IN responding to my letter of 7-12-14 in the Stabroek News titled, ‘No to shared governance, yes to federalism’, the TUC’s Mr. Lincoln Lewis resorts to the usual diatribe in his SN letter of 7-14-14 titled ‘The GTUC has a proud record of fighting for and achieving racial equality’.
In reinforcing affirmation that Guyanese workers, especially Indians are indebted because the Afro Guyanese-led TUC fought for those benefits, Mr. Lewis proudly also reminds us that “These were done during the stewardship of an African dominated PNC government”.
His letter has its quota of fulsome disrespect by his “lack of integrity” and its sharp edge benefits for me. No offense is taken.
But isn’t living in the PNC’s past graduated as a bigger burden for black progress? Dialogue should, however, continue, even with a gifted shape shifter, now holding forth about yesterday’s PNC magnificence.
Mr. Lewis, of course, has the democratic right to remain anchored in yesterday’s starvation. But assuredly what is currently desired, and it is also everyone’s right, is to be included as equal
beneficiaries in “the nation’s bounty and beauty” regardless if it is under stewardship of a working class based PPP/C Government that has massively neglected its Indian base, no less working class for sure!
No way does it logically follow that when Mr. Lewis’ TUC democratically opted to remain manacled to the PNC and its sordid past, can any demands by race entitlement become the leapfrog automatic solution of equality?
Extolling embrace of PNC failures in racial solidarity is not only a forever hindering imposition on all Guyanese moving ahead, but it reinforces such permanent imprisonment as an anchor keeping themselves back.
Until such issues are exhaustively addressed, the many century’s “anchoring slave mentality” will continue to keep black Guyanese from emerging into the 21st century as self-sufficient,
bountiful cool cats dependent on none.
Guyanese are not dimwitted to actually believe his is no abrupt about-turn of disassociation from his first letter of 7-7-14 in SN titled ‘Evidence-based discussions needed on executive governance to address the interest of all.”
Why does Mr. Lewis boldly deny, in his own words, mind you, that he “did not set out in any form or claim to say executive power-sharing/shared-governance must be the new form of
executive governance”?
Could he have set out to probably embrace Federalism and sing a sweet song of sixpence? This may be a dainty dish to set before the king – if additionally more than four and nineteen blackbirds (not “4-20” as Dr Walter Rodney no longer sings) were to support baking the pie – in tune with the PPP/C’s recipe.
Those birds can really sing. Compare the dissonance where in his first letter in SN of 7-7-14 he specifically wrote: “As a trade unionist an element of such discussions (his!) would ensure respect for universal (truth?) principles. The GTUC in 1978, during the tenure of Joseph
Pollydore as General Secretary, took to the Constituent Assembly a proposal for (sic) executive power-sharing”.
Still touting old time TUC munificence to all workers – no exceptions, it was Mr. Lewis
himself who also reminded us that “the call by the GTUC, though initially rejected, or not quite (sic) understood by some, has over the years been reproduced in various forms in the call for (sic) executive power sharing”.
Same old timer who also wrote “Though there’s respect for the calls for a (sic) new model of executive governance, what is not being made clear is how this will… (be implemented).” All these ingredients Mr. Lewis wants us to believe in no way endorses “power dispensation” by whatever flavour of the month it is described.
Guyanese swift automatic evaluation of such catalogued fossils of yesteryear will not find it anyhow difficult to discern if these are intentionally more lies, damn lies or barefaced lies all packaged, especially by an undaunted trade unionist, to be tomorrows’ new refreshing Jonestown cool-aid tonic.
It is either partition, sharing of whatever, retaining the present status quo, or federalism for sure.
While today’s TUC’s Lincoln Lewis however rides the sprinting “race horse” like a seasoned jockey, he is also most welcome to ignore, to thy kingdom come, those glaring valid demands in my letter of 7-12-14,which is embedded with its own prerequisite urgency and necessity: “For
power-sharing to work it must be very clear what is being brought to the table by all sides.” Would these demands disappear if ignored? The Opposition is the alternative government in all, but not by entitlement or race. Those PNC happy-happy joy-joy days for 28 years, in his words “under an African dominated PNC government” inspires no confidence with the “frying pan” in charge, the “fire” is the alternative, the “match” from Linden is out of the box and the big
pookney (“fan”) in the AFC are all on standby for “slow fire more fire”!
There are many talented Guyanese on both sides of the divide who will never rise to the top: But no one marches into oblivion by choice in a democracy. Because she is playing hooky, psychologist Dr Faith Harding should have her head examined for free if she brings Dr Van West Charles along, because they have not abandoned the PNC but Guyanese.
SULTAN MOHAMED
