Nascimento misrepresented Bisram’s position on cultural centres

Dear Editor,
Reference is made to retort of Mr Kit Nascimento (Feb 18). I agree with the writer on a few points, as we share similar goals. Nascimento seemingly misunderstands and misrepresents my position on Indian regional cultural centres (ICC).
Is there a hidden motif, given that Mr Nascimento worked in propaganda for over six decades, including serving the PNC that seized the Indian Immigration Fund?
I do not disagree with the trust of his argument for a “one Guyana policy”, but it is not defined. My position on the NCC or ICC has nothing to do with the vision of President Ali to build a united nation; but, as an activist who spent five decades combating racial discrimination, I have a patriotic duty to expose injustice and to further the culture of Indian Guyanese who were victimised for 28 years under the PNC regime, which Nascimento dutifully served.
Since Nascimento served Burnham loyally, he would have an abiding interest in defending the policy to confiscate the Indian Fund.
The appropriation and confiscation of the Indian Immigration Fund to construct Burnham’s edifice of what he calls a National Cultural Centre (NCC) is a very sensitive matter for Indians. The appropriation of the fund capped a long list of abuses of the Indian population, including, but not limited to, race riots, Wismar Massacre of Indians, independence date, confiscation of agricultural land, banning of foods and other items related to the Indian cultural diet and religious practices, and rigged election.
There was massive discriminatory practice and victimisation of Indians. The governance of Burnham left a bitter taste in the mouths of Indians. Indians viewed Burnham’s policy as a deliberate act to seize money left for the descendants of Indian pioneers.
Burnham was ‘rubbing it in the Indian population’ by using the Indian Fund to construct the NCC. The proposal was unanimously rejected by the Indian population, which by 1972 constituted over half the population. Burnham had no right to use the fund for Carifesta. It is noted that Nascimento’s wife, Gem, supported the confiscation of the fund to build the NCC.
Kit Nascimento was a loyal servant of Burnham for some twenty years, having broken off from Peter D’Aguiar’s UF, where he cut his political teeth.
As Nascimento noted, the use of the Indian Fund for the NCC is a longstanding issue that Indians have not forgotten or been able to overcome. Till this day, over fifty years, they remain opposed to it. Countless Indians of that era have refused to set foot in the NCC; they want the return of their ancestors’ funds.
I was told the late Pt. Reepu Daman Persaud did not set foot in the NCC until Lata Mangeshkar performed there. As the host, Pt Reepu had no choice but to accompany her to the hall. Other prominent Indian leaders also boycotted the NCC. Among them were Fenton Ramsahoye, Isahak Bashir, Dr. Balwant Persaud, Yacoob Ally (who was jailed for having a pound of imported salt), Mohammed Insanally, Pt Ramlall, Pt Churkeeman Tiwari, and others.
Dr. Jagan, who was indisputably the de facto, if not de jure, leader of Indians (overwhelming majority anyway), opposed the use of the funds to build a national cultural centre. He supported regional cultural centres. The fund would have been used to build regional Indian cultural centres before Burnham’s installment in office, but the matter got swept away during the PPP administration (1957-64) by the wave of more important political issues of the time, including political independence, race riots, etc.
Regarding my missive, I received countless compliments and plaudits from prominent Indians for what can be described as the Indian position on the Indian Fund.
Nascimento misunderstands and misrepresents my usage of the term cultural genocide. Culture must be autonomous, meaning that each group must be allowed to engage in its own practices, and alien culture must not be foisted upon a group, as Burnham attempted during his long 20-year reign in office to deculturise Indians and others. Replacing a group’s ancestral culture with an alien (creole or other) culture is cultural genocide, and we must guard against such national practices. This is completely different from cultural diffusion, which is “the synergy” Nascimento refers to.
Government cannot mix portions of different cultures and call it Guyanese culture, or national culture, or synergy of all of our different cultures. African Americans and other groups reject such synergy in America. It is also rejected by ethnic groups the world over. Africans, Indians, Amerindians, Chinese, Portuguese and others have their own culture.
Nascimento misquoted me (don’t know if he did so deliberately). I never wrote that Government should use the people’s money to build regional Indian cultural centres. What I stated was the Indian Immigration Fund with interest must be returned, and the Indian community, including Gem Madhoo, myself, and all other Indians would decide on the fate of the funds. I am in favour of Indian cultural centres. Gem wants to build regional theaters. I don’t see that as a necessarily opposing proposal.
Dr Jagan, the late Pandit Reepu, and other prominent Indian leaders also favoured regional Indian cultural centres. It was/is also my position that if the Government is offering subventions to any ethnic cultural centres, it must do the same to all groups. The African Tipperary Hall in Buxton was modernised in 2011 with the people’s money. Nascimento had/has no problem with it, but he has a problem with the people’s money being used to build an Indian cultural centre. I do not know if Government provides subvention to the (African) Lichas Hall in Linden (Mackenzie). If it does, for fairness and cultural equity, similar subventions must be given to cultural centres elsewhere.
Nascimento says the NCC was built for the celebration of “our Caribbean and national culture and identity”. What is this national culture and national identity? We don’t have one people or one culture. One national cultural centre divides the nation. We have several cultures and identities, not one. We need regional cultural centres, or theaters (to use Gem’s term).
Nascimento misquotes me (don’t know if it is deliberate) on the use of proposed regional Indian cultural centres. I never stated these should be used exclusively to stage Indian cultural programmes.
Nascimento and his wife are of the view that Indian cultural centres would “further divide the country”. Africans have the attractive Lichas Hall in Linden and the majestic Tipperary Hall in Buxton. Amerindians have Benabs where they host cultural activities. Why would regional Indian cultural centres lead to the division of the country, but African cultural centres won’t? Every group has a right to its cultural centres. In Switzerland and Belgium, each ethnic group has cultural autonomy, and its own centres or theatres. These don’t lead to further division. Instead, different centres lead to cultural appreciation and national unity.
On the usage of the NCC by Indians, its use for Indian programmes has been very minimal. And the attendance of Indians at the NCC has also been very sparse and limited to a few programmes. The bottom line is that Indians have consistently opposed the use of their ancestral money to build a national cultural centre. Their wishes should be honoured.
Nascimento defines culture as “the customs, ideas, and social behaviour of a particular people or group of people”. That undermines his own contention that each group should not have its own cultural centre, whether private or state-funded.
The expression “let a thousand flowers bloom” is a misquotation of Chairman Mao Zedong, who said, “Letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend is the policy for promoting progress…”. However, that slogan was meant to make critics and dissidents of his cultural revolution comfortable enough to show themselves. Those who did were executed, somewhat akin to Burnham’s policy of victimising those who opposed his usage of the Indian Fund.
When Nascimento speaks of supporting Guyanese culture, this is what he supports: The National School of Dance; The National School of Music; The Burrowes School of Art; Castellani House; Mashramani; Teachers Training College – all publicly-funded institutions that drive culture in Guyana, and which are all African-Guyanese-dominated. Not one of them promotes Indian culture. That is racial and cultural prejudice, and every fair-minded person who values justice and democratic society would understand the predicament of the Indian Guyanese community, which is continually silenced whenever its members speak about this national prejudice and injustice. The silencing is part and parcel of the genocidal policies which are both physical and cultural.
I support the “One People” policy that is meant to promote respect among all the nationalities or peoples who make up Guyana, and give them equitable treatment. There is no evidence that it is being borrowed whole from the Burnhamist doctrine of oneness, whereby all non-supporting groups were expected to disappear culturally, socially, and physically into the miscegenation that is nothing less than genocide.
Nascimento hardly needs reminding of this, since he was a loyal supporter of the Burnham dictatorship, and as head of Burnham’s information service, was the chief propagandist for the anti-Indian racist doctrines.
Finally, I agree with Nascimento that we must give recognition to our cultural roots, and who we are today – peoples of different ethnicities and cultures, and people who are extremely divided as a result of our toxic politics. We must not marginalise any group’s culture, or define what is their culture. And, most importantly, we must not usurp funds belonging to any ethnic group to promote the culture of another group.
As his wife, Ms. Gem Madhoo, proposed, would she and he champion the installation of the plaque stating the NCC was built with the Indian Immigrant Fund? Would they also champion the inscription of Indian cultural insignia inside and outside of the NCC?

Yours truly,
Dr Vishnu Bisram (PhD)