For some time now, there has been a proliferation of letters in the print media on racism, or the use of the term, “racial voting”, with good reason, because elections are soon to be held in Guyana, when this racial talk gets centre stage. When one speaks of racism in a Guyanese context, it is merely a discussion of the relationship between the two major races – Indians and Blacks. The other racial groups in that country are rarely talked about when the race question comes under the microscope.  Careful study of the history behind this racial discussion would show some shocking revelations, which I challenge the so-called race pundits to an intellectual debate.
For any debate of this nature to be of any soundness, one must subscribe to an in-depth analysis of the facts, or primary sources for reliable information; therefore, we head straight to the Caribbean Research Library (CRL). We will in so doing avoid our discussion   degenerating into the morass of a wild emotional outbursts, or the never-ending political mumbo jumbo, which is a common feature today.
Firstly, Indians are remarkable for their separation from the rest of the population something, which is still evident in their communities to the present day: Reasons being the indentureship scheme, which brought them to the Caribbean, alienated them from the rest of the freed African men and women.       They were taught to keep themselves separate from the mainly Black population, not because of racial reasons, as is misconstrued by some writers on this subject, but separated so as to avoid them being influenced by free society’s mindset and thinking.
The planters wanted a subdued, docile and permanent labour force free from outside interference, thus they encouraged segregation. It was planter policy, which had as its central theme an economic factor, rather than one racial or otherwise; racism was furthest from the mind of the planter when the indentureship programme was instituted. Even when, free from the contractual indenture, many Indians returned to the land and remained in agriculture, which meant that their sphere of influence was mainly rural to begin with, while the Blacks by this time had become urbanized. Thousands of hectares were bought by Indians and later put under cultivation. Again this spatial dichotomy cannot be interpreted as racial, because Afro-Guyanese did the very same thing as the Indians in establishing villages and going on the land to do agriculture. They were the forerunners in this regard, as Farley puts it “this insatiable appetite for personal liberty and land of their own of which history affords no parallel, freed men and women banding themselves in groups of twenty-five or fifty persons pooling their resources to purchase property, which they worked in shares.” This aspect of Black existence was not considered racial.
The reluctance of Indians for intermarriage should not be seen in the context of racism, but one surrounding the social and moral factors. Because the African slaves had their families torn apart and sold, they had psychologically blocked the urge to create families, which Indian social norms are strong on. There is evidence to support this argument when you look at the demographic trends of the two races as it pertains to union status and social relationships. A study of Carl Braithwaite’s work “An analysis of growth trends of the Negro population in Guyana” will clear up any doubts one may have on this issue.
Initially, there were ethnic alliances between Indians and Blacks under Critchlow’s leadership in the fight for better wages and an eight-hour working day. It was the joint effort of both Black and Indian against the colonials that brought about changes in the living conditions for ordinary citizens of the colony. Working class unity between the two races was evidenced in a pronounced way in 1946 when the Political Affairs Committee was formed.  Dr. Cheddi Jagan then made the next major step in the formation of the PPP a party, which drew support from both the Afro and Indo Guyanese communities. That broad-based nature of the party was further strengthened when Forbes Burnham, an Afro-Guyanese was brought into the political grouping. However, it was when Burnham, who had knowledge of British intentions towards Jagan, exploited the situation by making inordinate demands on his party, agitating vigorously for total control.
It was during this period that the issue of ethnicity, hitherto unheard of, began to take centre stage. There was now open talk of an Afro-Guyanese Burnham wing, and an Indo-Guyanese Jagan wing, ushering in the formation of the PNC. Thus Burnham’s  PNC was formed on racial undertones with the overiding strong arm support of the British and her ally, the United States, countries which had historically thrived on a divide and rule policy. This twisted plan apparently worked well in Burnham’s favour, because he held the reins of power for the next 28 years. With the reintroduction of free and fair election, this racial colonial mix backfired on them, quite to their chagrin, so the PNC, who are now at the race game again, appealing to “kith and kin”, and agitating their support base by falsely claiming marginalization and discrimination and encouraging resistance to government programmes with the hope of alienating their supporters from the government structure.  However, this time they are seeking power in a more subtle manner by calling for a power sharing deal.