African Guyanese live under a flawed system of governance and their political, social and economic repression can only be solved by changes to the present electoral system, which promotes unsuitable governance for multi-racial societies and sustains racial triumphalism.
This was the message delivered to participants at a recently held emergency forum, sponsored by the African Cultural Development Association (ACDA) at City Hall, to examine the “African perspective of the crisis in Guyana.”
Coming out of the meeting, a resolution was unanimously passed to authorise the creation of an All-African Guyanese Council, which would address the issues related to the current crisis in Guyana.
Another resolution unanimously passed is the undertaking to lobby African Guyanese to boycott the next election if held under the present electoral system. Rather, the council should advocate power sharing at the Executive Level of Governance, which would see African-Guyanese participation and representation at all levels of governance.
“The African Guyanese collective [in Guyana] is in serious crisis,” ACDA’s Violet Jean-Baptiste told the forum, noting that the nature of this crisis was multi-faceted, being political, social and economical, and stemming from conditions such as AIDS, unemployment, crime, and more so now “retaliatory,” “drug-related,” “extra-judicial” and “phantom” killings.
She noted that in such a crisis there were no ready-made solutions and the challenge which faced Afro-Guyanese was to find creative solutions.
“We believe the way in which our people are killed, [one everyday] is indicative of a flawed system of governance,” which she likened as being comparable to what was experienced during slavery.
“Today our young men are being killed for the flimsiest excuses... [and] one of the most oppressive experience of these deaths is manifested in Africans killing Africans in the interest of other race groups.”
Jean-Baptiste also ob-served that economic activities were dominated by other ethnic groups, to the exclusion of Africans, a situation which was further compounded by corruption, drugs and “outright theft.” She cited the “culture” of grabbing African lands, which she said had reached alarming proportions.
Noting that there was a need to put a stop to this aggression, and while being cognisant that reconciling national interests and African interests still remained a challenge, she declared that it was the responsibility of the entire African Collective to find a solution.
“This ingathering must not be seen as an event but as a process of meeting and working on our problems to achieve effective results together. Remembering always that `there would never be racial peace without racial justice and there could be no justice without a common recognition of the deep structural inequalities that [circumscribe] freedoms and deep structural equalities.”
In its paper, the Association of Young Africans (AYA), the youth arm of ACDA, noted that African Guyanese had become the objects of negative perceptions propagated by racists in the media and by African Guyanese themselves.
As a result, it was suggested that this negative perception encouraged persons to “murder, brutalise and maim young Africans and it was therefore necessary to work towards a positive transformation, which includes the education of the African collective and lobbying for changes to the negative stereotyping.”
The paper noted the areas which were in crisis and made recommendations for their reform. These include: the education system; the judicial, penal and police system; health and environment; media as a communication network; and economic and community development.
Among the reforms suggested for the education system are the introduction of African History into school; equal distribution of trained/qualified teachers in all schools, especially in the depressed communities; and the introduction of money management seminars for students.
The paper proposed reform of the judicial system, to eradicate extra-judicial killings, racial profiling and the trial of youths in adult courts, while also advocating access to educational opportunities for those institutionalised in the penal system.
It was meanwhile noted that African Guyanese youths are disproportionately unemployed and are therefore in need of more skills training and entrepreneurial training.
Meanwhile, according to a chart presented to the gathering, the present electoral system is unsuitable for multi-racial societies.
The chart shows that an Indian majority in the population consolidates it’s support, while the African minority hopelessly campaigns to get Indian votes. As a result of this, Indians win the election, leading to racial triumphalism, unfair distribution of the country’s resources and corruption which foster ethnic insecurity and results in a governance unsuitable for multiracial societies.
On the other end of the spectrum, Africans lose the election, leading to economic sabotage of the country such as burning cane and in turn protests and court petitions, which lead to a governance unsuitable for multiracial societies.
In his presentation, James McAllister considered the need to reassess the centres of power so that ethnic groups did not feel “shut out” in the government and development of the country.
“We cannot look at one centre of power and leave others,” said McAllister, who proposed that shared governance was the only solution to the furtherance of this dilemma.
McAllister, who reiterated that he was not speaking as a representative of the PNCR, noted that a review of the ethnic composition of the disciplined forces had been agreed upon. But he declared that there were other centres of power which also needed to be reassessed, including the economic/business power base and the political control of the state to ensure ethnic balance.
Considering the need for an ethnic balance in the business sector he pointed out that other countries have adopted affirmative action to ensure balance, having recognised that the existence of imbalance in the economic power centre can lead to problems.
Moreover, he observed that it was necessary to consider and review the political control of the state, given insecure ethnic perceptions.
McAllister explained that during the PNC’s tenure in government it had been the view of the East Indian population that African Guyanese controlled the interests of the state, while now, it is the belief that East Indians are in control.
“No ethnic group should feel they are shut out..” McAllister remarked, adding that the fundamental issue now had to be whether or not shared governance should be implemented.
“Do we need shared governance in Guyana? We do. And if we do, we have to start to work towards the achievement of shared governance.”
“[The] cabal that controls the PPP don’t want anything like shared governance. They have seized what you [may] want to call Indian rights. They are the representatives [of] Indian rights and [are] doing everything in their power to hold on. [They] are doing everything in their power to reduce the impact of discontentment.” “We must build a powerful movement no one can ignore,” McAllister urged, “don’t be lackadaisical.
They are looking at one centre of power... every group has the right to go forward and look at other centres too...”
Following a number of position statements by African organisations and individuals, several resolutions were proposed as possible solutions to the “crisis.” These include partition, the return of ancestral African lands, the re-establishment of the village system, the setting up of committees to organise economic, spiritual and cultural education and to look into the issue of reparations.