Dear Editor
AFTER reading Nigel Hinds’s interesting letter, titled: “I prefer you call me African Guyanese” in the media on Sunday 11/6/17, I wondered why the one-word descriptor “Guyanese” is not enough.

I grew up hearing and believing that “Guyana was a land of six peoples ( African, Amerindian, Chinese, European, Indian, Portuguese) and after independence, we were socialised to embrace the concept of “One people, One nation, One destiny”….all Guyanese!
Am I wrong in thinking that a logical extension of Mr Hinds’s postulation is that Guyana is now a land of ten (10) peoples, having regard to the recent ‘migrations’ to our land (i.e in alphabetical order: African, Amerindian, Brazilian, Chinese, European, Haitian, Indian, Surinamese, Portuguese, Venezuelan); thus we will have in addition to African Guyanese: Indian Guyanese, Amerindian Guyanese, Brazilian Guyanese, Venezuelan Guyanese, Haitian Guyanese etc., etc.

Would this not add to our already deleterious, dangerous divisiveness and detract from what should be a commitment to the cohesiveness being pursued by the Government and hopefully all Guyanese?

Regards
Nowrang Persaud