Dear Editor,
THEY’RE holes in your bucket, Dear Henry. Holes so obvious that your argument can’t pass the test of authenticity.

The first hole is your claim of “valuing the opinion of Dr Cheddi Jagan on almost any subject.”

Had you really been so, you would have “valued” his explanation regarding the origin of the term “Apan Jhaat.”

In CBJ’s The West on Trial, (and on many public engagements) he painstakingly went at lengths to point out that those words had their genesis in Daniel P Debidin, the leader of the United Farmers’ and Workers’ Party, an Indian reactionary and race-based leader, who was NO friend of Dr Jagan and the PPP.

Those of his ilk, like Dr J.B. Singh, lost in an Indian-dominated constituency to the PPP candidate, Fred Bowman, a sugar worker of the “shovel gang” in the elections in 1953. Mr Bowman secured 44 per cent of the votes against Dr Singh with 26 per cent, despite him being in the Legislative and Executive Councils for more than two decades.

Mr Bowman was one of the non-Indian candidates in those elections, when “Apan Jhaat” was introduced.

Surely any serious and honest academic research would have guided you to that fact, but it seems as if you would prefer to spend your “time and space” in your failed attempt to address my “ramblings.”

Again, your “explanation” regarding the EPA of the EU reeks of failure in someone’s portfolio, taking as fait accompli that the “discourse on the sugar subsidy was all but over.”

At least, some in the Guyana Government were putting up a fight to secure extensions in the Special Preferential Sugar Agreement, and not bending over and accepting what the regional lawyers were advocating for.

THE SECOND HOLE
Mr Jeffrey keeps singing the current theme song of the opposition, “ethnic dominance.”

I’m certain you would agree, Mr Jeffrey, that just saying it certainly doesn’t provide irrefutable evidence of the pursuit of any sort of dominance over any ethnicity.

I get the impression that my comment about “singing for their supper” has obviously “touched a nerve” and strongly suggest that you re-read your convoluted response.

You went on to claim “that the PPP has deteriorated” (from when you were no longer in the government?) and “sufficient evidence exists that points to its objective of ethnic dominance….”

I would have thought that you would have jumped with joy at being challenged to prove your assertion by providing the “evidence.”  Isn’t that how positions/opinion/claims/cases are irrefutably proven, Dr Jeffrey?

Then again, you went on to claim that “a significant portion of the population believes the PPP to be racist,” which “issue has become disruptive to national development and cohesion.”

Many Guyanese would welcome knowing who did that poll, when and where.

Sorry, but the only evidence of disruption to national development are incidents like the encouragement of the few squatters to be relocated to allow for national development to be undertaken.

Another hole, sir.

You went on to suggest erroneously my two concerns, one being your characterization of the “Mocha incident” and again put a hole in your bucket by regurgitating that all the “available democratic means” were not exhausted before the few squatters had to be forcibly removed.

Challenged to say what available means were there, you went on to employ the puerile and diversionary argument that those who were “removed” were not politically “a few,” and failed to address their politically motivated action.

You further went on to argue that the PPP decided that “it will not have serious discourse with political representatives of half of the electorate, including these people” (your words) leading again to your nonsensical position about “political/ethnic dominance.”

No, Mr Jeffrey, again, refresh your memory on what the ministry/government did to reach out to the “few” who refused to reason. What would you have done differently, had you been still Minister of Housing?

You’ve obviously blanked out what happened from March to August 2020: the barefaced attempts to remain in government by denying the will of the majority; the refusal by “the political representatives of half of the electorate, including these people” (your words) to recognize a legitimately elected government; racially disruptive (and possibly politically centrally directed and encouraged) actions immediately after March 2020 and continuing; and then the persistent refusal to produce those elusive SOPs.

Even after that period, there has been the childish refusal (by the leader of the political representatives…) to respond to the outstretched hand of Guyana’s Head of State
Now that the fourth hole has been plugged, we can move to what you suggested is my second concern.

No chief, not my concern, it’s yours. As far as I’m concerned, the status quo in the judiciary can remain as is until such time that substantive appointments have been agreed upon.

You again attempted to sidetrack the issue of incompetence (politically deliberate?) which succeeded in making us the “laughing stock” of the Caribbean and farther afield.

I’m willing to bet that even you were ashamed and dumbfounded to answer what was happening, after the majority decision was given by the Court of Appeal, on the majority of 65.

Or should the government agree to appoint someone who has failed to prove his/her credentials, regardless of the ethnicity of that person?

Do we revert to having a political party flag once again fluttering above the Court of Appeal?

At least I can say you were correct that I missed the “thrust of your argument” since I do not see any similarity between the PPP’s behaviour and that of the PNC in its efforts in administering an equitable and democratic Guyana.

Finally, you asked the question why Guyana is politically the way it is “and what can be done to erase, or severely limit, this democratic deficit?”

I suggest that as a start, you encourage in your Village Voice, to give the One Guyana initiative a chance to take root (You being a roots man).

Encourage it. Embrace it. Enhance it. Eradicate racism.

The train of “One Guyana” is on its way to the station but still has a few seats available, so make reservations for you and your pals. It might not arrive by 2025, but rest assured it doesn’t have much longer.

Roger and out.

Yours truly,
Harry N Nawbatt