By Ryhaan Shah
The introspection that has come with the centenary commemoration of the abolition of the indentureship programme does not forecast an optimistic future for Indians in Guyana.
More than the bleak economic prospects with sugar, rice and business sector under siege, the social infrastructure of Indian marginalisation in every sphere of Guyana’s political and cultural life favours an invisibility and diminution that are supported by state policies which appear punitive and which seem to directly target the Indian Guyanese community.
Minister of Culture Nicolette Henry’s lack of knowledge about the Hindu festivals of Phagwah and Deepavali is not just a faux pas at the highest level of Government, but should be taken as a clear indication of Government’s lack of concern and regard for the Indian Guyanese community in general. It unmasks the state’s social cohesion programme as so much empty rhetoric, and gives credence to the widely held belief that the loss of our ethnic and cultural rights is acceptable collateral damage in a high-stakes game for absolute power.
The creeping authoritarianism of the Granger Government is evident in its flouting of law, the Constitution, and of even the optics of ethnic equality that might serve to dispel some of the pessimism that pervades the Indian Guyanese community.
It is not just that the size of our population has dropped from 51 percent to a mere 40 percent, if that much, because of large-scale emigration to safer locations in North America, where we would not be targets for racial/political violence; but that those of us who remain are bombarded with the message – subtle and not-so-subtle – that to be Guyanese means surrendering our heritage and identity to the dominant African Caribbean culture. This is both unconstitutional and a violation of our human rights; but neither matters in a society where successive Governments have paid little heed to such overarching laws and principles. The incessant propaganda gains a measure of success because not many Indian Guyanese can stomach the abuse and accusations of racism that are hurled at those who speak from a position of truth about their ethnic identity. The bullying is now a societal norm, and comes from all quarters; but the still-largest minority, Indians, are expected to subsume their identity in order for Guyana to achieve national unity. So the script goes; it does appear odd, and bears some investigation.
The many stories of our fore-parents’ revolt and bravery in their fight for justice on the sugar plantations share a common factor in that all the rebellions and disturbances arose from within the indentured community. There were no unions or politicians organising or directing them. Leaders rose up from among the labourers themselves, and they fought valiantly; many being killed and wounded in the process for their rights.
These were people – both men and women — with an independent and fighting spirit, who spoke and acted against injustice and had no need for anyone to galvanise them to right action.
Then what happened? And what has happened to that fighting spirit? Because denial of any Indian identity and control of the unity message emanate from officialdom, some Indian Guyanese are rightly confused, while others are very comfortable with cultural loss and displacement, being acceptable prices to pay for societal inclusion.
Professors from Indian universities who were here for the centenary commemoration were pleasantly surprised at how much our community has retained by way of religion and culture after 179 years. The very fact that we retain so much of our heritage and values indicates that these attributes are important to us; and in a truly just and plural society, this retention would be commended and respected as part of our nation’s rich diversity.
However, talk of respect for such diversity is also part of the tired political rhetoric, while age-old suspicions, jealousies and hatreds are stoked and encouraged in the name of “oneness”. Were this not the case, Indian Guyanese would be employed in representative numbers along with every other ethnic group in every state institution; our artistic expressions would be showcased at every national celebration; and our narrative would be part of the fabric of our nation’s history and literature.
Every group would condemn an attack on any other group, because we would all uphold the ethos that an attack on one is an attack on all. This, however, is not the state of the nation; and, unfortunately, there is no political will that promises that it would ever be. Indian Guyanese take note, and many respond with flight or with surrendering their ethnic identity.
