Dear Editor,
I pen this response to Ravi Dev`s letter of Oct. 18 with the hope that the national importance of the exchange, in the media, between Ravi and myself, and the manner of the exchange, is good reason for your continued facilitation of the discourse.
In this response, I will not address the two substantive issues raised by Ravi, since I am of the view that first of all we must find common ground in our approach to the problematic, which is being described as the Ethnic Security Dilemma (ESD) and secondly, we have to determine the premises on which we are advancing the discourse. However, before doing so, there are two observations that should be made. First, Ravi`s ‘hope for our leaders to recognize validity of substantive positions from all “sides” in our Guyanese tragedy’ is no different from Kwayana`s assertion of 1999 that there is “No Guilty Race”. Our dilemma was engineered by the plantation owners and colonizers and subsequently unwittingly and or selfishly adopted by us notwithstanding its inherent antithesis to our cohesion as a nation state. Second, Ravi`s insistence “that all groups are treated equitably” is at the kernel of our problem and its solution.
While, I agree with Ravi that “ethnic differences in and of themselves do not cause a problem” we have to accept that our ethnic (cultural) differences have been a major factor in the engineering/evolution of the problem, in this instance and will have to be catered for, in its resolution. Not only were our ethnic differences exploited; our physicality defines our ethnicity. It invokes stereotyping and prejudicial reactions as if it is in and of itself the problem.
Secondly, we have to accept that equity, in our circumstance, speaks to the redress of historical wrongs; and the accommodation of diversity, while we seek to be cohesive. Our solution is beyond the creation of the traditional western democratic regime which evolved in; and is responsive to; and some might even say sustains dissimilar circumstances.
Much of the above speaks to Reconciliation which has been recently touted by the current regime. What has not been touted is truth, which is the only basis for the realization of lasting reconciliation.
We must, initially, establish the cause of, and the framework within which we seek to determine and confront, our fundamental problem.
Let the discourse of the committed continue. Acceptance of, and coming to terms with, the truth shall set us free.
Regards
Vincent Alexander
