Guyana Visionaries

Defending My Spiritual Convictions

2006-02-17T10:18:00.000-08:00

Those who have discussed religion with me, often disagreeing with with me, when asked about my religious views opine that I am a contrarian. It's probably a nice way of saying that I do not confirm to what they consider to be the conventional in terms of religious expression. I do not belong to or favor any particular organized Christian denominational group. As a matter of fact, I am turned off by the ever increasing expansivness and materiality that today seem fashionable as expressions of Christian fidelity. I am merely one who finds comfort in the essential message of Christianity, the one that emphasizes humility, charity, peacemaking, love, forgiveness and all of those unpopular values delivered by the first and only true Christian to the multitudes at the foot of a mountain. So maybe I am a contrarian, maybe I am unconventional. Still, I suffer no pangs of regret from being dislocated from a pattern of expression in which beating on the chest and praying loudly is popular. I find great solace in my little dark cupboard each day where my communication with my spiritual advisor and mentor is private and exclusive.

The Guyana Gazette

2005-12-29T19:29:00.000-08:00

The contributors to this blog along with a few other individuals have launched The Guyana Gazette - an Online Guyanese Newspapers.

Turning The Curve

2005-11-03T08:59:00.000-08:00

Within a matter of hours after the official launching of Guyana‘s newest political party, I was able to log into my favorite cyber space room, the GTF Forum, and connect pictorially with those happenings. Yep, our own Bryanmaxx, ever conscious and thoughtful of the diasporian interest in important happenings in our beautiful country, used the agency of technology to bring the mountain to Mahomet so to speak. Isn’t the internet just wonderful? The following day on accessing the various newspapers sites I was pleased to see that the two independent dailys appropriately made that launching the feature presentation on their front page. However, surprise, surprise, I accessed the one paper that is ex officio the property of all the people of Guyana and found that for them it was a matter of politics as usual. The headlines for that day read, MISTERY BOAT FIND IN BUXTON. I will leave the grammatical sorting of that headline to the experts and maybe knit pickers among us, but just for the hell of it would like to throw out this question to the nation at large. Don’t you-all think that when a State run nationally owned newspaper pre-empts the launching of a new political party on a turbulent political scene such as ours, with news about the discovery of an inflatable rubber dinghy, you-all should seriously consider adding your voices to the call for immediate removal of this nationally owned asset from the hands of its public caretakers? Just asking a question.

With the official launching of two new political entities, namely, The Guyana Third Force (GTF) and the Alliance For Change (AFC) now completed, I am driven to ponder another question. And that revolves around whether these recent developments in our political culture are indicators that we are finally turning the curve, and moving away from a baseline of race inflected notions and perceptions seemingly indigenous to our pattern of selecting national leadership. Because despite the fact that we have a history of coalitions, and mergers, and coming together of various political organizations and players, this time there is an aura of expectancy and hopefulness at a level we have never experienced before.

Recent polls and census results have triggered a slew of brass faced and facetious pronunciations from some politicians, to wit, that this whole idea that we are a nation that hibernate into ethnic enclaves during elections is a myth, or conjured up explanation to deny the in-roads they are making into non-traditional constituencies. Well, if you live in Guyana, or have ever done so for a considerable period over the past fifty years or thereabouts, and you still believe that kind of crap, then I have a nice piece of land sandwiched between Brick-dam, Water, Hadfield and High Streets I would like to sell to you. And the price is set at rock bottom on the real estate market. Look, we face a dilemma of which race is the most prominent feature, as is often commented on by the leader of ROAR. Burying our heads in the ground like an ostrich and ignoring it is not an adult manner of dealing with this aversive situation. That would be appropriate if we all were infants and had not yet figured out that things do exist even when we cover eyes to hide from them.

As I contemplate the emergence of two new options for the Guyanese electorate, the questions in the forefront of my mind are, what will it take to make that decisive turn at this crucial juncture of our political history? And what strategy can these two new political organizations adopt that will facility a 360 degree revolution in our political behavior? It is not too difficult to come up with answers for the first question. We have to be moved away from the practice of voting for a party because primarily it is associated with our particular racial grouping. We have to be motivated to begin thinking about the kind of Government we desire in terms of its ideological leanings, and economical outlook. We have to be encouraged to seriously accept our obligation to prepare a better and more people friendly social environment for our kids and their kids. In other words, we have to be influenced into superimposing issues like crime, jobs, healthcare, education et al, above the operand of race as the main determinant of how and why we will vote. The strategy for getting us there is what will be difficult.

In the letter column of an independent daily of Thursday November 3rd, 2005, a contributor, very frustrated with the way things are going, claimed that he voted for change in 1992 and it got him nothing. In fact he was worse off than he was before he voted, and he was mourning the death of a parent whose passing was incidental to the economic travails they had experienced. He said he would not “vote for change” again, but would base his choice on a number of things he illustrated. This, to me, is a microcosm of the kind of mindsets the two new political entities will have to tackle. They somehow have to make people, driven to frustration and skepticism about promises made by politicians pre 1992, understand the difference between a change of garment and driver, to a change of direction and a new car. Obviously, the GTF and AFC will secure the services of better minds than ours, we pontificators in the letter columns of newspapers and in forums on the internet. And they will face the unenviable task of developing a strategic message that connects with the rank and file of our people, in order to lure them away from this current pattern of selecting Governmental Leadership.

Keith R Williams
Atlanta, Georgia.

Journalists Under Attack

2005-10-08T11:26:00.000-07:00

A surefire symptom that democracy in a nation is under threat is when attempts are made to silence the press from exposing malfeasance in public institutions, and other politically sensitive situations. Governments of this modern era react frantically to scandals or perceived scandals involving their administrations, and journalists who take seriously their equivalent of the medical Hippocratic oath, often find themselves in the sights of zealous governmental and political operatives out to silence their voices, or the messages they are in the course of delivering.

In the US, an investigation is being conducted over the leaking of an intelligence operative’s name to the media. Her husband disagreed with certain claims leading up to the Iraq war, and wrote an OP ED piece in the New York Times in that regard. Apparently in retaliation, as the story goes, she was outed to Administration friendly journalists, and one proceeded to publish her identity in his weekly column. Fortunately in the US, no one, not even a President is immune from the law, as Nixon’s political demise because of his conduct in the Watergate Burglary evidences.

Literally hundreds of journalists have been assassinated this year, either by government agencies or by insurgency forces. Although the killing of prominent ones like Paul Klebnikov, who was an American and associated with Forbes Magazine among other publications, receive world wide coverage, the passing of the vast majority fall by the wayside, except for mention in the obituaries in the annals of NGOs like “Reporters Without Borders”. Like Arnulfo Villanueve, a columnist for a community newspaper in the Philippines who was apparently gunned down in February for criticizing local officials for their involvement in illegal gambling. Or Relangi Selvarajah, a popular Tamil broadcaster who, along with her activist husband, was gunned down in Colombo Sri Lanka in August. Incidentally Sri Lanka’s foreign minister Lakshman Kadirgamar was assassinated on the same day, and the Government is pointing fingers at the Tamil Elam organization for all three killings. But be that as it may, the fact is that journalists committed to bringing the truth to public view too often find themselves in cross hairs of forces averse to having their dirty laundry exposed.

I am writing this because of a disturbing report I read in a Guyanese Independent Daily recently. And it is indicative of a belief, not overtly widespread at the moment but perceptually growing, that the State is uncomfortable with scrutiny of its performance. In this report action that is internationally acceptable in the course of a journalistic investigation was being categorized by Officialdom as a crime. And what cements the notion that these kinds of reactions are panicky and frantic is the fact that the “man in the street” already knew what was going on. I will not castigate the individual official who lost sight of discretion in response to a scandalous situation. I kind of liked his confrontational approach to the villains who issued threats to him because of his investigations. But what I would like to say to him and others carrying the chalice of power is that; "you set the tone for peoples’ reaction to journalist involved in a justifiable expression of their trade". "Threats of prosecution being leveled against them in such pursuits, are no different than threats issued against you yourselves when you are in lawful execution of your official functions". "THINK".

A human society, in a broad sense, consist of three elementary groups of people. (1) Officialdom, represented by institutions of Government and Politics. (2) The Press, all aspects of media dedicated to information gathering and proliferation, and (3) The Public, comprising every soul detached from the previous two. Although in a democracy it is routinely claimed that power reside in the hands of the last group, in reality, particularly in developing nations, that power can generally be exercised sans restraint by the first group. The limiting agency, or restraint on the first group is the second group, the press, comprising journalists and reporters who are the gatherers and disseminators of information to the public. They are the un-official private detectives who keep tabs on the doings of Officialdom and report what is appropriate and important to the public. They are the referees who keep a keen eye on the interaction between Officialdom and the Public in order to ensure that there is no hitting below the belt or gouging so to speak. They are the eyes and ears, and when necessary voice of a Public, who, too often, are blind and deaf to the machinations of those they placed into power and pay from their taxes, and absent the means of vocalizing their complaints and concerns. A free and independent press, through the agency of courageous, fair and objective journalism fills this vacuum in the power equation between the group inaugurated into office to govern, and the masses in the category by whose leave they do govern

Keith R Williams
Atlanta, Georgia

Will ideology play any role in the next election?

2005-09-27T17:36:00.000-07:00

I have little doubt about the veracity of pollster, Vishnu Bisram's NACTA July-August sample polling that shows, if the elections were held today, the PPP would cart off 45% of the votes to the PNC's 35%, and other smaller parties 10%, while another 10% of the votes could be up for grabs.

Outside of the not-so-surprising revelation that "the newly formed AFC is attracting a significant following and could hold the balance of power...with 6% (voters) support, which, when combined with the other mini-parties poll about 12%," what I want to address immediately is the statement in the news item: "Most Indians distrust the PNC and will stick with the PPP to keep the PNC out of office."

This distrust obviously stemmed, not only from the PNC's past as a party in government, but in recent post-election upheavals that threatened to turn civil society on its head with Indians always being targeted for physical and business attacks.

Perhaps hoping to use the concept of 'making Guyana ungovernable' to pull the PPP regime to consider shared governance, the PNC's strategy backfired, much to the relief of the PPP, which can now quietly point to the above quoted statement that its mission of exploiting the racial insecurity of its Indian support base could assure it being re-elected in 2006.

Note, however, that 'most Indians' are more likely to vote for the PPP to simply ensure the PNC is kept out. But this whole notion of voting for a party in order to keep out another party defeats the whole purpose of governing by shared vision. Now, once this is done on Election Day, what's next? I'll tell you what's next, the party that wins goes on to do its own thing in power, not really caring about the electorate's concerns, because the electorate did not vote for it on the basis of issues, but on the basis of racial insecurity.

That is why it is so darn disturbing and irritating that after Burnham's failed socialist policies and the collapse of communism under the Soviet Union, the PPP has the temerity to say it is adhering to socialist principles as its vehicle to move the country.

In fact, I have long been asking whether the lethargic pace of socio-economic recovery and growth is attributable to the ruling party's communist leaning, because this snail-paced movement fits in neatly with a plan to keep Guyana on a slow-growth rate with the hope of showing that free or open market system is not working, so Guyana should then link up Cuba and Venezuela and other ambitious socialist forces in the region.

Now, what would be interesting to know is what potential voters think of the PPP now that it has gone public with its claim to be a socialist/communist party? Will the ideological position of the main contenders matter to voters in the 2006 elections? More specifically, will 'most Indians' still vote for a communist PPP just to keep out a 'distrusted PNC', knowing communism has failed or is bad for Guyana, but that it is still being foisted on the nation because 'most Indians' who are uncomfortable with a PNC regime will automatically vote anyway for a PPP regime?

Before I end, permit me to state my deep concern over the publicity surrounding the convergence of the ‘smaller parties’ at a time when a viable Third Force, to be called the Alliance For Change, is getting ready to make its grand entrance on the political scene.

Yes, I know parties have a right to meet and form alliances, wherever and whenever and with whomever, but this particular timing could not have been worse. For the past few months, observers have been glued for new developments regarding the Third Force, but the ‘smaller parties’ calling a meeting the same month or around the same time of the Third Force being officially launched, it’s as though the ‘smaller parties’ want to steal the Third Force’s thunder.

This is divisive behaviour and it plays well into the open arms of the ruling party, which can point to undecided or swing voters that opponents are fragmented, and therefore will not be able to mount a serious challenge to the formidable PPP.

I would have preferred if the Third Force got launched, making its manifesto clear and plain to all, and if the ‘smaller parties’ – which already existed and need no grand introduction - feel they, too, have a manifesto, then go right ahead and make their case. If, per chance, the Third Force and the ‘smaller parties’ share a similar vision, then look for common ground on which to work together.

With the meeting already taken place, I would now settle for the leadership of the Third Force going ahead with its blueprint for the party and the nation, while the leaders of the ‘smaller parties’ can do likewise. However, I am against any attempt at this early stage to link the Third Force with the ‘smaller parties’ because the Third Force was born of a peculiar set of circumstances at a time when Guyanese are deeply frustrated with both the PPP and the PNC. This is a turning point moment in Guyana’s politics, and the momentum is with the Third Force.

Third Force Politics is Revolutionay and Practical

2005-09-21T16:30:00.000-07:00

Now why do I make a bold statement like that, and what do I base it on? Well, I make it because I happen to believe that it is true, and I base it on the fact that what is being pursued by this new movement appear to be too ambitious an undertaking for the two political dinosaurs locked in perpetual struggle for the right to determine and govern the affairs of our State. Politics in Guyana, except for the brief interlude when Walter Rodney appeared on the scene, is always a contest between the two largest racial groups to determine who will come out “on tap”. The social storm that follows is reminiscent of the after shocks associated with the proverbial struggle between the devil and his wife for the hambone. However, the people associated with Third Force Politics, although seemingly at variance on some issues, appear to be in unison on one front. And that is the need for a fundamental change in this standard of behavior applied by the Guyanese electorate in selecting their Government. It is revolutionary because it will really challenge the modus operandi of political campaigning and all that goes into winning an election. And it is practical because politics based on racial numbers will forever leave somebody out in the cold after every election cycle is over.

The term “Third Force Politics” suggest that there are two other rails of politics in Guyana before this one, and that’s a fact, at least by my thinking. There is the first rail where every party knowingly and consciously panders to its racial or ethnic base, using language that specifically address their concerns, or facilitate an understanding that their concerns are the ones being addressed. The PPP significantly vociferous when there are Indian crime victims, or the PNC modifying condemnation of violence with complains of marginalization are examples of these.

Then there is the second rail where, in an effort to placate and reduce the ammunition of external critics, the two parties indulge in what I call “’feeder sound-bites”. Empty phrases denoting empathy or common cause with the base of their opponents, and which both that base and the politicians themselves recognize as crap. Examples of these are endless, and range from Jagdeo’s comments in Britain that he considered himself President of all the people in Guyana to Corbin’s’ claims that the PNC can win a plurality at the polls. Maybe I am being too harsh on them and they both believe what they are saying, but the voting patterns at elections and tension afterwards suggest that the particular audience they seek to impress have an askance view.

And then we come to the third rail, or what I referred to as “Third Force Politics”. Yes, I know, there have been coalitions before. Yes, I know, there have been attempts by one or more political entities to join together to take down one of the big boys. Listen, this is different. I am not simply talking about the physical coming together of Trotman, and Ramjattan, and Ramsaroop, and Holder etc, etc, etc. I am talking about a political conversation taking place across Guyana and in the Diaspora by others besides the politicians in the forefront. I am talking about a conversation with TK, emotional about the excesses during the years of the PNC, but refusing to allow that to blind or in anyway impede his grasp of what continuance of the status quo implies. I am talking about conversations with and between Roy and Bryan, and Annan, and WoodBoss, and Paul and Peter, the young and maybe the not so very young now, eagerly offering up positive commentary and suggestions that supersede the restrictions of race, and religion and class. Yes, I am talking about Third Force Politics during which conversation moves beyond the boundaries of who did what and when, and engages in how do we deal with this, and then what do we do after.

The revolutionary aspect of Third Force Politics is not only its commitment to take the exercise of selecting a Government beyond a choice based on Race. It is its willingness to condition its success to such a transformation in the electorate. Because that is the only way they can win. They have to change and influence the mindset of the electorate to disengage themselves from a tradition practiced by their parents and grandparents, and this will be no easy task. They have to walk that line their opponents were either reluctant or afraid to trod, and they are willing to do so because it is right, and just, and enabling to our future. And Politics that take Guyana in a direction that is intrinsically right and just and nationally enabling, is indeed revolutionary politics.

Third Force Politics is Practical because it seeks to deal with a situation long on the back burner of press coverage, and not too popular with analysts resident in the two main structures of Guyana’s Politics. But it happens to be the situation around which everything that divides us, that alienates us, and affects our concern for security and quality of life revolves. Some describe it as the Ethnic Dilemma, others choose the way of circumlocution to hint at this basement underbelly of our political reality. But it comes down to one question, and the answer to that question is what makes Third Force Politics a practical alternative for Guyana.

Take a poll, do a survey, but ask this question of the people in the two largest groups in the country and bare the answer for all to see. Will either of the two major Political organizations ever be able to convince the majority of their opponents base that they are capable of acting in their best interests? Go on ask them. Will they ever trust these parties to do what is right, and just, and enabling for communities traditionally loyal and supportive of their opponents, nay their very enemy? We might as well get down to the grimy truth while we are at it. If the answer to that question is affirmative, then Third Force Politics will have a very hard road to travel. But if it is negative, as everyone in Guyana who has not had a lobotomy believe it will be, then Third Force Politics is the only viable situation available to our Nation.

The Third Force, as an organization, will face the same degree of wrath from their opponents for bringing a sense of practical consciousness to the Guyana electorate, as the mythical Prometheus faced from Zeus for bringing fire to mankind. Evidence of this has already been seen in the disjointed attack upon the embryonic organization and some of its prominent members by the PPP’s most pugnacious political pit-bull. But they knew this was not going to be a cake walk when they got into it. Raphael Trotman said that he had reached a point of no return, and was clearly counting on his faith to see him through. Peter Ramsaroop was a soldier, and has clearly demonstrated that backing down is not one of his favorite options. And Kemraj and Sheila strike me as people who will become tougher as the battle gets longer. Bringing up their flank is an assortment of personalities whose gravitation to Third Force Politics convert them to Heroes and Patriots in my book. Now let’s get this Revolution of Political Practicality going.

Keith R Williams
Atlanta, Georgia
keiwillia2111@bellsouth.net

Beware of the communist youths in Guyana

2005-09-18T20:12:00.000-07:00

Nigel Dharamlall, writer of the letter, "Our participation at World Festival of Youths should not be seen as a threat to capitalism," (Kaieteur News, September 16), must have done his sponsors in Guyana and the Venezuelan Government proud the way he defended the seemingly note worthy celebration.

He admitted there were challenges that were foreseen, but never revealed what they were and how they were overcome. He said participants were there to “speak out against the atrocities committed against the disadvantaged to the benefit of the personal and political aggrandizement of a few,” but probably doesn't know or ignores the fact that same exists in communist nations where leaders can do, say, go any place and live on a certain socio-economic level the ordinary masses can only dream of.

Then he got personal with a “certain political neophyte-turned naive investor” to make some sort of point that likely was supposed to serve as a lead up to his claim that he, by the way, is extremely pro-business.

"Our participation in Venezuela," he wrote, " should not be seen as a threat to capitalism but as a launch-pad from which we will ensure that the ills of the world are solved through honesty, dignity, social justice and equity." Who would have thought otherwise, Mr. Dharamlall?

Can Mr. Dharamlall say if, to the best of his knowledge, such ills have been and are being addressed in nations - Cuba, China, North Korea and Guyana - whose governments currently adhere to communism? By the way, how has communism been faring globally compared with capitalism?

I do not reside in Guyana, so I do not know what “many negative comments” were made and by whom, which targeted the Guyanese contingency's participation, but from what little I have gathered, including both from what Mr. Dharamlall explained and what I read elsewhere, I have to wonder if he recognizes that this 16th festival was previously hosted in such cities as Moscow, East Berlin, Havana and Pyongyang, making it an exclusive gathering of communists?

I asked the question against the backdrop of the caption given to Mr. Dharamlall's letter and to further ask him whether it is true that the seminars, conferences, workshops, roundtables, etc., to which he referred did allow participants to discuss their respective struggles for communist revolution?

Can he recall observing the huge portraits of Che Guevara, Karl Marx, Hugo Chavez, Vladimir Lenin, Fidel Castro and Ho Chi Minh that were hung in the general meeting hall?

Can he say if it is true that the multi-million dollar festival, fully backed by the Chavez Administration, included an international mock tribunal, with the presiding judge being a Venezuelan Vice President; the star witness for the prosecution being Hugo Chavez himself, and the accused being US President George W. Bush, facing charges that included being the reason for world terrorism?

And is he now aware that delegates to the festival were caught on film shouting, "Death to America," and holding signs that read, "Death to Bush" (Read that to mean: Assassinate Bush!)? Is he also aware of serious charges against the Venezuelan Government for deplorable human rights conditions?

Is he aware that the same Hugo Chavez, whom TV evangelist Pat Robertson ill-advisedly named as a target for assassination by the US, while functioning as a Lt. Col. tried to assassinate then democratically Venezuelan President Carlos Andres Perez, on February 4, 1992, but wound up killing several dozen people in the process?

Months after this failed coup, court-martialed and in prison, he again plotted to kill Perez and overthrow his government. He actually made good on part of the plot when rebel aircraft gunners pounded the president’s residence, and then pre-maturely had a TV station air a tape of him stating the government had fallen. When he urged the people to take to the streets, they wisely ignored him, and the coup failed once again.

It’s sheer irony that the man who so badly wanted to kill a democratically elected president is now the subject of a call for his own assassination, and the world is crying ‘foul’!

Mr. Dharamlall is definitely entitled to his opinion on issues and to adhere to the communist ideology, but I would be remiss if I did not elicit a response from him as to the whole purpose of the festival if it was not aimed at bringing down capitalism and promoting communism.

Guyana Could Do With A Few More Peter Ramsaroops

2005-09-14T14:28:00.000-07:00

When we use the phrase “Telling it from the mountain” to describe the outpourings of others or even ourselves, we draw the analogy from the proverbial speech made by the Christian Christ from a mountain top to his multitudinous audience below. It means telling it like it is. It means telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. But means something even more profound, something more emotionally awakening than say, a pedantic adherence to a standard of actuality. It means appealing to the inner core of your audience, to their soul, to the part of their being that represent the moral consciousness of their humanity. When a son of the soil urges his country kinfolk to move forward with the 3rd Force away from “the putrid politics of the present and past”, forging an alliance that refuses to “pit one race against the other to attain or maintain political power”, that Son Mr. Editor is, “telling it from the mountain top”.

Societies produce all manner of Leadership over time, and generally they mould and adapt their style to confirm with the era, the politics of the day, or the distinctiveness of the constituency they aspire to represent. However, as any brief reconnaissance of the past will substantiate, societies torn by divisive and internecine conflict often produces a quality of leadership that is unique in its approach to the current issues, and tend to leap ahead of the pack in speaking to those issues and advancing ideas and proposals on how best they can be resolved. It is a style of leadership that goes for the high ground, that assigns blame to “we” instead of “they”, that call for changes from among “us” rather than among “them”. It is the kind of leadership in which public utterances take form in the expressions in the piece “Hope is Brimming in Guyana - New Force a People’s Movement“ authored by Peter Ramsaroop, and published by both independent print medias in Guyana.

Martin Luther King at the helm of the civil rights struggles in the United States of America extolled the religious virtues of “peace”, of “love”, of a sense of forgiveness and reconciliation. He urged his followers to develop “a kind of dangerous unselfishness”, of becoming the kind of person who possessed the “capacity to project the “I” into the “thou” in terms of demonstrative compassion and concern for fellow human beings. He spoke acerbically of the then Governor of Alabama whose lips, according to him, were “dripping with words of interposition and nullification“, but he dreamed of the day when the situation would be transformed into one “where little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls and walk together as sisters and brothers”. Martin Luther kings’ style of leadership was one that spoke to his followers from the top of the mountain, from the high ground, appealing to that part of their core where the best abstract content of humankind reside. And that is a style of leadership we seem to be in short supply of in these turbulent times in our Nation.

Look, we can spend the remainder of eternity airing our grievances with each other and seeking capitulation by one group to the other in order to achieve a manner of closure consistent with accepted guilt and innocence. Or alternatively, we can, in the words of Peter Ramsaroop, “choose to stamp out the fire of hatreds instilled within us” by the relative few who benefit most from such incendiary group interaction, and “take back our country”. I believe the that the latter is the only credible choice. And since by virtue of years of manipulative cajoling, enticing and coercive efforts, no base group is likely to trust the perceived organizational arm of the other, a transitional exodus towards the new and populous people’s movement of 3rd Force politics should be as natural as osmosis.

Guyana need many more Peter Ramsaroops who are prepared to speak to our people from the mountain top. We had and have every other kind and style of leadership in abundance but this one. I firmly believe, without overtly or covertly making any analogous link between the two personalities, that Martin Luther Kings’ hopes and aspiration in respect of the cognitive growth of his Nation was no different than those being harbored by Peter Ramsaroop in respect of Guyana. And he speaks on it from the mountain top because he understands that you have to cultivate and plant a sense of one-ness, a sense of collective responsibility, a sense of forgiveness and acceptance, in order to harvest the dream of “ONE PEOPLE, ONE NATION AND ONE DESTINY”

Keith R Williams
Atlanta, Georgia
keiwillia2111@bellsouth.net

Jagdeo's Vision and Red Tape

2005-09-11T20:19:00.000-07:00

Reference: "GIVE ME VISION, I'LL CUT THE RED TAPE," BHARRAT JAGDEO (SUNDAY STABROEK, SEPTEMBER 11, 2005)

Former Chrysler Chairman, Lee Iacocca, who is making comeback of sorts, as a TV pitchman for Daimler-Chrysler motors, once went to President Ronald Reagan when Chrysler was in dire financial straits, and the Reagan Administration loaned Chrysler $800 million to revitalize the ailing auto manufacturer.

That Chrysler is now linked with the folks who make the luxury Mercedes Benz is all we need to know how Iacocca turned Chrysler around. But not without the help of the federal government, which was repaid every cent it loaned Chrysler. Jobs were saved and another chapter was written in American political-business culture which allows government to support businesses without controlling or influencing them for ideological purposes.

I said that to say, several weeks ago, President Bharrat Jagdeo intimated the time has come for government to formulate policy that would lead to Guyana becoming an open or free market economy. Never mind he was almost thirteen years late in coming up with this very useful proposal.

I even thought he had some sort of draft proposal for the private sector to review and discuss as part of his 'national conversation' idea, but it is now manifestly evident there is no draft, just talk. And talk is exactly what communists do.

Now he is telling the private sector to give him 'vision' and he'll cut the 'red tape'. Which planet is he from and on which planet is he living?

The private sector in Guyana is exactly where his ruling party wants it to be - submitted to the control and influence of the ruling party. The manufacturers’ association and the chamber of commerce have been rendered silent – almost impotent.

This is exactly what socialism and communism allow state governments to do to private businesses: You function at the pleasure of the state; all ideas for expansion and growth will be vetted by government to ensure they cannot and do not become a stepping stone for maverick politicians to emerge as competitors to the status quo.

The president is asking the private sector for vision then he'll cut the red tape, when he should be providing the vision even as he cuts the red tape. Policy makers usually set the tone by way of a painted vision for others to view and follow. Within the framework of that policy, businesspersons then shape their vision for their own businesses.

Government's actions over the past 13 years have raised serious questions as to its ideological stance, with communism sometimes appearing to be ideological vehicle of choice.

Worse, foreign investors realized that the same 'Matriarch' of the party in the New Millennium is the same person of fifty years ago whose fascination with communism in the United States over seventy years ago, did not jibe well with free or open market systems. Ergo, there is grave suspicion on the part of investors they may be gambling with a behind-the-scenes leader who may try to control and influence how far businesses can go in their expansion in Guyana. Until she goes, via resignation or death, she is not to be trusted on the question of foreign investments.

Mr. Jagdeo may be on to what is needed for foreign investors, but being educated in the communist Soviet Union, he has to work real hard to distance himself from his 'Mentor' and from his own communist-based learning, to convince foreign investors he is into the 'glasnost' and 'perestroika' stuff.

Local investors, such as the guy from Richmond Hill, Queens, who bought Guyana Stores, (has he finally paid off the outstanding balance?) and others who are closely tied to the ruling party, do not impress observers that the government is serious about investment.

To gauge the success of investments, one has to seriously look at how many foreign investors are lining up at Cheddi Jagan International Airport to be checked in. One has to look at the number of qualified and skilled overseas-based Guyanese who are returning home to live and work. One has to look at the drop in unemployment rate, not due to attrition via migration or death, but meaningful employment.

What does the present picture show us? Does the idea of a little here and a little there in a land filled with untapped resources satisfy people that real progress is being made?

The ruling party needs to cut the red tape wrapped around its eyes and I am sure it will have a better vision around which it can write a relevant policy with which investors can feel comfortable to work.

Until then, blurred vision will continue to lead to more red tape that will be used to tie up opportunities for economic enhancement and advancement.

Is New Orleans A Wake Up Call For Guyana - PART ll

2005-09-10T14:31:00.000-07:00

My memory of Georgetown as a kid is that of a beautiful garden city with avenues and walkways in Waterloo and Main Streets among others, where adults could take their kids on Sunday evenings and sit on a bench relaxing while they frolicked in the grass among the Daisys. It was a City consisting of structures that could be described as quaint, whether they were domiciles, educational institutions or commercial premises. Some were huge, like the St George’s Cathedral, considered to be the largest wooden building in the world. Others were dimunitive, like a tiny wooden cottage I passed each day on my way to primary school. Some were made of concrete and mortar, like the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception or “Brickdam” as we were wont to call it. Others were completely wooden, like St George’s of course, and Christ Church and The Public Hospital. License plates all seem to begin with PA or PB in those days, and the Ducati Motor Cycle was the most noisiest of human contraptions possible. I can remember the rainy periods when the drains and trenches alongside the sidewalks and roadways would become torrential waterways channeling the excess waters at a fast and un-impeded clip through the raised koker gates and into the Demerara River. You could swim in the flowing waters back in the day, and building wooden toy boats powered by paper sails and racing them in the waterways was a favorite pastime for us kids during the rainy season. I know this nostalgic wandering down memory lane might elicit raised eyebrows or mental queries as to its purpose. It is quite simple. You cannot grasp the significance of the changes the City and its environs have undergone without first conjuring up an image of what it was like back in the day.

Does anyone remember the Punt Trench Dam, with high bridges across it fashioned thus to allow the passage of horse drawn steel pontoons moving cane from the Durban backlands to Diamond Sugar Estates? That was a favorite Sunday swimming area for much of the City, back in the day before Luckhoo Pool was constructed. But importantly, it was an integral part of the drainage system in the City. And their were other canals, like the one alongside upper Sussex Street we called Barbados, and with similar waterways running alongside Princess Street, North and South Road, and Lamaha Street to name a few. They were all part of the drainage system, capturing and channeling overflows from rain through the open kokers into the Demerara River. Visiting those areas now one experiences cultural shock over the environmental deterioration that has taken place, and a strengthened premonition that the worse is yet still to come.

The Punt Trench Dam was filled up during the reign of the PNC, maybe for the same reason the steam rail system was dismantled and rendered obsolete. The Leaders in Government at that time perhaps envisioned a modern Capital with road connections everywhere. Why the hell should we cling on to stinking 19th century transportation technology, was the response they probably gave to those who far sightedly challenged the transformation. It is a pity that the decision makers did not travel to London or New York and acquaint themselves with the efficiency of the rail systems in those two populous metropolitan areas. Maybe the fact that two developed Nations were still clinging on to their rail transportation system might have served to disengage them from the stupid notions circulating around and in their minds at that time. That they jettisoned the bird they held in their hands before securing the one soaring almost out of reach above their heads, is a conclusion as clear as light today. The other canals were not deliberately filled up although they might well have been, given the state they are in today. Poor maintenance and no maintenance of these canals over ensuing years increasingly resulted in them becoming blocked and clogged with all manner of residue and debris, and the koker gates overwhelmed by slush and silt. When garbage collection became extinct, the canals became the preferred dumping ground for all and sundry, from dead pets and other animals to junk cars. Today human remains have also joined the refuse group found there.

The topographical metamorphosis the City has gone through over the years has positioned us at the point where New Orleans was just before Katrina hit the Gulf Coast. The vulnerable parishes in New Orleans have their equivalent in Wards like Queenstown, and Alberttown and outer areas like Kitty, and Bel Air, and Sophia et al. The bulk of the population in the affected parishes in New Orleans were low income, maxing out at about US$11000 per year. The people living in those areas in Guyana likely to be hardest by Tsunami like waters penetrating the Atlantic sea defense system, and flooding waters from heavy seasonal rainfall overwhelming the drainage system, are mostly very poor, might possess a bicycle at best, and have no proximate built up areas to which they can evacuate. The American Federal Government with all of its vast wealth and technology in areas of transportation, communication and health care, was unable to mount the kind of response necessary for the magnitude of the disaster in New Orleans. Does anyone in this life or in this world, even remotely, believe that the Government Guyana could do better when and if our turn arrives?

Flooding as a result of heavier than usual seasonal rainfall is not new to Georgetown and its environs. This has been going on from time immemorial, and is a natural consequence of the low level situation of the City. But back in the day the water ran off much faster, and there were no impending disaster situations as a result of the flooding. The outlets were freer, more passable, perhaps because garbage disposal was routine; remember the M&TC trucks with attendants with pitch forks and huge baskets emptying and carting away the contents of 45 gallon garbage drums positioned in front and to the side of virtually every yard. But even back then the flooding situation suggested that long term residency under current conditions was not feasible, and that some day Mahomet had to decide to go to the mountain, since no amount of technological tinkering was going to produce the kind of protection required. Today, particularly based on happenings earlier this year in Guyana, and the frightening images of what has happened recently in New Orleans, a pull back to higher ground appears to be the inevitable solution. The fact that the people responsible for coming to this final decision might not have even began to ponder its feasibility yet, is a patent example of Nero fiddling away happily while the fire creeps slowly but inexorably towards the tinder boxed housings and protections of the poor.

Keith R Williams
Atlanta, Georgia
keiwillia2111@bellsouth.net

Is New Orleans A Wake Up Call For Guyana?

2005-09-10T08:42:00.000-07:00

Greetings folks. Since this is my first posting on this forum I figured I’d begin with some introductory comments that are, truthfully, pre-defensive in nature. You see I am a Baby Boomer rather than a Generation Xer, and inflicted thus with all the inhibitions and anxieties related to this burgeoning information technology. So take these factors into consideration in assessing the format of my presentation, and do not allow criticism to spill over into the content.

I wrote a letter about a week ago and sent it via email for publication in the Letter Columns of our two “independent” print media establishments. The letter asked the question that is the subject matter of this post, and drew attention to comparables in terms of topography, natural and demographic circumstances. My letter, based on daily perusal of these newspapers, apparently could not elude the idiosyncrasies of the censors and gatekeepers of those two media establishments. It has been my observation that editorial and journalistic imagination at these two periodicals is rather narrowly confined, and at times becomes incapacitated thru retrogression to a cognitive developmental period before “objective permanence“. Things that are not of their personal discernment are deemed either, not to exist, or, possess no relevance to the discussion about Guyana. None the less, I must admit that I was elated when I accessed the Kaieteur New this Saturday morning and discovered that they had dedicated their editorial page to the said issue I had raised in my letter. Because in the end, it matters not who is asking these questions or in which forum they are being asked. What is important is that the issue surrounding the viability of the saucer in which our Capital City and proximate population centers are situated, is coming to the fore. And as it begins to infiltrate the fore-ground of our consciousness, it is opportune to ponder whether what occurred in New Orleans is a call to action for us, or whether we have to undergo a similar ordeal before we can be galvanized into action.

It is very important for us to jettison the hype and focus on what really contributed to the dilemma in the Parishes of New Orleans. It was not the gale force winds of Katrina crunching structures into flying cinders, and converting things not connected to realty into Identifiable Flying Objects or IFOs. Nope, that was the case in Alabama and Mississippi not New Orleans. In New Orleans the dilemma was produced by a deluge of water swamping and covering the city, and turning it into grimy lake filled with the spillage from sewers, residual chemicals from oil refineries, and human created garbage and other waste products.
It is said that the city of New Orleans is a bowl surrounded by water kept at bay by a fifteen high levee system. When you close your eyes and say this it is not too difficult to conjure up an image of Georgetown and its environs, and the rapidly eroding concrete sea defense system keeping the waters of the mighty Atlantic at bay. According to reports received so far, there were breaches of the levees, including the main levee where a two block gap is said to have occurred. Close your eyes and visualize incoming tide way above normal breaching the sea wall and pouring down Camp Street, Water Street, Sheriff Street, and across the East Coast Highway. Think about this happening in the midst of heavy rainfall during May or June, or December thru February. Wait a minute. Am I stretching a point here? Am I being unduly alarmist here? The events of early 2005 would clearly suggest that I am not doing either of these things. And if you visit the Flood Website of Bryan McIntosh, I believe the images you will see there would be eerily similar to that of New Orleans today.

In my next post I will deal with some anecdotal history surrounding our present day malady relative to the potential for a devastating flooding of the Capital and certain coastal areas. I am not an engineer, so my opinions, projections and suggestions are not based on technical expertise in the relevant fields of study. I do what we do as Guyanese, i.e. try to offer a common sense and practical explanation for things that might be technical by their very nature, but poignantly understood by virtue of experiential association with their effects and consequences. Until then, bye.

Keith R Williams
Atlanta, Georgia
keiwillia2111@bellsouth.net

Welcome to Guyana Visionaries' Blog!

2005-08-06T14:33:00.000-07:00

It takes a visionary to see the realization of something that has never before existed. That is exactly what we are – a group of visionaries with a hope to one day see a prosperous Guyana.

On this blog we explore ways to better the country and improve the standard of life for all Guyanese. We invite everyone to catch the VISION too!