Dear Editor,
My letter today concerns references to me made by Mr. Kissoon in his columns in the Guyana Chronicle, a newspaper that has thus far declined to publish my responses, contrary to the basic norms of fairness and the free exchange of ideas.
My response to Mr. Kissoon—which the Chronicle did not publish but which appeared in the Kaieteur News on March 9—was clear. As I stated then, “there is history, and then there is history.” My recollection, published in the Kaieteur News, is lived history. I do not write as a detached observer, but as an active participant in the processes the Chronicle columnist claims to understand through unnamed sources.
I come from an upright family with a tradition of respect for the dead. This is why, for example, along with Eusi Kwayana, Rupert Roopnaraine, and David Hinds, I attended the funeral of Mr. Burnham in 1985. There is something deeply embedded in our culture—and in human society more broadly—about showing respect for the sick and the dead. For that reason, I find it troubling that Mr. Kissoon chose to attack Dr. Roopnaraine after his passing in a series of columns. Such conduct strikes me as excessive and unbecoming.
In his column of March 11 in the Guyana Chronicle, Mr. Kissoon did not extend even the basic courtesy of careful editing; he misspelled my name. Whether this was deliberate or simply careless, I cannot say. His claim that David Hinds and I contradicted each other is equally unfounded. There is no contradiction. Both of us were active participants in the events under discussion, and we expressed essentially the same position in different ways. A careful reader—and a careful student of history—would recognise this.
I stated the facts as I experienced them. I have no objection to anyone challenging those facts. But those who do so should not hide behind unnamed sources. If Mr. Kissoon truly wishes to contribute to the writing of history, as he claims, he should avoid the use of misleading or unsupported assertions as a means of shaping readers’ perceptions of events. Newspapers play an important role in society by bringing public attention to events and debates that shape our collective life. For that reason, it is incumbent upon any newspaper to ensure that claims presented as facts are responsibly sourced. Columnists should not be exempt from this basic principle of accountability. Ultimately, the archival record will remain, and the historical record will reveal the inconsistencies, contradictions, and unsupported claims that may arise in public commentary.
Editor, I have no interest in prolonging this exchange. This will therefore be my final word on the matter for now. However, as someone who was an active participant in that history, I remain ready and willing to engage with students, the public, and the media in respectful and honest discussion.