Dear editor
I make reference to the words of letter-writer Ms. Ryaan Shah in her letter in your newspaper of March 5, 2022. She observed; “The discussion about whether or not we should make allowances for the flaws of brilliant people who produce ground-breaking work continues, and there is no right or wrong answer to what is an individual choice, based on individual values and beliefs.

Carter made choices during the PNC dictatorship that were probably a matter of survival. He was not alone in making difficult choices during the darkest days of Guyana’s recent history.”

Ms Shah was referring to Mr. Alan Fenty’s reference to Freddie Kissoon’s analysis of Carter. I admit I read Mr. Kissoon but there is an equal amount of agreement and disagreement. Mr. Kissoon writes on everything under the sun some of which generates intense controversy. I saw no controversy this time in Kissoon’s assessment of Carter. What I find troubling are the words of Ms. Shah quoted above.

I am a retired school teacher with a Master’s Degree in Literature from London University. I live in the UK. I have never returned to Guyana after settling in the UK, and that is more than 40 years ago. I taught the poetry of Martin Carter to my students. As someone who with more than a passing interest in Guyanese politics due to my wife’s political passion, I have maintained a scholarly interest in Guyanese politics. My wife’s father was once very active in GAWU and came to know Cheddi Jagan very well. I never penned a letter to the press but the interest Carter generated by Mr. Kissoon caused me to respond to Ms. Shah.

I never thought of examining the politics of Martin Carter until the Christmas season of 2016 when I read in the online edition of the Kaieteur News, an article by someone named Dennis Nichols. It opened my eyes. I never ever reflected on this aspect of Carter’s life. Mr. or Dr. Nichols used the word incongruity in referring to Martin Carter hobnobbing with the colonials of Guyana while engaged in anti-colonial politics.

Mr. or Dr. Nichols pointed out to readers that Caribbean scholar, Bruce Paddington, had put the question to Carter of his being friends with the top colonial elites in British Guiana like Sir Anthony Tasker and Sir Jock Campbell. Carter’s reply was; “The human aspects of their lives were more important to me.” This information is taken from the West Indian Journal, Caribbean Beat, Issue 13, Spring 1995.

Ms. Shah needs to take this statement into consideration when she writes further on Carter. My own experience in London here is instructive. I became very close to a friend who was White through our membership in the same cricket club. This man was very nice to me and had very good qualities. It was when he ran for a council seat, his background became known to our family.

He had a history of anti-immigration politics and involved in racist politics.

When I spoke to him during the campaign because our family wanted to campaign for him, he told me in those days it was a matter of survival. It was when I read those words of Ms. Shah, I thought of doing this letter. She raised a very important point that may have no answer. I guess someone like Freddie Kissoon has answers for everything complex in this world. He would condemn Carter outright. I suppose people with the mind-set of Mr. Kissoon would use the moral argument that wrong is wrong.

As to Mr. Kissoon’s point that Carter was a spy for the British Government, this is the first time I think Guyanese are hearing about it. Mr. Kissoon supplied no [proof] but being an academic, he used the methodology of logical deduction. When you consider Mr. Kissoon’s arguments, he has points. Why was Carter so accepted by the colonial establishment and not the other PPP leaders? I think the ensuing debate will be interesting.

Yours Sincerely,
Anand Khemraj Poonai
London, UK