…on Burnham
Some folks feel there are really no coincidences in history. And so there must be a reason why the PNC refused to accept the findings of the Rodney CoI in Parliament – for which the Guyanese taxpayers forked out $400M – and then a day later Prezzie announced that Burnham was the “author of social cohesion and national unity” in Guyana?
Now could it be it was because the CoI concluded: “…given the manner in which the country was run, coupled with the threats issued by Prime Minister Burnham to the members of the WPA and the evidence of Mr Robert Allan Gates, we conclude that Prime Minister Burnham knew of the plan and was part of the conspiracy to assassinate D. Walter Rodney.”?? You think?
But even without going into why the CoI said what it did or didn’t – which certainly never even remotely suggested Burnham pushed social cohesion – maybe we can look at the uncontested historical record. Prezzie grounded his assessment of the PNC’s Founder Leader from a single speech the gentleman made in 1964 after becoming Prime Minister of then British Guyana. There’s no question Burnham DID say all the six peoples of Guyana were “important” to the PNC/UF Government and that they’d all be “protected”.
But don’t the declassified files of the US and the UK confirm for Burnham to become Prime Minister he went along with the CIA’s fostering of riots to get rid of the PPP – which was supposed to take British Guiana into independence? And that the PNC had a hand in many of the operations of the CIA and was well funded for its troubles – even after the PPP was forced out? It doesn’t seem to this Eyewitness that conniving with a foreign power to remove your legally elected government from office is a good move to build social cohesion, nuh?
There’s that age-old dilemma of using nettlesome means to deliver facially laudable ends. No one’s really doubting Mr Burnham’s laudable goals for the lions to lie down with the lambs. But the Rodney CoI did uncover some pretty gruesome means Burnham took even two decades after his radio broadcast. Using the House of Israel to violently break up political meetings of the Opposition wasn’t going to lead to greater social cohesion, would it? And how about challenging the WPA to “make its will” since the PNC had “sharper steel”?
But seems to this Eyewitness it’s clear we’ve come a long way since then. Yeah, baby!
After all, why would the WPA not contest Prezzie’s statement on Burnham, but now say the Kabaka might’ve been misunderstood?
…on education
In the conferences and talk shows and private discussions about the “State of the African Guyanese Community”, your Eyewitness is a bit taken aback by the emphasis placed on education. Now in theory, nothing’s wrong with education. But after looking back at our history, shouldn’t we be concerned about what exactly are we being educated about?
After all, at the abolition of slavery in 1838, “education” was also emphasised by one and all. Especially by the missionaries. But don’t we remember that the strike of 1848, which broke the backs of the freed Africans, was undercut more by the “education” on docility than the introduction of indentured labourers?
Or later when Africans wanted to move up, they were told “education” meant imbibing the “classics”, which had nothing to do with the engineering and managerial skills that would prepare them for really running their affairs professionally.
So when your Eyewitness hears about “education” – without connecting it to jobs being created – alarm bells get set off!
…on cricket
Your Eyewitness heard about “third time lucky”. So he’s beyond consolation after the performance of his Amazon Warriors in the finals. These fellas he saw with the Warriors uniforms didn’t show up to play. 93 runs?
An entire nation’s eyes and hopes were on them…and they choked. Plain and simple.
