central concern is racial reconciliation and a Guyanese nationhood based on justice for all races.

I therefore address this letter primarily but not exclusively to African Guyanese. I feel that telling your own when they are wrong is one of the greatest acts of love-I criticize African wrongdoing because I love my people and I want them to be dignified even in the face of aggression and oppression. My criticism also stems from my sense of racial justice-racial injustice cannot be conquered by racial injustice. I am also conscious that runaway aggression against your neighbor eventually turns on you as is becoming evident.

If Africans must struggle, and they must struggle for respect, bread, and justice, they must come out of it with their dignity intact. If our foreparents had surrendered their dignity during slavery they would not have been able to strike the dignified blows that consolidated their emancipation after 1838. That's why while I support the struggle of African Guyanese to preserve or reclaim their political, social, economic and cultural space in a country that they in no small measure helped to humanize, I cannot support wanton attacks on the person or property of East Indians, Africans or any other group. That's simply undignified and un-African.

Having gotten that out of the way, let me set the record straight on where I stand in relation to, and how I see, the African Guyanese condition. I believe that the current juncture is critical for the African community in this country for given the insensitive mood and behavior of the PPP and the seemingly ideological confusion of the PNC, Africans run the risk of being relegated to second class status in a country where their contribution has been first class. African people in Guyana are marginalized, dispossessed and disempowered. Even the most casual observer can test this. They have no access to the power of decision-making-they do not contribute to decisions that affect them both at the national and local levels.

It is important to understand the origin and nature of this condition. The African Guyanese condition is the direct result of historical forces that have been hostile to their socio-economic empowerment coupled with their over-dependence on the political party as the vehicle for empowerment and liberation, and a political system that discriminates against electoral losers.

Those who point to the number of roads and schools this government and previous governments have built in African areas or the number of African people employed by the government as proof that Africans are not marginalized do not understand the true meaning of marginalization. Group marginalization means that the group is located at the margins of both the political power structure and the economic structures in society.

African Guyanese marginalization is systemic, historical and political. Historical because the post-emancipation political orders have as a matter of policy economically disempowered African Guyanese. Since Emancipation all governments have pursued policies with the aim of keeping Africans economically dependent. This practice, despite some attempts at correction during the early post-independence years, persisted during the PNC tenure.

No political administration has ever consciously tackled the issue of African economic marginalization and African organizations, save for ASCRIA 1964-71and ACDA, have never mustered the courage to deal frontally with this issue. To be economically empowered, a group must be guaranteed access to employment with livable wages, capital, loans, contracts, and markets. And in polarized societies such as Guyana this access has to be guaranteed on a level playing field. This has not been the case with African Guyanese who consequently have been unable as a group to acquire wealth comparable with other groups in the society.

African Guyanese marginalization is political because the PNC to which Africans have looked for leadership is a political-electoral machine primarily and perhaps singularly concerned with achieving political power as an end in itself. This is the nature of Caribbean political parties. As such the PNC is not overly concerned with African economic and cultural empowerment as ends in themselves. The party uses the African condition as political capital in its pursuit of political office. The PNC's argument that it is not an African party is ample evidence of its limitations when it comes to frontally tackling the African question. African empowerment has therefore been sacrificed at the altar of PNC's tactics and strategy in and out of office. And because the PNC has treated parallel African organizations such as ASCRIA and ACDA as competitors, it has directly and indirectly undermined their efforts at mobilizing for African empowerment. Further, given Guyana's racial situation such efforts have been seen by some Indians and conservative Africans as African racism. The consequence of this is that African groups have become timid or apologetic in this regard.

The systemic aspect of African marginalization lies in our system of government that constitutionally and institutionally marginalizes electoral losers. Given our racial arithmetic and in the context of racial competition Africans are permanent electoral losers. It is common practice in Caribbean politics that insofar as ruling parties facilitate some "trickledown", it benefits their supporters. The PPP like any Caribbean party is primarily concerned with votes and since it knows that it does not have to secure the African vote in order to win, it shortchanges that section of the community.

So this is where we are. Although the feeling of marginalization has always been there, because of the racial problems that feeling is most pronounced when the party of the other race is in power. When the PNC was in power Africans protested their marginalization from a class standpoint, but since the PPP came to power that protest has understandably taken on a racial outlook.

But the perception by Africans that they have been pushed further to the margins of the society since 1992 has been matched by the PPP's open facilitation of the disproportionate empowerment of the East Indian economic and political classes and a simultaneous insensitivity to African cries of injustice. The PPP's method of rule then becomes the symbol of Indian domination, which in the context of racial insecurity the marginalized Indian masses are forced to hold up as Indian power. Power is both a perception and reality. The Indian masses perceive that they have power and the Indian political and economic elites know they have power. This is what Africans are responding to.

The problem is that the PPP has shown that it does not respond to reason, thus justifying the charges that it only responds to force. Every time the PPP has responded since 1992, it has been either to the threat of force or the use of force. The PPP's insistence on giving a token project here and there to African communities does not address the fundamental questions. In fact it is an insult to Africans as the party seems to say "We have the power, we will give up none, but here are a few crumbs to keep you quiet until the next blow up."

So what we have is an arrogant ruling party that is prepared to ignore all reasonable African demands being faced with a militant African upsurge part of which is driven by an anti-Indian sentiment. The PPP to my mind seems to have decided that it will cede no power to Africans and that its Indian constituency would have to bear the burden if they want this perception and reality of Indian power as represented by the PPP government to remain in tact. This dangerous convergence is where we are at the moment.

I feel that Africans must fight the PPP's arrogance, but they must fight with a plan. If Africans are fighting to replace an Indian government with an African government, I am not with you. You can't solve one-sidedness by seeking to replace it with one-sidedness-that's not acceptable. If you are fighting for your fair share of the political and economic assets of this country, I am with you all the way. Neither Indian nor African representatives have any right to monopolize power in Guyana.

I therefore say to Africans, you have a case. Fight your case with militancy, but do not visit physical violence on ordinary citizens. The Indian masses despite their electoral support for the PPP are not responsible for the PPP's excesses. By the same token the African masses cannot be held responsible for the PNC's excesses when it ruled Guyana.

I will not retreat from that stance. It makes life easier for Indian triumphalists and extremists if all African voices preach violence and race hate, for they can then justify Indian domination of government and society. Given the PNC's 28-year baggage and its continued acceptance of a political system where dominance is supreme, it is fair game for those Indians who want Indian dominance. Indian dominance as represented by the PPP is perpetuated as a defense against African dominance as represented by the PNC. African resistance is then cast in the mould of an attempt to reinstall African dominance of Indians. Prophets of Indian extremism need the African extremism it has been getting since 1997 for it strengthens the stereotype that Africans are bullies, something that does not find favor with reasonable world opinion. Those African leaders, self appointed and appointed, who implicitly and explicitly encourage reckless African behavior are therefore walking into a not so well disguised trap set by the supporters of Indian dominance.

I continue to believe in and urge a militant but nonviolent solution to this problem. But I say to the PPP that you cannot decry African violence without recognizing the psychological violence being perpetrated against Africans under your governance every day-no power, no jobs, no health care, no education. If you continue to frustrate a national settlement, history will ultimately hold you responsible for the harsh consequences.

Dr Hinds is a University Lecturer and Political Commentator and Activist. He currently teaches Political Science at Glendale College and Mt San Antonio College in California. Please send your comments on this article to dhinds6106@aol.com. An archive of Dr Hinds' other writings can be found on his website-guyanacaribbeanpolitics.com.