Dear Editor,
Recently I was drawn to three letters in the daily Kaieteur news each seeming to suggest that were Dr. Jagan alive today he would have solved all or most of the problem confronting our country. I would like for a moment look at some of the arguments offered by one of these writers.
This is the letter attributed to Dr. Tara Singh appearing in the Kaieteur News of 28th April, 2026. In that letter Dr. Tara Singh asked the question “why do opposition parties refrain from recognizing even a single achievement among the numerous transformational projects implemented by the PPP/C government.” When I read this, I steadied myself to hear the good doctor (I was his student at UG and thoroughly enjoyed his lectures) evenhandedly deal with this vexing observation of his. But this was not to be.
Even though Dr. Singh in stating his observation said why do “opposition Parties refrain from recognizing even a single achievement among the numerous transformational projects implemented by the PPP/C government.”
This phrasing of the question suggest that his concern is only about such behaving when directed at the PPP/C or that such a behavior is not a feature of the PPP/C when in opposition.
If his intent is reflected in the first possibility I pose, then for the intellectual I perceive him to be he disappoints. If on the other hand he holds the latter proposition I offered, then he is being ridiculous and dishonest.
Dr. Singh dealt with all the assumed neglect of the APNU/AFC to acknowledge any “transformational project implemented by the PPP/C.” Why did he do this? Why did he not recognize that the PPP did the same? In a divided country like Guyana wouldn’t a fair analysis of this tendency by both our major parties have been helpful and be encouraging to this concept of “One Guyana”? Surely the Dear Doctor cannot believe that the PNC did nothing transformational, thus justifying this lack of balance in his letter?
Under the PNC Guyana was exporting blackeye peas, cotton, tined pine apple chunks and pine apple juice. As part of the PNC’s house clothe and feed ourselves drive, we (Guyanese) were producing beautiful local clay bricks for building homes and using our sand for making drinking glasses and other cutleries, built the Linden Highway. Perhaps the only road that served us for such a long time without the need for repairs immediately after completion as is the case with those built under the PPP/C.
All this done at a time when the resources available to the PNC was nowhere near what is available to the PPP today. Weren’t these projects “transformational” and worthy of praise? So, why did Dr. Singh in his letter not call the PPP/C out for refraining “from recognizing even a single achievement among the numerous transformational projects implemented” by the PNC? How could DR. Singh partisan letter be helpful to a badly bruised and divided nation that Guyanese of good will have been struggling to unite for years?
Another worrying aspect of his letter is even though he laments this perceived lack of praise for the present PPP/C “transformational projects” by opposition parties, Dr. Singh chooses to look at the PPP during the DR. Jagan’s Leadership to find occasions when in his perception the PPP and the PPP/C exhibited a readiness to praise the government when it (the PPP) was not in power. This reliance on the distant assumed past behavior of the PPP speaks volume of what he thinks of the present PPP/C which he seems to be a willing defender.
But Editor, there are some far reaching consequences when our intellectuals write in the manner that Dr. Singh did in his letter of 28th April ,2026. Some years ago a young member of the PPP, asked me to give him a lift home, since he had forgotten some papers that he needed for a meeting. He lived on the east coast, I lived in North Ruimveldt, never the less I took him to his home and back to Georgetown.
He was a talkative fellow and kept telling me of how “great the father of the nation” (meaning Dr. Jagan) was. As he spoke my mind travelled back in time. Now, even though I respected Dr. Jagan and his contribution to Guyana, I couldn’t help musing on the fact that this same anti-colonist fighter sided with Russia when under the threat of the gun it opposed Czechoslovakia’s determination to be an independent nation.
I also recall as a young man attending a PPP meeting at Vlissingen and Durban Streets and hear Dr. Jagan speaking about what great things his government did on the Corentyne and the crowd shouting “Wa yuh do fo we!?” After a while Dr. Jagan, apparently fed-up with this disturbing of his speech blurted “Al yuh don’t vote fo me!” Even as a teenager I was shocked. So for this great man the interest of those who voted for him was his sole concern. I recall hearing from senior members of the WPA of Dr. Jagan telling the late Dr. Rodney to stay away from the Corentyne and stick to Georgetown in his campaigning.
As all these thoughts flood my mind, as the young man at my side kept on tell me of how great “the father of the nation” was. I couldn’t help wondering what he would say if he heard that on a trip to the interior a young Indian media personal was stunned to hear Dr. Jagan say that he wishes people would appreciate some of the good things that Burnham did. So stunned was the young man that on returning to Georgetown that evening he sought out seasoned media personnel to share his “shocking” experience.
As I thought all these things, I felt a bit sorry for the young man sitting beside me. Not because of his fanatical belief in Dr. Jagan and the PPP. But because we, adults have failed him and his generation. He, like many of his generation; on both sides of the political divide; have been fed only one side of our history, the side that supports the teller’s political bias.
So now I must live with the fact that an intellectual I have respected for all these years is contributing to this madness. It hurts.