Inside the mind of a newspaper owner

As a commentator on Guyanese contemporary and current history, I will always regret that I never spoke with Peter Taylor, one of the Guyanese media barons in the sixties during the Premiership of Cheddi Jagan.

It is not that I did not try. Each time I shook the gate, the nurse told me he was resting and that I had to return.

Taylor was in his eighties and bed-ridden so I understood his craving to be left alone. He didn’t want to talk about the role of the paper he owned in the sixties, the Argosy, and about events of that era. But I know he would have chatted with me.

He fathered three kids with the sister of a close neighbour when I lived on D’Urban Street, Wortmanville, and she was kind enough to tell Mr. Taylor that I needed to reflect on Guyanese history with him. I understood that he agreed but as it turned out our timing didn’t coincide.

The two Peters are gone, (D’Aguair being the other one), and they left no recording about why they took such a bitter stand in the newspapers they owned against Premier Cheddi Jagan from 1959 to 1964.

It is left up to Kit Nascimento to give us the numerous dimensions, angles, nuances and unreported circumstances that characterize the deadly confrontation between the citizens of Georgetown and the Jagan Government of the sixties.

Mr. Nascimento is gradually creeping up to the 80th birthday and I hope he realizes that the gaps are too precious to be left unfilled.

I am convinced that unless people like Mr. Nascimento write about the sixties, present and future Guyanese generations will continue to see that epoch in a one-sided way as told by the protégés of Cheddi and Janet Jagan.

I do accept without hesitation that the opposition led by Burnham and D’Aguair had their narrow agenda and did unpleasant things. But I also believe that for too long the equally negative side of the Jagan Premiership has not been revealed.

The sixties were not about good guys versus bad guys but about people who genuinely believed they were right in what they wanted for Guyana.

In this context, one should reject the continuing subjectivity of Jagan’s admirers that the media of Peter Taylor and Peter D’Aguair were demonic potters. The latest contributor to this ongoing pro-PPP stance is Mr. Harry Hergash of the Guyana-Canada Forum.

Mr. Hergash has been writing about me lately and his acceptance of private media harassment of Premier Jagan Administration is veiled and subtle but nevertheless the one-sided view is there for the reader to see once he/she reads between the lines; the private media sabotaged the Jagan Government in the sixties.
Here is how concealing Mr. Hergash has become.

In the KN (July 14, 08) he cited pages 84, 85 and 87 of Father Andrew Morrison’s fantastic journey into Guyanese contemporary, political history, “Justice: The Struggle for Democracy in Guyana, 1952-1992.”

On those pages was Father Morrison’s factual description that the three privately owned newspapers were opposed to the Jagan Government (in Father’s words).

Hergash didn’t go on to say that Father Morrison was close to the editors of all three of those papers and supported their crusade against communism.

Hergash didn’t make the point openly but he subtly left it there; the private newspapers attacked Premier Jagan.

It is this kind of writing that has seeped into the minds of thousands and thousands of East Indians who migrated from Guyana and locked away inside the prison walls of their minds that in the sixties it was Jagan the good guy versus the press barons, the bad guys.

This is a reduction of the events of the sixties into arid simplicities. What was wrong with the three newspapers that were opposed to Jagan’s communism?

Where in the history of journalism was it written that there is a law that morally forbids newspapers from taking a stand against a government policy that the media feel is nationally destructive?

Objective scholars have to get into the mind of the newspaper owner in the sixties and try to imagine what was taking place inside his psyche as he watched a liberal democratic state in the British West Indies being transformed into a communist polity.

Why are we against what the Americans did to Jagan in the sixties when in the very sixties, Jagan openly embraced the Soviet invasion of other countries including Hungary, Poland, East Germany and the tragic rape of Czechoslovakia in 1968.

Why do we hate the Americans for what they did to Jagan in the sixties when Jagan was an unashamed supporter of Castro’s horrible execution of thousands of innocent Cubans? What scholarly nonsense is this?

Only in Freddi's mind were there ever liberal democratic states in the West Indies in the '60 being transformed into communist polity. They were colonies or colonies still being tied to the apron strings of her majesty and the

"Capitalists" of the era still reverently sang "for good so love our gracious Queen" with tears streaming down their faces.... the affliction of the "house negro"...when massa has a cold, he/she loudly proclaims "we sick"! Let Freddi know that the destitute masses of our society did not know anything of the "isms' except one was their persecutors and one promised Utopian bliss.

The majority cared little for her name. Objective scholars of our era need to look to Colonial and Post colonial scholars and ask why is it they so readily gravitated to Marxism and Neo-Marxist sociopolitical traditions to buttress their analysis.

If CBJ embraces the despotism of that suffocated the Slavic and Polish and Hungarian spring, or the Castro cruel purge, he was wrong. Counterbalancing that with the evil of implanting a dictator in our midst is does not make it right. Scholars acceding to either position are nether right or Objective. They are wrong. Evil is evil is evil.

So much for scholarly nonsense

quote:

Originally posted by D2:
Only in Freddi's mind were there ever liberal democratic states in the West Indies in the '60 being transformed into communist polity. They were colonies or colonies still being tied to the apron strings of her majesty and the

"Capitalists" of the era still reverently sang "for good so love our gracious Queen" with tears streaming down their faces.... the affliction of the "house negro"...when massa has a cold, he/she loudly proclaims "we sick"! Let Freddi know that the destitute masses of our society did not know anything of the "isms' except one was their persecutors and one promised Utopian bliss.

The majority cared little for her name. Objective scholars of our era need to look to Colonial and Post colonial scholars and ask why is it they so readily gravitated to Marxism and Neo-Marxist sociopolitical traditions to buttress their analysis.

If CBJ embraces the despotism of that suffocated the Slavic and Polish and Hungarian spring, or the Castro cruel purge, he was wrong. Counterbalancing that with the evil of implanting a dictator in our midst is does not make it right. Scholars acceding to either position are nether right or Objective. They are wrong. Evil is evil is evil.

So much for scholarly nonsense

I see you keep calling people names. I take it lots of people know better.

I have to agree with Freddie on this one. Jagan is also to be blamed for the 28 years of punishment under the PNC. His flirtation with Communism was what caused the CIA to side with Burnham and his subsequent rise to power. Jagan was duped into thinking that Communism was the answer to Guyana's problems. Even if the PPP had remained in power Guyana would have still have been a hell hole since Jagan would have implemented the same communist ideals as the PNC did but at a much more rapid rate since he was already a convert befor Burnham.

quote:

Originally posted by BGurd_See:
I have to agree with Freddie on this one. Jagan is also to be blamed for the 28 years of punishment under the PNC. His flirtation with Communism was what caused the CIA to side with Burnham and his subsequent rise to power. Jagan was duped into thinking that Communism was the answer to Guyana's problems. Even if the PPP had remained in power Guyana would have still have been a hell hole since Jagan would have implemented the same communist ideals as the PNC did but at a much more rapid rate since he was already a convert befor Burnham.

Everyone has to right to think, but it is when they open their mouths and the filths comes out. Jagan and his communtist tendencies could not touch my father beloved country one second of his life. Janet wanted to fulfil her desires.

quote:

Originally posted by D2:
Only in Freddi's mind were there ever liberal democratic states in the West Indies in the '60 being transformed into communist polity. They were colonies or colonies still being tied to the apron strings of her majesty and the

"Capitalists" of the era still reverently sang "for good so love our gracious Queen" with tears streaming down their faces.... the affliction of the "house negro"...when massa has a cold, he/she loudly proclaims "we sick"! Let Freddi know that the destitute masses of our society did not know anything of the "isms' except one was their persecutors and one promised Utopian bliss.

The majority cared little for her name. Objective scholars of our era need to look to Colonial and Post colonial scholars and ask why is it they so readily gravitated to Marxism and Neo-Marxist sociopolitical traditions to buttress their analysis.

If CBJ embraces the despotism of that suffocated the Slavic and Polish and Hungarian spring, or the Castro cruel purge, he was wrong. Counterbalancing that with the evil of implanting a dictator in our midst is does not make it right. Scholars acceding to either position are nether right or Objective. They are wrong. Evil is evil is evil.

So much for scholarly nonsense

I doan know how old you are.

Unless yuh have lived in Guyana during colonial times then yuh would not understand.

Yes, many things were not right, but pre-independence Guyana was a pleasant place to live in.

Unlike what we have today.

Jagan was more about communism on the world stage and Guyana and indo Guyanese was merely the stage upon which he aimed to fulfill his selfish desires.

In the fifties, the town indians, afro and mixed guyanese were more informd about world events rather than the majority of indians. So, on the ignorance of the poorer indians, the Jagan sold them an ism they knew very little about-it was an indian man with a white woman who showed that they cared for them.

The americans might have had segregation then, but black folks outside of america revered the american culture-freedom as they percieved it to be. The ppl of Georgetown was not about to let that freedom be taken away by a cooolie boy with a white lady. They stopped him with the lives of ppl, money, propaganda and american help.

For those who believe that Cheddie was not a communist and part of the acts of those groups were to desatbilize the society. Just ask those who went to soviet block of countries what was their instructions.

quote:

Originally posted by seignet:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:
Only in Freddi's mind were there ever liberal democratic states in the West Indies in the '60 being transformed into communist polity. They were colonies or colonies still being tied to the apron strings of her majesty and the

"Capitalists" of the era still reverently sang "for good so love our gracious Queen" with tears streaming down their faces.... the affliction of the "house negro"...when massa has a cold, he/she loudly proclaims "we sick"! Let Freddi know that the destitute masses of our society did not know anything of the "isms' except one was their persecutors and one promised Utopian bliss.

The majority cared little for her name. Objective scholars of our era need to look to Colonial and Post colonial scholars and ask why is it they so readily gravitated to Marxism and Neo-Marxist sociopolitical traditions to buttress their analysis.

If CBJ embraces the despotism of that suffocated the Slavic and Polish and Hungarian spring, or the Castro cruel purge, he was wrong. Counterbalancing that with the evil of implanting a dictator in our midst is does not make it right. Scholars acceding to either position are nether right or Objective. They are wrong. Evil is evil is evil.

So much for scholarly nonsense

I doan know how old you are.

Unless yuh have lived in Guyana during colonial times then yuh would not understand.

Yes, many things were not right, but pre-independence Guyana was a pleasant place to live in.

Unlike what we have today.

Jagan was more about communism on the world stage and Guyana and indo Guyanese was merely the stage upon which he aimed to fulfill his selfish desires.

In the fifties, the town indians, afro and mixed guyanese were more informd about world events rather than the majority of indians. So, on the ignorance of the poorer indians, the Jagan sold them an ism they knew very little about-it was an indian man with a white woman who showed that they cared for them.

The americans might have had segregation then, but black folks outside of america revered the american culture-freedom as they percieved it to be. The ppl of Georgetown was not about to let that freedom be taken away by a cooolie boy with a white lady. They stopped him with the lives of ppl, money, propaganda and american help.

For those who believe that Cheddie was not a communist and part of the acts of those groups were to desatbilize the society. Just ask those who went to soviet block of countries what was their instructions.

I don't remember living under colonialism but I was old enough to see the destitution of the logies and grasp the conditioned subservient disposition of the colonial masses. I also can read and would provide you with a list of the pre eminent scholars of the area who painted a consistent picture of how it was.

All I ask for is historical realism. Imperialism and colonialism not to mentioned the emergent Communist and socialist traditions were uniquely western philosophies. The necessity of framing liberation struggles in terms of taking sides in these ideological framework has little to do with freeing oppressed masses. That was a moral dilemma that stood outside these of traditions.To blame disciples of one or the other of these ideologies for our present problems is to fail to acknowledge a legacy of oppression we inherited and are yet to unlearn. Unfortunately, those like you are too conditioned to stand outside the grasp of the strangle hold of these positions to grasp a difference. You only see one or the other and none of the evil of each viepoint.

Get it in your noggins, we were a people cast as an inferior culture and yet to considered able to entertain the concepts understood to be the benefaction of enlightenment thinking among Europeans for some 200 years! Even JFK still had not yet fully acknowledge that among his own where a multitude still existed in social, cultural and political apartheid!

quote:

Originally posted by seignet:

I doan know how old you are.

Unless yuh have lived in Guyana during colonial times then yuh would not understand.

Yes, many things were not right, but pre-independence Guyana was a pleasant place to live in.

Unlike what we have today.

Jagan was more about communism on the world stage and Guyana and indo Guyanese was merely the stage upon which he aimed to fulfill his selfish desires.

In the fifties, the town indians, afro and mixed guyanese were more informd about world events rather than the majority of indians. So, on the ignorance of the poorer indians, the Jagan sold them an ism they knew very little about-it was an indian man with a white woman who showed that they cared for them.

The americans might have had segregation then, but black folks outside of america revered the american culture-freedom as they percieved it to be. The ppl of Georgetown was not about to let that freedom be taken away by a cooolie boy with a white lady. They stopped him with the lives of ppl, money, propaganda and american help.

Well, at least I am old enough to remember vividly the period from 1953 and throughout the 1960s. It's pure nonsense to say that rural folks knew less than the town folks as to what was happening internationally. The radio was a popular medium and many households in rural areas had radios with shortwave bands so that they could tune in to international news. The BBC news at 7.15 a.m., 12.15 p.m., 4.15 p.m and 7.15 pm. were listened to very keenly. People in the rural areas knew about the Hungarian uprising, the Vietnam war (from the inception when the French were involved,)the colonial uprisings in Kenya, Congo, and Malaya, the civil rights struggle in the USA, the atrocity of Sharpville, among numerous other international happenings.

And in general elections, the percentage of turn-out was higher in rural people than in Georgetown. Why? It could be that rural folks (Indians, Africans, Mixed) were more aware of political issues. People in rural areas were not ignorant. They were not educated as their urban counterparts but they were fully aware of local and international events.

Back then I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII was a freer person.

Loggie communities were full of life-weddings, family visiting one another and other community activities.

Ofcourse, these were the latter days.

The trouble with writers, they neglected to pen the progress of the system. I am certain it was terrible at the beginning, but it never remained that way.

Even black slavery never remanined the same way troughout its period-it became more humane towards the end.

There is no justification to use humans against their will , but the way the world is, it will continue to happen.

Thank God, he placed upon the hearts of some men regardless of race the desire to correct the wickedness of other men.

quote:

Originally posted by Daren David:

quote:

Originally posted by seignet:

I doan know how old you are.

Unless yuh have lived in Guyana during colonial times then yuh would not understand.

Yes, many things were not right, but pre-independence Guyana was a pleasant place to live in.

Unlike what we have today.

Jagan was more about communism on the world stage and Guyana and indo Guyanese was merely the stage upon which he aimed to fulfill his selfish desires.

In the fifties, the town indians, afro and mixed guyanese were more informd about world events rather than the majority of indians. So, on the ignorance of the poorer indians, the Jagan sold them an ism they knew very little about-it was an indian man with a white woman who showed that they cared for them.

The americans might have had segregation then, but black folks outside of america revered the american culture-freedom as they percieved it to be. The ppl of Georgetown was not about to let that freedom be taken away by a cooolie boy with a white lady. They stopped him with the lives of ppl, money, propaganda and american help.

Well, at least I am old enough to remember vividly the period from 1953 and throughout the 1960s. It's pure nonsense to say that rural folks knew less than the town folks as to what was happening internationally. The radio was a popular medium and many households in rural areas had radios with shortwave bands so that they could tune in to international news. The BBC news at 7.15 a.m., 12.15 p.m., 4.15 p.m and 7.15 pm. were listened to very keenly. People in the rural areas knew about the Hungarian uprising, the Vietnam war (from the inception when the French were involved,)the colonial uprisings in Kenya, Congo, and Malaya, the civil rights struggle in the USA, the atrocity of Sharpville, among numerous other international happenings.

And in general elections, the percentage of turn-out was higher in rural people than in Georgetown. Why? It could be that rural folks (Indians, Africans, Mixed) were more aware of political issues. People in rural areas were not ignorant. They were not educated as their urban counterparts but they were fully aware of local and international events.

In Rosignol, radios were very rare in homes. Those who had, attracted a large crowd to listen to cricket.

The batteries were so huge and expensive that the device was used for special occassions.

Yes, there were news and a few ppl listened to the world news.

People were big on reading the newpaper. So were the schools and we had a subject called current affairs of which we learnt about politician through out the world.

Schools raised money to buy radio sets to listen to school broadcasts. Due the scarcity of radios from financial constraints

And the voters turn out in rural areas had to do with the hard work of the PPP groups in their communities teaching ppl to mark their ballot and arranging transportation to polling stations.

In Rosignol of which I know of, I was a foot soldier in that effort.

And we had a RK radio powered by some big big batteries and a gramaphone which had to wind for playing.

quote:

Originally posted by seignet:
Back then I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII was a freer person.

Loggie communities were full of life-weddings, family visiting one another and other community activities.

Ofcourse, these were the latter days.

The trouble with writers, they neglected to pen the progress of the system. I am certain it was terrible at the beginning, but it never remained that way.

Even black slavery never remanined the same way troughout its period-it became more humane towards the end.

There is no justification to use humans against their will , but the way the world is, it will continue to happen.

Thank God, he placed upon the hearts of some men regardless of race the desire to correct the wickedness of other men.

If I respond as I normally would to statements like the above you would complain that I am hard on you.

Unfortunately there is no other way than to say you are quite foolish to romanticize the enforced servitude of low paid colonial plantations. The huddled conditions in crowded single room dwellings of logie-life with families stacked on top of on another can only be described in terms of chronic poverty and extreme misery of those shackled to it by oppressive forces.

As I remember every one of the logies I have seen, they were always vermin infested ramshackle communal huts that can hardly keep the elements out. They were surrounded by open sewers and an absence no potable water to secure proper personal hygiene necessary for healthy life. Mose of the people lived very short unhealthy lives and that people endured and were able to smile is not evidence that life was better then than now. None of us would want that for ourselves.

Also, slavery is slavery and there is no good, better, best forms of it. The deliberate captive holding of another a human being for their entire lifetime to do with him/her what one will is straight up evil.

God has no input into the matter either. This is about human evil practiced against another and even if held up as valid by your holy writ remains a dispicable act.

It is also clear that men do not change from their wicked ways willingly by some spontaneous cathartic experience. When change comes it is also seldom via internal reformations and most frequent is through revolution. Evil practices ends always in coerced capitulation of the evil doer. Despite the aphorism that evil never yields profit the remarkable persistence of it demonstrates otherwise.

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by seignet:
Back then I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII was a freer person.

Loggie communities were full of life-weddings, family visiting one another and other community activities.

Ofcourse, these were the latter days.

The trouble with writers, they neglected to pen the progress of the system. I am certain it was terrible at the beginning, but it never remained that way.

Even black slavery never remanined the same way troughout its period-it became more humane towards the end.

There is no justification to use humans against their will , but the way the world is, it will continue to happen.

Thank God, he placed upon the hearts of some men regardless of race the desire to correct the wickedness of other men.

If I respond as I normally would to statements like the above you would complain that I am hard on you.

Unfortunately there is no other way than to say you are quite foolish to romanticize the enforced servitude of low paid colonial plantations. The huddled conditions in crowded single room dwellings of logie-life with families stacked on top of on another can only be described in terms of chronic poverty and extreme misery of those shackled to it by oppressive forces.

As I remember every one of the logies I have seen, they were always vermin infested ramshackle communal huts that can hardly keep the elements out. They were surrounded by open sewers and an absence no potable water to secure proper personal hygiene necessary for healthy life. Mose of the people lived very short unhealthy lives and that people endured and were able to smile is not evidence that life was better then than now. None of us would want that for ourselves.

Also, slavery is slavery and there is no good, better, best forms of it. The deliberate captive holding of another a human being for their entire lifetime to do with him/her what one will is straight up evil.

God has no input into the matter either. This is about human evil practiced against another and even if held up as valid by your holy writ remains a dispicable act.

It is also clear that men do not change from their wicked ways willingly by some spontaneous cathartic experience. When change comes it is also seldom via internal reformations and most frequent is through revolution. Evil practices ends always in coerced capitulation of the evil doer. Despite the aphorism that evil never yields profit the remarkable persistence of it demonstrates otherwise.

I stayed at Albion logie.
The latrines were positioned over constant running water out to the ocean.

They were no vermin, my patty and tatta kept the place clean and they were not cramped like sardines. There was a leentoe where the outside kitchen was situated.

In Albion it wasn't huts, it was row housing.

Rain water was refreshing, free from rust and iron. But it had mosquitoe lavae.

A good swim at the canals after good days work was sufficient. Back in India, they probably had to becareful where they walked not to offend another caste. If it was so bad in BG then when the last boat left back in 1954, all indians would have been on it.

And today blacks would have been happy.

Slavery was always around and yuh must know it is even practiced today. The bible states it. The hindoes had ppl placed in their respective place. Africa was too close to europe-easy access to free labour.

God is in everything. We had an opportunity for better lives. Better than i Africa or India.

And he does move some men.

And yuh doan know if that is false, cause yuh ain't enlightened in that.

Not yet anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by seignet:

I stayed at Albion logie.
The latrines were positioned over constant running water out to the ocean.

They were no vermin, my patty and tatta kept the place clean and they were not cramped like sardines. There was a leentoe where the outside kitchen was situated.

In Albion it wasn't huts, it was row housing.

Rain water was refreshing, free from rust and iron. But it had mosquitoe lavae.

A good swim at the canals after good days work was sufficient. Back in India, they probably had to becareful where they walked not to offend another caste. If it was so bad in BG then when the last boat left back in 1954, all indians would have been on it.

And today blacks would have been happy.

Slavery was always around and yuh must know it is even practiced today. The bible states it. The hindoes had ppl placed in their respective place. Africa was too close to europe-easy access to free labour.

God is in everything. We had an opportunity for better lives. Better than i Africa or India.

And he does move some men.

And yuh doan know if that is false, cause yuh ain't enlightened in that.

Not yet anyway.

How nice of you to have such idyllic recollections of one of the symbols of Indian and African warehousing and destitution in colonial Guyana? It is also nice you of you to think the dependence on rain water was sufficient to meet your all needs for potable water, mosquito larva, not withstanding! Were you not serious I would think of you a little on the slow side. A tinge of lunacy would be my correction to that thought.

Why would "today blacks" want to regress to what then was a miserable life as well?

It us also a historical fact that the plantation owners appropriated much of the Indian return fund and traded swampy land to many Indians in lieu of sending them back to India. In any event, that is besides the point. Their sojourn as indentured servants was cruel and their subsequent existence dating to the 50's was one of enforced third class status. Even now many are still waiting to be liberated from that legacy.

The point is not that slavery persists but that it is cruel, and those who practice it possessed a depraved indifference to human life. That the bible tolerates it matters little to the fact it is an odium in a civilized world.

That "God is" is still a matter of some debate to many. That "he is not" is a decisive and thought out conclusion by many others as well.

We hear so much about the Jagans being affiliated with the USSR and Eastern Europe as being evil. What do we have to say when during the cold war the US joined hands with Red China, which practices communism to this day, to further her own political interests?? Do we have a problem with such unprincipled move??
Many of you don't see a problem with the ANC's Marxist ideology because of what they were fighting against, yet you refused to acknowledge the evil the Jagans were battling.

Evils-I do not know what yuh fellas are griping about.

Life is meant to live a little better each year.

And ppl back then lived better each year. Christmas and New Year is when they demonstarted their progress from the last year.