One of the books that have had a profound influence on my human rights ideology is an edited volume of radio talks given by 10 German scholars in their country in 1962. It was translated into print form in 1966.
It is entitled, “The Path to Dictatorship” (Anchor Books: New York, 1966, Trans. John Conway). I had to study this book when I was in graduate school at Mac Master University because it was required reading for a course on fascism taught by Professor Alan Cassels. Cassels at that time was one of the leading experts on the study of fascism.
“The Path to Dictatorship” is a profound reflection on how Europe and Germany sat by and allowed Adolph Hitler to rise to power in Germany. One of the writers showed clearly that the acquisition of power by Hitler could have been prevented if human beings were more committed to the principles of democracy.
It is with sadness that I read the column of Ian Mc Donald in yesterday's Stabroek News. I want readers to know (including Mr. Donald) that this judgment here is not designed as a criticism of Mr. Mc Donald himself.
For more than a decade and a half, Mr. Mc Donald has done a Sunday column in the Stabroek News in which he devotes his time to literary topics. He is a literary columnist. His writings are intellectually interesting and his subjects are worthy of reading by any mind, whether young or old.
Mr. Mc Donald is a well-respected, learned Guyanese that studiously and meticulously avoids controversy. In all his writings in those 15 and more years, I can recall only one time he was criticised in a brash way. It was after the 2001 election. Mr. Deryck Bernard had taken unnecessary umbrage at something he had written.
I think I once remarked in a column that the worst things can happen to Guyana and when you pick up the Sunday Stabroek, Mr. McDonald would ignore them and continue with his poetry. Looking back, that was a wrong thing to say. If Mr. McDonald is a literary critic, why then should he write or comment on social phenomena?
He is not expected to. Yesterday, for perhaps the first time in almost sixteen years, Mr. Mc Donald threw off his non-political gloves and took on the Government of Guyana.
His piece entitled, “The use of state advertising” [Please note: link provided by LOSP] is a rejection of the Guyana Government's explanation of why it withdrew ads from the Stabroek News. It is not clothed in diplomatic language.
For example, read this: “The decision creates unease that there may be more, and perhaps worse, to come.” It took Mr. Mc Donald more than sixteen years to write on a political controversy in Guyana. One can say, like Mr. Clairmont Lyle, he had to start somewhere.
I don't accept that line of reasoning. I read “The path to Dictatorship” and I have internalised the meaning of that book. I know if we start early about identifying the early warning signs of authoritarian use of power, we can prevent what Mr. Mc Donald says is the “worse to come.”
The question we should ask Mr. Mc Donald is this: “Has the worse come already?” There is the tantalising feeling we will now have about Mc Donald. Will he let his influential voice be heard again? Was this article of his just a departure from the norm and we will not hear from him again on topics involving politics?
It will be difficult, if not impossible, for Mr. Mc Donald to continue to eschew political controversy because the insult that he will face is that it was only when the newspaper he writes for is affected then you see his pen.
What we need to understand as human beings is that those of us that have a voice in the society, those of us that help people to form opinions of life and the world but particularly the society in which they live, have a moral obligation to situate the unfolding of the wrong use of power in its proper context.
There are citizens in all societies that people look up to. They see such people as role-models. It is for this reason, these role-models must have a moral standing that is worthy of emulation.
Sporting personalities, writers, movie people are all admired by the younger generation. The admirers pattern their value system after such people. For this reason, a celebrity will immediately lose endorsements if she/he makes racist remarks or advocate violence. Because those in society that are opinion-shapers can influence the thought patterns of others, then they should not violently incite those that look up to them.
There was a period in this country not so long ago when talk-show hosts and a certain television-station owner should absolute contempt for moral responsibility in their role as opinion-makers. Some of them are still doing it. This is where the law of sedition comes in.
The opposite to the law of sedition is the unwritten rule of moral condemnation of those that can change a society that is drifting towards the path of dictatorship but chose to remain silent because the winds of sin is not blowing their way so it does not concern them.
I will end with an important lesson for those who read this column. I met Ms. Sadie Amin, an attorney and high-level PPP activist, when she joined the Council of the University. During the Vice-Chancellor scandal of 2005, Ms. Amin sided with the directive from President Jagdeo.
I met her at NAACIE head office on High Street and asked her how she could be so insensitive to what the President did to Dr. Mark Kirton. She was honest but brutally frank.
She said, “Freddie, I am a PPP member, I take position that my party takes whether they are right or wrong. I believe I should stick with whatever my party does.”
Months later, I met her and I told her that I noticed that she was not attending meetings of the Council of the University. She promptly told me she resigned from the Council and the PPP because the PPP leadership unfairly sidelined her husband for a position that he deserved.
She felt the pain at what the PPP did to her husband. But this same woman refused to understand the pain Dr. Kirton's wife went through when he was badly treated at UG. Ms. Sadie Amin refused to recognise we were on the path to dictatorship. Mr. Ian Mc Donald has done so at last.