WHAT is your explanation on the motive for the public letter of Dr. Walter Rodney’s wife and his son on the visit of President Bolsonaro to Guyana? You will get a better handle on the reason for the letter when you take into consideration the 42-year-old silence of both Mrs. Rodney and her son on everything. I stress, everything that occurred in Guyana since 1980.
The only action that has emanated from Mrs. Rodney and her son has been the need for a commission of inquiry into the assassination of Walter Rodney. Former President, Donald Ramotar said he knew from whom Mrs. Rodney got his mobile number, but she rang him and requested the judicial inquiry. Prior to that, the son, Shaka, had held a vigil outside Mr. Anil Nandlall’s office demanding that as Attorney-General he should arrange for the enquiry.

From 1980 until the visit of President Bolsonaro in 2022, the Rodney family has not uttered one word, I repeat, even one word about anything in Guyana. Think of what has happened in Guyana since 1980, the year of Dr. Rodney’s assassination. The list includes the 1985 rigged election; 1992 election violence; post-election violence in 1997; the Buxton massacre between 2002 and 2006

There was the ubiquity of former soldiers in the state sector after the APNU+AFC came to power. One thought the Rodney family would have commented on that aspect of Guyana’s politics because President Granger was head of the army and Joe Harmon was chief of army intelligence at the time of Rodney’s assassination. Guyana witnessed the arbitrary appointment of a GECOM chairman by President Granger.

There was the refusal to hold a general election after the passage of the no-confidence vote. There were five months of attempted election rigging. You had post-election violence in 2020 when on the pretext of PPP supporters killed two youths in Cotton Tree, PPP supporters were violently attacked. All these things missed the voice and pen of Mrs. Rodney and her son, Shaka until 2022 when both of them put their signature to a letter in the newspaper.

What was the demand of mother and son? That President Ali should not invite Mr. Bolsonaro because Brazil mistreats its African population. The issue was not about Guyana but how Brazil treats its African population. So the determining factor for the letter was the concern for African-Brazilians. No political anomaly in Guyana interested Mrs. Rodney and her son. After that letter, I have withdrawn any respect I had for Patricia and Shaka Rodney.

We come to Dr. Alissa Trotz. This column here came about because I got a few emails from people who showed complete disdain towards Dr. Trotz over a letter she wrote praising President Ali over his passionate defence of the reparation demand for slavery. The motive for Dr. Trotz’s missive was identical to that of the Rodney family. Dr. Trotz praised the Guyanese leader for an issue that involves Africans in the Caribbean. It should be noted that Dr. Trotz joined the Rodney family on the rejection of the Bolsonaro visit.

It brings up the question as to why since August 2020 when he became president, Ms. Trotz has not written positively on any aspect of his presidency. One cannot escape the pressing curiosity that the determinant in Trotz’s position, as in the case with the Rodney family, was a race instinct. If not, why Trotz has never uttered one line of admiration for presidential policies since August 2020?

Ms. Trotz edits a weekly column titled “In the Diaspora (ITD).” There has not been even one column that was devoted to presenting a positive appraisal of the Guyanese President. On the contrary, every commentator that has done a piece in ITD has been either staunchly anti-government or mild critic of the ruling PPP.

Ms. Trotz has not reached out to one scholar among the thousands of educated Guyanese in the diaspora to request a positive assessment of the Guyana government. Is this an oversight? Do you think it is? My answer is no, and a resounding no. Ms. Trotz is an anti-government critic. She is part of an assembly of letter-writers; publishes a view every two weeks and the contents are always in chastisement of the Government of Guyana.

The people who sent me those emails and were cynical about Dr. Trotz have every right to be so. The motive of Trotz for heaping praise on Dr. Ali is because he was embracing a cause that is dear to the heart of the descendants of slavery. That is a cause all of us should embrace. There must be reparation. But don’t be fooled by Dr. Trotz’ action. It is not based on multi-racial, democratic instincts.