In the early 1950s the charismatic Cheddi Jagan was able to unite the Indian and Black working class into the PPP. His victories were massive, despite gerrymandering by the British Colonial Office. During that period, the PPP became a truly multiracial party, representing both the Indian and Black working class people. Then along came Forbes Burnham. Mr. Burnham was as self-serving as he was brilliant. The CIA and British Colonial Office recognized this self-serving trait in Burnham, and promised to help him if he took the Black votes and split from the PPP. They considered Burnham a lesser threat than the Marxist Cheddi Jagan. Their infamous "divide and rule" policy worked.
Burnham broke away from the PPP to form the PNC - and took the Black votes with him. The PPP then became ipso facto an Indian based Party, as the PNC became a Black based party. But the PPP either failed to recognize, (because of their "class struggle"), or refused to admit, the changed political/racial demographics. The CIA and British Colonial Office, however, did not. They recognized it, and consequently changed the voting system from first-past-the-post to the scarcely used Proportional Representation. The PPP got less than 50% of the votes, even though Indians voted overwhelmingly for it. And presto! The PNC was in power, in return for Burnham's betrayal of the united Blacks and Indians, by a combination of British gerrymandering, and a coalition with the United Force of D'Aguiar.
Guyana's reality is the PPP is a predominantly Indian party, and the PNC is a predominantly black party. But the reality ends there. The PNC is true to itself and its supporters, by admitting it is a Black party. It openly identifies with, and makes representation on behalf of, Blacks. The PPP, on the other hand, like the proverbial ostrich, has its head in the sand. It refuses to accept the truth, that it is an Indian based party. By this very refusal, the PPP is unable to represent the Indians that voted it into office. But the real irony is that the Indian faith and trust in the PPP is so implicit, they too either fail to recognize it, or refuse to accept it. The Indians, in effect, are WITHOUT a CHIEF. They are caught between a PNC that brutalizes them, and a PPP that treats them like a stepchild.
Indians must realize that the honest and incorruptible Cheddi, who would have laid his life on the line, who was a genuine leader, is no longer here. The current crop of leaders has neither the conviction nor the commitment of the PPP of the 60s. They have never passed the test of fire. Indeed, they are failing their first “baptism of fire.” Indians must watch and question the decisions and actions of the PPP, and ensure their interests are adequately represented. They must stand up and be counted, and no longer take things for granted. For too long Indians have blindly given the PPP their votes, without questioning, and without getting appropriate answers.
The PPP is still a Marxist party at heart, at least while Janet Jagan is in charge (she is in charge, is she not?). It has toned down the socialist rhetoric and changed some, because of new international circumstances, but the PPP still believes in the class struggle. The problem with that is while the PPP continues to fool itself about the class struggle, the PNC is engaged in a race war. This has left Indians out in the cold, unarmed and vulnerable for the taking, both in the halls of parliament and on the streets.
Some of us may think that the PPP is doing the best it can, and so we pride ourselves as being liberals by refusing to question the PPP with necessary vigor. Some of us even accuse those who are questioning the PPP, as being Indian extremists. Maybe the problem is not the PPP or the bandits who come after our hard-earned goods and money and bodies week after week, month after month. Maybe it is us who can’t decide what’s really happening (ironically, this would therefore make the PPP the party most suitable for us).
Otherwise, we better wake up . . . . . before a nightmare comes!
