THERE was a national outcry against what David Hinds said two weeks ago. In a nutshell, he uttered two atrocities. One is that in a country like Guyana, where there are Black political parties, African Guyanese must support Black political movements, meaning Blacks must side with Blacks. Secondly, African Guyanese who choose not to support overt African political entities are people without character who reduce themselves to be backside lickers.

It is revolting for anyone to side with such mental miasma because it simply lacks commonsense. Forbes Burnham’s most trusted acolyte was an Indian, Steve Narine. Cheddi Jagan’s most trusted comrades were two Blackmen. Earlier it was EMG Wilson and later it was Dr. Roger Luncheon.
Walter Rodney’s most sacred comrade was an Indian, Rupert Roopnaraine. Rodney would only reveal the most sensitive information to Roopnaraine. When he secretly left for Zimbabwe through Suriname without Burnham’s intelligence apparatus knowing, only Rodney’s wife and Roopnaraine were told.

The stupidity and asininity in Hinds’s utterance is if Africans must side with Black political parties then by what logic is the WPA doing with three Indians in its rank – Roopnaraine, Rohit Kanhai and Ali Majeed? Hinds was in napkins when Martin Luther King had close White associates.
But let’s examine the African political school in Guyana to see if there can be found subtle similarities between Hinds on the one hand, and Clive Thomas and Eusi Kwayana on the other. In my Wednesday, February 12, 2025 column titled, “This is how close Clive Thomas’s politics is to David Hinds” I

quoted the words of Tacuma Ogunseye about what Thomas said about African Guyanese’s relations with the Government of Guyana.
Once more, I am reproducing what Thomas supposedly said at a closed-door meeting of the WPA executive. Here it is: “Once the youth of a people buy into selling/trading their votes for political, economic and social favours, people are lost. The meaning and value of the vote are gone forever – and impossible to retrieve.”

At that meeting, Hinds was present. I am contending that Hinds’s racist outburst was born out of what he heard Clive Thomas said. My point here is that there are only subtle differences between Thomas and Kwayana on the one hand and Hinds on the other hand. The difference is that Thomas, because he once had regional status, would not want to go that far with crass language; he would not use such language. That is the only difference between Thomas and Hinds.
Kwayana too is not the person to openly show his true colours (I don’t mind if people say there is pun intended). Kwayana throughout his life has been racist like Hinds (Hinds was taught African history and African-centric politics by Kwayana). Hinds is wild and in that wildness there is plainspokenness. He feels he is big and bad and couldn’t be bothered by what people say.

Kwayana, on the other hand, has always been a devious man who masks his racial mischief with recondite grammar. Kwayana hides behind the status of the village elder and was born into the culture of mild-mannered use of language. So he lacks the capacity to generate instability because his innate deviousness leads to subtle references rather that open advocacy like Hinds. But this is where the difference between Kwayana and Hinds ends. They are both racialised inciters.
Here is evidence where Kwayana, at 99, is addicted to racial mischief-making. I will ask readers to go over the words of Kwayana below so you can fully comprehend the evil thoughts of this man. Writing in the February 15 (2025) edition of the Stabroek News, this is what he noted down: “Guyana is about

to hold a general election, bearing this in mind and the need for as little prejudice and bias as possible, I make comments to remind those (he points to President Ali) responsible of implicit duties that have not been performed.”
So what are these duties President Ali has not performed? One is that Dr. Ali made accusatory statements in 2020 about African people in “a self-respecting village” up the East Coast. He said the President has not withdrawn the remarks. He went on to add that the President’s commentary hangs like a judgement over the heads of these African people.

What is Kwayana referring to? I live in Guyana. Kwayana has been out of Guyana for 20 consecutive years. I know of no African group of people that have the President’s words of 2020 hanging over their heads. But here is really the election incitement from Kwayana. He intones: “The President should

consider if it is fair to allow those citizens to enter the election with a sense of shadow hanging over them.” This is racist incitement for which the ERC should prosecute Kwayana.
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Guyana National Newspapers Limited.