By Mark DaCosta- In a recent ‘Straight Up’ broadcast host Mark Benschop delved into numerous pressing national issues; one of those is the Guyana Police Force’s (GPF) use of the term “Negro” to describe Guyanese of African descent. Benschop’s guest, Lincoln Lewis, General Secretary of the Guyana Trades Union Congress (GTUC) and a veteran advocate for workers’ rights, provided a comprehensive critique of this terminology and its implications for racial identity in Guyana.
Lewis began by highlighting the offensiveness of the colonial-era term “Negro” to African Guyanese, stating that its usage in police reports perpetuates a derogatory view of the community. He argued that this term is employed in every police statement involving individuals of African origin, which has caused considerable distress among those who prefer to be identified as “African Guyanese.”
Referencing the book, “The Cycle of Racial Oppression in Guyana” by Dr. Kean Gibson, Lewis underscored the historical and sociological underpinnings of racial terminology. He emphasised that the wishes of African Guyanese to be referred to as “African” should be respected by the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) government. “Every other ethnic group is allowed to choose how they are identified,” Lewis remarked, pointing out the inconsistency in the government’s approach to ethnic nomenclature. For instance, individuals from Portugal are called Portuguese, and Europe are referred to as Europeans.
Lewis criticised the PPP for its perceived racially insensitive policies, asserting that the government must engage in meaningful consultations with African Guyanese communities. “The PPP has no right to impose the term “Negro” on African Guyanese,” he stated, calling for respect and recognition of the community’s chosen identity.
Benschop furthered the discussion by playing a video clip of Attorney General Anil Nandlall, who – incredibly – defended the GPF’s use of the term. Nandlall argued that the term “Negro” has been historically used by the GPF for its 180-year existence, questioning why there is a sudden shift in preference to “African.” He suggested that objections might be influenced by external factors, such as the presence of a notable African American congressman in Guyana.
In response, Lewis rebutted Nandlall’s stance by emphasising societal evolution. “Society does not remain static; what may have been acceptable years ago may not be right today,” he stated. He drew parallels with outdated practices like corporal punishment in schools, which were once accepted but are now widely condemned. Lewis highlighted that the term “African” was once undesirable but has now been embraced by the community, signifying their right to define their identity.
Lewis also pointed out the inconsistency in Nandlall’s argument by drawing attention to the East Indian community in Guyana, who would find it offensive to be addressed by colonial-era terms. Without using any explicit derogatory terms, Lewis made it clear that such labels would be unacceptable and demeaning. “By the same token, African Guyanese should not be demeaned and disrespected by the PPP regime,” Lewis argued.
That segment of the broadcast concluded with a strong call to action from Lewis, urging the PPP government to respect the identity preferences of African Guyanese. “A whole people want to be called African Guyanese, and that wish should be honoured,” he declared, reinforcing the importance of self-identification and respect for all ethnic groups in our nation.
The debate on “Benschop Radio” has brought to the forefront critical issues of racial identity and respect in Guyana. As our country continues to navigate its diverse cultural landscape, the voices of communities seeking recognition and respect for their chosen identities must be heard and acknowledged.
