Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

norman-fariaAt the risk of being subjected to the abuse of being called racist we have decided to continue with our analysis of the open door immigration policy which Barbados has been practicing in recent years. The new government has just acceded to office and we have no idea if we will see a departure from the earlier policy. We remain adamant that the high influx of illegal immigrants into Barbados is cause for concern. We have additional concerns at the high number of those illegal immigrants who are Indo-Guyanese. We remain firm in our view that there are case studies in the form of Trinidad and Guyana which should warn Barbadians that we need to ‘manage’ our burgeoning multi-ethnic population.

We have written several articles which have expressed our concerns. It seems however that the tipping point on this volatile issue occurred on January 31, 2008 when we published an excerpt from the writing of Dr. Kean Gibson – UWI lecturer titled, Indian Racism Against Afro Guyanese In Guyana. Since then the comments have been flowing and have clearly illustrated that the issue of race relations should be placed at the centre of government policy. We are sending a message to Prime Minister David Thompson that Barbados needs to be proactive from now on this matter. Please take decisions to ensure that the stable climate which Barbados has enjoyed over its post-colonial existence continues.

Some comments posted on BU have been pushing the boundary but we feel it is important Barbadians and others try to understand that this is an issue which needs to be confronted. We understand the emotionalism which this issue continues to evoke but as a people we need to move past this point if racial harmony is to be achieved. In the spirit of fair play we have published a letter written by The Honorary Consulate of the Republic of Guyana, Norman Faria which was sent to the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) last year; it addressed concerns arising from the program Book Talk which was aired last year. By coincidence Dr. Kean Gibson was a panelist on the program.

Read Norman Faria’s letter which he emailed to BU tonight…

29 November 2007
Mr.Claude Graham
General manager
Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation (CBC)
The Pine, St.Michael, Barbados

SUBJECT: CBC-TV GIVING PLATFORM FOR HATEFUL RHETORIC

Dear Mr.Graham:

The Honorary Consulate of the Republic of Guyana in Barbados presents its compliments and wishes to refer to the above subject matter. Sometime this year, or maybe last year, your station broadcast a discussion on the book “The Cycle of Racial Oppression in Guyana” by Kean Gibson during a programme called “Book Talk” . The panel composed of the book’s author and Robert “Bobby” Clarke and David Commissiong. The programme was re-broadcast this year. The exact dates for both screenings may be obtained from the station’s log. The consulate, representing the government and people of Guyana, expresses its disappointment and condemns the showings of these programmes, giving as it does a platform for the peddling of inflammatory falsehoods and other hateful rhetoric which will only serve to incite hatred and tension among ill informed and impressionable minded viewers and cause difficulties for the ongoing cordial and otherwise friendly relations between the peoples of Barbados and Guyana, some of the latter’s nationals choosing to come and live or work on a contract basis in the island.

Gibson’s thesis, as she outlined in her presentations on the programme, basically alleges that people of East Indian descent in Guyana, particularly now there is an “Indian” government as she contends, will mean trouble and oppression for Guyanese of African descent. She blatantly said Africans are being targeted and murdered in Guyana, or words to that effect, among other falsehoods, in said programme. Her exact words may be checked by perusing the programme in your library.The whole thrust of her presentations directly or inferentially portrayed Indo- Guyanese and the present administration as being bent on oppressing and discriminating against Afro-Guyanese. Gibson presented no scholarly evidence of these allegations. There is none. Indeed, Gibson’s book has no scholarly basis and was rejected by a number of publishing houses to which it was submitted. As established by serious and reputable analysts (See for example “Rebuttal to Kean Gibson” http:www.guyanajournal.com/gibson_rebuttal_2.html) the book is riddled with subjective, irrational, personal and false views. On that level alone, the Consulate asks why should it have been deemed worthy of discussion in an otherwise interesting and worthwhile programme such as Book Talk ?

Barbadian law prohibits the public stirring up of racial hatred and other inflammatory views to create discord among races. Yet here we have a person being given a platform by a government run TV station to air and give succour to what may be justifiably interpreted as just those illegal and undesirable practices. It has nothing to do with “freedom of speech”. The fact that the two gentlemen were invited to offer a rebuttal is of no consequence. They made some good points, especially Mr.Clark, though I would have offered other information with a different emphasis. Strangely, the Consulate, which is the premiere source for services and knowledge about the Guyana government’s programmes and philosophy, was not invited to send a resource person. Further, since it would have been known by the programme’s organisers that Gibson frequently refers to Hindu religious theology and practices in her allegations, no one from the two Hindu temples in Barbados were apparently invited.

Those proffering inflammatory views and falsehoods when it comes to a racial situation should not be given a platform. They have no freedom of speech. When I worked and studied in Toronto in the 1970s, I joined with the campaign to try and prevent the (late) racist William Shockley from giving a talk at Convocation Hall at the University of Toronto. I marched in a demonstration outside the Hall. It will be recalled that Dr. Shockley’s theory is that people of African descent are genetically inferior to whites. Further, I fully support the correct stand of those who in recent days protested against the prestigious Oxford Student Union at Oxford University in the UK in allowing the convicted Holocaust denier David Irving as well as Nick Griffin, a leader of the far right (British) National Front Party, which among other neo-fascist stances, calls for the deportation of people of colour including those from Guyana and the Caribbean region from the UK.

I was also disappointed in the way the Book Talk host’s handled the programme. Instead of simply permitting the participants to present views in an orderly and reasonably time frame, he came across as being a panelist himself and appeared to be arguing at some times against the submissions of Clarke and Commissiong. He appeared to be prompting Gibson to offer other information , though of course no one is saying this otherwise excellent host in other programmes and displaying professional and tolerant views in other public areas of endeavour was supporting said Gibson’s views. Gibson “hogged” the show. She had a disproportionate amount of time to peddle her hateful rhetoric. She should never have been on the show or the book discussed.

I know you personally as general manager would not be responsible for the invitations sent out for the said Book Talk or any other programme on the station.. I further commend you for, as far as I know, initiating the really excellent programmes about Caribbean immigrants in the UK aired on CBC -TV and which you so ably presented. I trust that you will look into the airings of the said Book Talk programme. The delay in writing to you about this matter is regretted but unavoidable due to other commitments.

Accept Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration.

Respectfully Yours,

NORMAN R. FARIA
(Guyana’s Honorary Consul in Barbados)

Related Stories

Indian Racism Against Afro Guyanese In Guyana
Can Indians And Blacks Co-exist In Barbados?
Can Barbados Avoid Escalating Crime & Violence In Neighbouring Trinidad & Guyana?


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

149 responses to “Norman Faria (Guyana's Honorary Consul) Responds To Indo-Guyanese Debate”


  1. Norman Faria is lucky that he is in Barbados and has the freedom to make those remarks.

    Would a black bajan be as free in Guyana to crticise indo guyanese?

    I dare say not.

    Norman Faria has written the commissioner of police Mr Dottin last year to take action against VOB and bajan citizens for their publicly expressed concerns about the large guyanese presence here.

    He has written numerous letters to the newspapers and has the good fortune to be accomodated by his fellow guyanese Roxanne Gibbs – Managing Editor of the Nation newspaper.

    His support seems primarily to be in favour of those guyanese of indian descent,with some token gestures to afro guyanese.

    He refuses to tell us how many of his compatriots are here whether legal or illegal,yet he he seeks to assert his rights and their rights as the honaray consul of Guyana.

    He has been given a lot of air time and newspaper space – and my guess is he is just watching this government to see how they move before he starts his whining and whingeing again.


  2. David/BU

    Heard something on the news tonight about Barbados Government seeking to revist the skill artisans provision in the CSME document, of course much to the consternation of Guyana’s Foreign minister.

    According to him:”many persons will suffer hardship”.

    I wonder who those many persons are,perchance would they be those pesky guyanese?

    Perhaps someone in the DLP hierachy could come on and tell us exactly what the DLP is intending to do.


  3. You should also show the Related Stories link:

    Indian Racism Against Afro Guyanese In Guyana


  4. Norman Faria should be put out of Barbados, and he can take Owen Arthur with him.


  5. Anonymous:
    “Norman Faria is lucky that he is in Barbados and has the freedom to make those remarks”

    “His support seems primarily to be in favour of those Guyanese of Indian descent,with some token gestures to afro Guyanese.”
    ………………………………………………………………..
    Please note that Mr. Faria is Barbadian born – one of his parents (like Rihanna), is Guyanese. He has been Honorary Consul since the Marxist- Leninist PPP (Indian) government took over Guyana in 1992.

    Hisi negative behavior towards some Guyanese of African descent, especially lawyers, like Samuel Legay is well documented and complaints have been made to the Foreign Ministry in Guyana, without any action being taken.

    Many feel that Mr. Faria is a disgrace as a representative for Guyanese here in Barbados. He is also despised by many in the Diplomatic Corps. Even the last government ignored him.

    The Police and Immigration authorities also consider him a difficult person to deal with. They prefer to deal with the Guyanese Association of Barbados (GABI), a reputable , non-political and cultural association , that is supportive of the laws of Barbados, and willing to help in solving some pf the pressing problems. Mr Faria has made vicious attacks on the Association public since he cannot control it.

    The racial divide in Guyana is quite obvious; the problems that Afro-Guyanese have with “marginalization” are real. Mr. Faria, like President Jagdeo and his cabal, refuses to admit that there is a problem re the marginalization of Afro-Guyanese. Many Afro-Guyanese may leave because they cannot stand the Indian racism there. Indo -Guyanese support the government and also leave – why do they not stay there and build the country if they so love Jagdeo? If Guyana was properly run and every person had a fair share the people would never leave in droves for other countries… People would be going there instead… That is what has to happen!

    Fix Guyana…… foster racial harmony and then there will be no insurrection force talking about revolution because of marginalization and killing innocent people to settle scores for Afro Guyanese being killed by “phantom” squads.

    Analyst


  6. David,

    Thank you for your introduction and for posting the letter. I hope it will lead to more reasonable discourse.


  7. For your information there has been a growing debate in Guyana regarding the issue of marginalization of Afro-Guyanese. … and its relation to the recent massacre of 11 Indo-Guyanese in Lusignan, which borders Buxton. The new words for the “criminals” is now “terrorists” or “revolutionaries”, with a cause, fighting to avenge the killings of some 400 black men by government backed “phantom squads”, over the last four years….

    The following article is one from a Roman Catholic Priest who is advocating support for:

    “Time to talk to the terrorists “-Father Rodrigues
    By Miranda La Rose – Stabroek News
    Monday, February 11th 2008

    http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56538823


  8. Norman Faria is a nuisance and has always been. Now that he is clothed in diplomatic robes his nonsense and nuisance value are coming more and more to the fore.
    Norman, you know that the Indo-Guyanese are the chief offenders in Bdos and across the caribbean.
    Somehow they are able to have access to doctored passports and now I understand doctored certificates.
    Norman your problem is in Guyana and its Officials not in Bdos and its Officials.
    OOPS, let me alter that. They are some officials in Bdos, especially the Immigration Dept who are not clean and who should be investigated and swept out of that sensitive department.
    Get real Norman and do not continue to adopt the attitude that Bajans are opposed to Guyanese. The Guyanese are their worst enemies. These are the ones that should be thrown out unceremoniously.


  9. Get real Norman and do not continue to adopt the attitude that Bajans are opposed to Guyanese. The Guyanese are their worst enemies. These are the ones that should be thrown out unceremoniously.

    I totally agree.Bajans need to stop bothering about unimportant things (like Rhianna’s clothes) and deal with serious issues like illegal immigration , crime and the high cost of living.


  10. “GUYANA “TERRORISTS”

    “You can get to the root causes through dialogue or continue to deal with symptoms”
    Saturday, February 16th 2008

    http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article_letters?id=56539185

    This letter was written by a South African, who spent three years in Guyana. He discusses Guyana’s situation and compares it to South Africa, Mali and Kenya, and the need for peaceful conflict resolution there.

    Analyst


  11. Mr. Faria please respond to the concern of bajans. HOW MANY ILLEGAL GUYANESE IN BIM?


  12. If I may quote Norman Faria:

    “Gibson’s thesis, as she outlined in her presentations on the programme, basically alleges that people of East Indian descent in Guyana, particularly now there is an “Indian” government as she contends, will mean trouble and oppression for Guyanese of African descent.”

    Let us examine the above and try to understand how it relates to Barbados.

    Guyana and Trinidad are different in many aspects but in others they are quite similar. One feature links them both their ethnic distribution.

    Trinidad: 39.6% African/Trinidadian, 40.3% East Indian.
    Guyana:43% African/Guyanese, 51% East Indian. (approx fig)

    What links them together was their previous need for “cheap labour” African slaves, and later Indian indentured labourers – an economic argument.

    We -Barbadians- are now being told that there is an “economic argument” to have “cheap labour” in Barbados supplied by Indo/Guyanese, and those of us who have advanced the view, that if those immigrants are “illegal” the Government should do something about it, are labelled racist.

    Guyana and Trinidad both show that in the long term there is a bitter harvest to be reaped by Barbadians who are black, that to my mind outweigh any short term “economic” benefits.

    We learn nothing if we do not learn from history.

    The simple fact is that, when the Indian population swells to an appreciable size where the native population if of African heritage and in a previous majority… there is conflict.

    Barbadians are in a position to do something about that, and they should not allow any “economic argument” however compelling for the short term, to dissuade them otherwise.

    The fragmentation and destruction of the social cohesion of a country, and what that entails, should not be allowed to happen without the views of its citizens being expressed.


  13. Norman Faria WAS NOT BORN IN Barbados.

    He in an interview stated that he came here as a young man and was allowed to attend secondary school here.


  14. Dear David,

    We disagree on many things, and sometimes we put that aggressively, but I think you have created something important with BU.

    Are you beginning to feel that your repeated blogs on racial issues is beginning to drag down the blog and make it dominated by invective, hate and prejudice?

    You cannot discourse with hate and prejudice. You can see that in the way people repeatedly make racist characterisations of Indians, and when described as racist which it surely is, they say that are only arguing against illegal immigrants – as if anybody is arguing in favour of them.

    As Brutus has pointed out, the problem with all this equating illegal immigrants with Indians is that when you look at an Indian in Barbados you do not know whether they are legal or illegal, you will often not know whether they are hindu, christian, catholic, or other.

    I wonder how many people on this blog who were excited by Gibson’s remarks have read the rebuttal you linked to? The enemy of racism is information. Caste for example, used by people to negatively characterise all Indians in Barbados is not a feature of the Indians in Barbados (they are Muslim, Catholic or non-caste Hindus).

    Those who do not wish to embrace arguments say that they will not be persuaded by economics because what may be good for the economy may be bad for social cohesion. This is the argument of those whose prejudices do not stack up with rational argument. A key factor in social cohesion is getting the economics right too. As Kenya has showed, where there is economic despair what appears to be social cohesion can quickly evaporate. And all these people trying to protect our social cohesion from a few immigrants do not ask whether it is this social cohesion that is holding back a greater distribution of wealth from whites to blacks?

    But my key point here is if your blog is dominated by hate and prejudice, those who wish to discourse and debate will increasingly leave, exponentially reducing the power of the network you have created.

    I wish you wise judgment.


  15. Yardbroom,

    Your normally well argued positions are being compromised by this last post.

    No sensible person on this thread is supporting “illegal” workers, and for you to raise straw men by stating such is disappointing, to say the least, to your admirers.


  16. Thomas Gresham thanks for your advice.

    We wish to assure the BU family that our priority interest has always been the open door policy which has been practiced by Barbados government in recent years. We have never discounted the argument that there is an economic argument to support immigration flows into Barbados. It is one reason we have highlighted the two sides of the concept which we are struggling to implement CSME in previous weeks.

    Barbadians have always been positioned as an intelligent people, well educated and all. We feel that the socio-economic argument must be factored when discussing the influx of immigrant labour to the shores of Barbados in an unplanned way.

    It must be discussed and managed.

    It will not happen in the fettered environment of the mainstream media.

    We are also somewhat concerned that a Doctor at our University of the West Indies would have published an academic work on this isssue which seems to have been disregarded in this debate. What is more startling is the lack of support Dr. Kean Gibson seems to be getting from her colleagues in the mainstream and social media.


  17. David,

    I have to admit it. This man Gresham makes me really SICK. What hate and prejudice is he talking about?

    He comes on here talking all sorts of illogical trash, intent only on justifying open borders to support his ‘Immigration is good’ nonsense.

    A long procession of posters demonstrate to him, endless examples of countries near and far where this is NOT true – especially as it relates to Indians and blacks in Caribbean countries….. and now he is accusing those who demonstrate his ignorance as being hateful?

    What hateful what?!?

    In todays news in Kosovo /Serbia attempts are being made to resolve long standing ethnic conflict by declaring independence. All over the world this is a recurring problem.
    Only a COMPLETE IDIOT does not see the challenges of creating such diverse cultures in a small community. We got rid of Owen…. Is Gresham now the lone ranger?

    Why does he not respond to Yardbroom’s trashing of his so called ‘economic argument’ that is supposed to justify this sort of immigration….

    Gresham, If you are writing this nonsense to show your Indian wife how much you love her, I forgive you… but if you’re serious I pity you.


  18. The People’s Democratic Congress (PDC) will strongly support at any point in time any Barbados Workers Union-led planned national protest action against either the Royal Shop, or Sandy Lane Hotel, or both, over the sacking of a number of their former workers, even though we believe that any such planned industrial action must be seen as an effective, proportionate, and short term response to the very intransigent and selfish behaviour of these two crass exploiters of so many of the masses and middle classes of people of Barbados.

    We in PDC have observed via the local media that, in regard of these two disputes, that in the negiotiations held so far to resolve them, and as between The BWU and The Royal Shop, and Sandy Lane Hotel, respectively, there has emerged a very rebarbative and gory picture of these two pathological blood suckers of some of the hardest working segments of people of Barbados, NOT willing to compromise and reach consensus on the BWU’s call for re-instatement of those former workers.

    Moreover, what has been very appalling is that in this so-called modern era in Barbados there are still these two anti-worker, anti-masses, anti-middle classes and anti-national development elitist corporates, which can be thinking that they can blatantly resort – in these two seperate incidents – to inflicting clumsy, heavy handed and possibly prejudice treatment upon some previously very underpaid and misused workers, and would be able still to get away with it, primarily because they have important GOVERNMENT AND BARBADOS CHAMBER AND COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY connections. These two and others like them believe that they can continue, very indefinitely, to mistreat and exploit the individual workforces that are so largely responsible for the surplus incomes they make on an annual basis. But, they are wrong indeed!! And, how these two foreigner-oriented, modern-day upgraded sweat shops, dare to think in those ways and maltreat the descendants of those who have fundamentally helped to build this country?? How dare them??

    Also, what is very henious and disconcerting about these two indignant situations is that these two joke companies, which primarily cater to tourists, have forced two respective groups of native workers to resort to old time 20th Century tactics of picketing and singing songs, staging strikes and withdrawing their labour – though they are the unionised workers rights under the relevant trade union related laws – just in order for them to appear to esp. many disinterested onlooking Barbadians, as being so powerless, so propertyless and so subservient as to be simply appearing to be begging to get back some jobs – and even in the case of the Royal Shop – jobs that have already been taken up by others, so that these wretched employers at the Royal Shop will be able to continue as uninterrupted as possible their crucifixion OF OUR WORKERS at the cross of the TOURIST DOLLAR. What a shameless, calamitous state of affairs!! What a naked brute situation!! It absolutely shows that BLP and DLP Governments and Trade Unions, since the last 30 or so years, have seriously failed to lead the way in really ushering in greater freedom and democracy, and progress and development for the country, with the broad but optimal goal of securing greater slices of social and political empowerment, enfranchisement and ownership rights and responsibilities to the broad masses and middle classes of people of Barbados, being central to such an important notion.

    We must clearly state this: had we formed the government of the country at the last Election, we would certainly already have been looking at initiating a national political legislative process of making PARTNERSHIPS THE ONLY NATIONAL MULTI-MEMBER CORPORATE BUSINESS ENTITIES POSSIBLE IN THIS COUNTRY. Hence, under this sytem there no longer being STATE/PRIVATE/PUBLIC COMPANIES OR CORPORATIONS EXISTING, BUT ONLY PARTNERSHIPS BEING ESTABLISHED AND MAINTAINED as representative of a new historical and cultural epoch in the making in Barbados. Such partnerships having to be instituted to make sure that PRESENT-DAY WORKERS, like those at the Royal Shop and Sandy Lane and the Labour Department, become PARTNERS/PART-OWNERS of the enterprises that they would ordinarily now be a part of; that there would no longer be in existence an old and decrepit culture of wages being paid to WORKERS, BUT an incipient modernist culture whereby such PARTNERS/PART-OWNERS would be being remunerated in PROFITS EVERY MONTH, OR AT WHATEVER TIME AGREED UPON BY INDIVIDUAL PARTNERSHIPS; and that there would NO longer be a structure and culture whereby persons as workers are presently peripheral to the main decisional making processes of these particular present-day COMPANIES or CORPORATIONS, BUT that there will be an evolved structure and culture IN PARTNERSHIP ENTERPRISES that will allow persons as in ALL PARTNERS/PART-OWNERS to be very central to such processes, esp in regard of having a say as to who would become PARTNERS or not of these INDIVIDUAL PARTNERSHIPS; and, yes, ALL the aforegoing and more initiatives under the legislation that would have to be enacted by a PDC Government to give rise to such PARTNERSHIPS.

    In the meantime, though, we urge many, many Barbadians to properly and unreservedly support any planned national protest action on the behalf of those of our brothers and sisters who were once at these inhuman establishments, and that would be directed towards these establishments themselves.

    PDC


  19. David this Thomas G person is yet another latter day saint, who have not created anything but comea acalling with advice on what you should or should not be doing with this blog. Please ignore him. His approach is very similar to someone on the BarbadosForum who goes by the name GoldenBoy. At last there is nothing there. If you want your blog to be reduce to a trickle then take his advice. You can read the many comments of this person over at Barbados Forum and see the similarities.


  20. The reason why Gibson’s work is not getting support in academic circles is that respectable academics in the field know that she is peddling falsehoods designed to incite racial hatred.

    These false hoods are fairly well exposed in the rebuttals to Gibson’s work. You have a link to one of those rebuttals on this site. I hope people who have read Gibson should read that as well.

    To say that the economics arguments for immigration have been thrashed suggests you know no economics while you propose ideas with serious economic consequences. This is not wise.


  21. David

    When I read that old letter by Norman Faria,I knew then, that even though your intention might have been to create balance by portraying the other viewpoint,that other persons with their open agendas (no longer hidden,at least to my eye – see Gresham et al) will use the content of faria’s letter as though it was the Gospel and represented the unvarnished truth.

    So many holes could be put into that letter,but I would not waste too much of my time on him.

    What Faria was writing there was a pile of jobby.Plain and simple.

    As stated above,any bajan who dares to raise the question of too much guyanese in this country,or the criminal activities of guyanese,or that they are driving down wages and creating havoc on the social services has been accused by Faria of inciting and strirring up racial hatred against the guyanese people .

    But you know what? – he damn right – to push that ‘in yuh face’ attitude to bajans.

    Everybody seems to want to take a hands- off approach to norman faria,and just like the British behave – to try to be politically correct in these matters.

    But guess what that ain’t wukkin’ for the Bristish,and it ain’t goin’ wuk here neither.

    It is time that the Commissioner of police,the head of Immigration either start publicly stating the problems they have with guyanese and other illegals,and the problems they anticipate if it continues.

    It is also time that the moderators on call- in programmes and their producers allow a free discussion by bajans on how they feel about the presence of these people in their country,and stop trying trying to stifle public debate – or interrogate the callers like Tony and Don marshall and others do,or trying to manipulate the callers to not criticise these illegals and like David Ellis – try to push his ‘suposedly ‘ balance spin’.

    Why is it that Basdeo Jagdeo of Guyana never criticise Antigua, or Trinidad or Dutch St Martin for their harsh stance against the said guyanese?

    Why have they only targeted Barbados?

    Well because we had an idiot in owen arthur as prime minister who for whatever reasons wanted to to continue to flood his country with these people,and even publicly admitted using illegal guyanese to work on his home – yet he was never sanctioned for it.

    These are serious times and serious times calls for serious action by serious people.

    Over to you Prime minister Thompson.


  22. Thomas Gresham we don’t want to engage you in any theoretical or ‘book’ debate because frankly we don’t think that we are ‘qualified’ or competent so to do, neither do we think it relevant to the argument. Your constant harping about the economic benefit of immigration has been nulled when trying to establish relevance. Several commenters have tried their damnest to get the alternative arguments over to you.

    In further support of the other argument we want to acquaint you with the following, and we have to admit that you made us go to our bookshelf this morning:

    A challenge for economists and persons involved in economic planning is to anticipate on the optimum level of financial and non financial costs to the society with any policy measures which they roll-out. It is what they refer to as trying to create social efficiency, a kind of a cost benefit analysis if you will but having to inject a social variable in the equation

    We will quote from John Sloman to define the definition of Social Efficiency:

    If the marginal benefits to society of producing any given service /good exceed the marginal costs then it is said to be socially inefficient to produce more. This is BU example here: If the social costs of importing labour both illegal or illegal, Indian or Black is determined to exceed the financial benefits down the road then it is deemed to be socially inefficient.


  23. I was fortunate while studying at the University Of Toronto to have met one of the most intellectual and powerful Caribbean men. This Professor is Dr. Arnold Itwaru, Dr. Itwaru is of Guyanese heritage but instilled in his students of Caribbean Studies the power of self love as a Caribbean people.

    It is deplorable when we witness the debate that is taking place on Indo Guyanese and the onslaught of abuse of them. Why are you allowing your fellow Caribbean brothers and sisters to enter Barbados in order to be abused? Where is the self-love for our own? how will the Euro-Americans, Euro-Canadians and Europeans look at this budding social catastrophe under the guise of racism?

    It is time the Caribbean governments come together and assist Indo-Guyanese to live comfortably in their resourceful country. Please remember quite like Caribbean blacks, Indo Guyanese were transported as indentured servants by the same agents of hate that transported blacks from Africa. Thus it is imperative for us to be supportive at this time instead of being so hateful. Life might not always be that glamourous for those self righteous bajans whose wealth has gone to their heads.


  24. I am willing to support action by the Government (Any government) to rid barbados of these illegal Guyanese and illegal immigrants of other nationalities. It can’t happen in a vacuum i know, but Barbados needs time to develop its people and the country for itself first before it becomes an open sepulka. It should never be an open sepulka actually. I see barbados as a pond or lake with its own ecosystem. We have just introduced the snakehead fish (guyanese). Trust me, the analogy is sound if you research snakehead fish.

    My analogy may sound racist to some people out there and maybe it is. I am man enough to admit that. In no way does that diminish the point being made. Guyanese should stay in guyana and fix Guyana. Honestly though its not their fault, people will exploit what is there to be exploited, not just Guyanese. The problem lies with there being no immigration plan, no policy (that i know of) no nothing. You just do what you want in this country. The political system stinks in this island and the politicians are a product of that. This country is one large plantation.

    The citizens are socialised to be like zombies. Would sooner kill you for stepping on their shoe than stand up and seriously fight this present plague that will reduce this country to a slum. One person told me that Barbadians are too slow and small minded and we need more people in the country so we would stop from f**in each other, new blood she said. I totally get her point, i totally do, her child’s father is Indian and she employs about 3 guyanese house keepers probably for next to nothing. Another guy this time told me he renting his house for 1500 a month but he thinking of renting it out room by room to guyanese and he could get 3000 a month.

    Security! Can you please stop that person that’s about to type “Barbadians go to other countries to make a better living?” Security!!!

    Thank you Mr Owen Arthur for your utterly misguided policies and flagrantly selfish attempts to develop a legacy for yourself in the history of Barbados. You will be long dead and gone when the shit hits the fan. Your children will be well provided for financially and will live on compounds with high fences and armed guards. Marvellous innings mate! Meanwhile, the rest of this country will be turned into a shantytown and the future inhabitants will not look like you or me.

    It’s a rant I know.


  25. A couple years ago in Barbados an illegal Guyanese worker lost both arms in an accident that occurred on a work site belonging to Mrs Ram. Mr.Bosemple was hospitalize at our QEH, he had no insurance did not pay into NIS and therefore became a ward of the state, meaning that he was until then nothing more than a profit center for his bajan employers, and became a burden to taxpayers as a result of his injuries. This is one way that illegal immigrants become a burden. The other is in an economic downturn.

    ….David here is a book that will solidify what we are seeing on the ground and that economist never sees and or takes into account. Remember it is widely accepted that economist do not concern themselves with price increases as they set about to measure inflation, again this is something that we have seen in Barbados. But here goes Thomas Gresham who seems to be in theoretical purgatory with regards to illegal immigration and who seeks to ignore the reality of everyday living that boldly confronts his opinions.

    The Dismal Science
    —–How Thinking Like an Economist Undermines Community —–
    Stephen A. Marglin
    Economists celebrate the market as a device for regulating human interaction without acknowledging that their enthusiasm depends on a set of half-truths: that individuals are autonomous, self-interested, and rational calculators with unlimited wants and that the only

    The High Cost of Cheap Labor
    Illegal Immigration and the Federal Budget
    August 2004

    By Steven A. Camarota


  26. I have always advocated a peaceful Barbados, where whites, blacks and indians can live together in peace and harmony, and will continue to do so.

    What I have simply said from the beginning of this debate, is that some “illegal” Indo/Guyanese appear to be causing problems and those issues should be addressed. Others said that is racist, why I know not. I can only assume they thought that accusation would garner support and silence me.

    It would appear that the black majority population in Barbados, is not expected to speak about reasonable concerns, and people would say how nice we are. I have simply pointed out, the long term dangers in that attitude.

    What has happened over many years is that “some” people do not expect blacks to express a position on anything of importance, we should always be “participant observers” to our fate…that is not good enough.

    To be honest, the stability of Barbados is based on a multitude of factors but there is one important element which makes the difference between Trinidad, Guyana and Barbados.

    Barbados never had Indian indentured labourers of any size, it is true there were indentured labourers from an earlier period but they were not Indian, it is that one single factor despite other problems – and they have been and are some – which has meant Barbados has had some degree of social cohesion.

    To not understand that, is not to understand the history of our close neighbours and how that factor “influences” our thinking.


  27. Thomas Gresham // February 14, 2008 at 8:46 pm
    According to David: “As we have stated in previous articles many of these UNDOCUMENTED Indians are unskilled and add little value to the GDP of Barbados.”
    David, If you were one of my students in my academic past I would have to flunk you for being continuously uninformed about a subject you continuously write about. There is countless research to indicate that unskilled workers, by doing the jobs that others do not wish to do, at wages that locals would not work for, adds substantially to the real GDP, if not the measured GDP. Its what built America and Canada. The West Indians who went to the UK in the 1950s and 1960s to support economic growth were not doctors and lawyers, they went to operate the buses and tube.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    In the 1950’s and 60’s the economies of these same countries where vastly different than what they are now. In the case of America Michael Camarota of CIS (Center for Immigration Studies) states that many native-born Americans observe that their ancestors came to America and did not place great demands on government services. Perhaps this is true, but the size and scope of government were dramatically smaller during the last great wave of immigration. Not just means-tested programs, but expenditures on everything from public schools to roads were only a fraction of what they are today. Thus, the arrival of unskilled immigrants in the past did not have the negative fiscal implications that it does today. Moreover, the American economy has changed profoundly since the last
    great wave of immigration, with education now the key determinant of economic success. The costs that unskilled immigrants impose simply reflect the nature of the modern American economy and welfare state. It is doubtful that the fiscal costs can be avoided if our immigration policies remain unchanged.


  28. The reason why we have immigrants here is that the demand for employment is higher than can be met locally. By meeting this demand they lower our inflation rate from what it would otherwise be. If there were no immigrants, inflation would have to rise to crowd out the demand.

    ==============================

    This is all theory, but when place againt the global activities of 2001 (911) and the GoB response to the economic fallout, this theory cannot explain what occurred in Barbados.

    ….The national concern about illegal immigration in particular such immigrants from Guyana started in ernest around 2002. In september 2001 the world witness the terrorist bombing in NewYork which led to economic shock around the world. The GoB sought to cushioned the impact sure to result from tourism fall of by pumping money into the economy by starting a massive capital works program. This has the effect of materializing significant activity in the contruction sector. As a result and to head off a shortage of labour which would have resulted in a demand for higher wages, cheap labour was sought and initially brought from Guyana. This fact is contained in the public report of the IMF consultation with GoB 2002. The importation of cheap labour had the intended effect of moderating wages downward. These are the facts, actual occurances that your theory, books and author could not have known about. Now please try to remember that the concerns here are with illegal immigration, and unskilled immigration.


  29. Dear David,

    There is much empirical work done on the social and economic costs of immigration. It is a well traversed area in economics. The majority of economists have concluded that immigration brings substiantial economic and social benefits.

    The height of our profession is the Nobel Prize. To win it your work needs to be some of the most cited, tested and proven. You will not find an Economics Noberl Laureate arguing against our consensus opinion that immigration brings net economic and social benefit. Indeed, the most recent economist specialising in immigration and labour economics, Gary S. Becker, is a strong proponement of the social and economic benefits of immigration, espeically the unskilled immigrants. His work is on the web. I have already cited Legrain’s study of immigration wirtten for non-economists (his recent book is called “Immigrants”).

    To illustrate the connection between social cohesion and the economics of immigration let me set out an extreme position of where we “rid Barbados of all Indians or Indo Guyanese” as some of your bloggers would appear to like, even though many Indians and Indo Guyanese are here legally.

    Less immigrants means higher inflation and lower growth. The economic case for this has been proved several times over. Please see Gary Becker’s work and the work of other eminent labour economists like This will reduce the purchasing power of wages and so it will further encourage our ablest and brightest to look for jobs abroad like our doctors and scientists. We will be increasingly left with the young and old who do not work and pay taxes and so the government will have less revenues for public services which will deteriorate. Does that promote social cohesion? No. Does that help to shake up the economic structure of Barbados which continues to favour the old plantocracy?

    I have always said that we need to get the right balance and on one side of that balance are cultural issues and on the other are economic issues of costs, growth, efficiency and “shake up”. A cautious approach would be to tighten up on illegal immigration and allow new work permits representing 1.5-2% of our labour supply per year, and to put a cap on long-term work permits of 10-15% of our workforce, but to ensure that there are opportunities for unskilled workers to get them – like the lottery system used by the US.

    David, you keep calling for a rational debate on how best to manage immigration. Yet whenever I have offered suggestions on how to do so, by weighing up the issues in setting limits, the only response from others on the blog are racist comments on ridding Barbados of Indo Guyanese.

    When I think about our history and culture and how much we have suffered at the hands of imperialists who used racist views to justify their actions and who today still cast influence on our economies, I am staggered that there could be so many Barbadians who are content to hold racist views (derogatory characterisations of a race) about fellow travellers.

    I have said my bet and this discussion is not progressing so I am going to leave it there.

    David, what about a thread on Sandy Lane/Royal Shop/BWU. Where do you think the Minister of Labour or PM is on these issues – lets hope they are negotiating behind the scenes, this looks serious for labour relations as well as for our toursim industry. it doesnt take much to tar our reputation.

    David, what about a thread on Sandy Lane/Royal Shop/BWU. Where do you think the Minister of Labour or PM is on these issues – lets hope they are negotiating behind the scenes, this looks serious for labour relations as well as for our toursim industry. it doesnt take much to tar our reputation.

    Thomas Gresham we refer you to a sister blog http://barbadosfreepress.wordpress.com to see coverage on what you ask.


  30. Thomas Gresham has been taking many of these blogs promoting his idea of open borders to create efficiencies in labour. he refuses to accept the “REALITIES” that are so obvious to others on the ground. I suggest that he be ignored as he could easily derail the main arguments of the subjects being discussed.

    Mr. Gresham is an intelligent person, but being in retirement from his cushy job in a wasteful and useless organization like most UN and aid organizations- writing useless reports and studies and earning big bucks – he has never experienced what it is like at the worker level competing with illegal immigrants for wages, housing etc. May he spend the rest of his life in comfortable retirement talking about the useless reports he has written over the years. We should not be distracted!

    The reality is that in East Africa, Fiji, Guyana and Trinidad there is documented truth that Indians were imported as “indentured labourers” to cut the bargaining power of freed slaves after 1840; or to compete with indigenous people (Fiji, East Africa- Uganda).

    The competition between the Indians and non-Indians in these territories may have brought economic benefits to the colonialists. They however have left scars from conflicts have have been festering for over 100 years. Now that the Indians have multiplied in Guyana, Trinidad and Fiji, for instance, and are now a political majority they have now asserted themselves as rulers over the non-Indians, with potentially violent results.

    Today, the competition of the Indians in For Barbados is just a repeat of the wage competition their forefathers gave to the ex-slaves settled in villages like Buxton, who competed against low wages in the nearby estates like Lusignan. The conflicts of 100 years lives on and is reflected in Guyana politics today…. in the massacres and violence.

    Many ask – Why can we all live in peace and harmony.?.. good question! Well go and live in Guyana and study what the government is doing on a day to day basis and you will understand. Read the Trinidad blogs after the Indians lost the elections due to the split Indian vote and you will understand the underlying racism and superiority they project against non-Indians. Study the history of Fiji and you will understand.

    It is truly unfortunate that Indians are so engrossed in Mother India and their lost Indian cultures and Bollywood fairy tale India and the potential of India as a world power, that they never become truly Guyanese, Trinidadians or Barbadians. They just take what they want – money and profits for their trinkets – and live their separate lives. That is until they become the majority, as in Guyana – then you know what their money and power brings… the gradual marginalization of non-Indians. Trinidad will have to deal with this reality within the next 10 years and it will not be without violence.

    It is difficult to talk about this subject without being sometimes labeled racist. However, being a realist helps ensures that you are not a fool.

    Analyst


  31. David how many times had you to tell Thomas G that the argument is not about Immigration but about illegal immigration and the immigration of a people who by the many undisputed demonstrated practices in their native society seem incapable of rising above racial divisiveness. What make Thomas G think that they will put off their cultural practices at the port of entry to Barbados? what are the guarantees that any assimilation will take place to negate what is the norm in Guyana from visiting Barbados via the practices of illegal immigration?

    …..In spite of the noble prize winning Theorist, studies have been done at the federal level in the US that clearly shows the cost and deficit to the economy of illegal immigration. Illegal immigration has social and economic implications for Barbados whose society and economy has undergone significant changes that allows of welfare and other social programs that can be access by illegal immigrants and thereby resulting in a cost above and beyond what little they contribute. Thinking like an economist as the book says has led us into this spiral of belief that say we have to be continually expanding, and that’s why they would argue in favour of open immigration. The implications for community has never been their concern.


  32. Center for Immigration Studies
    11
    Introduction
    As illegal immigration has increased dramatically over the last two decades, so has concern
    about its impact on American taxpayers. While other consequences are clearly important,
    the fiscal impact of illegal immigration is at the center of the ongoing debate. Surprisingly,
    few studies have attempted to measure the total fiscal effect of illegal immigration on the
    United States. Several studies have focused on all immigrants, making no distinction by
    legal status, and other researchers have examined either the costs imposed by illegals or the
    tax payments they make, but not both together. Most of this work has focused on the state
    and local level, giving little or no attention to the federal government. Focusing on the
    federal government, this study attempts to answer two related questions: First, what effect
    do illegal aliens have on the fiscal balance (all taxes paid minus all services used)? Second,
    what would happen to the fiscal balance if illegal aliens were legalized?
    Why Study the Fiscal Impact of Illegals?
    Concern over illegal immigration ranges from national security and the rule of law to the
    risk would-be illegals take to enter the country and their well-being once here. But the
    fiscal effects are a key part of the issue. In fact, much of the public’s anger over illegal
    immigration stems from the belief that illegals are a drain on taxpayers. Past policy responses
    to illegal aliens, such as barring them from welfare programs, were also driven by
    the desire to minimize fiscal costs. Thus, determining the actual fiscal impact of illegal
    immigration is critically important to formulating a policy response to illegal immigration.
    The Fiscal Equation. Simply by living in the United States, illegals unavoidably impose
    some costs on government. Like all people, illegal aliens enroll their children in public
    schools, drive on the roads, and engage in a host of other activities that necessarily cost
    government money. They also unavoidably pay taxes. Even when they are paid “off the
    books,” they still pay excise and other types of taxes to the government. So the fact that
    illegal aliens cost public coffers money does not necessarily mean they are a net drain.
    Conversely, the fact that illegals pay taxes does not necessarily mean that they are a fiscal
    benefit. At least with regard to fiscal considerations, the key question is the balance between
    the taxes they pay and the services they use. This study attempts to estimate both
    their tax payments and costs in order to determine their net fiscal impact at the federal
    level.
    Importance of Current Fiscal Impact. Almost all observers agree that illegal immigration is
    a problem. The fiscal impact of illegal immigration has enormous bearings on the question
    of what to do about illegal immigration. While employers may want access to immigrant
    labor, the fiscal costs to taxpayers must be considered. Understandably, employers can be
    counted on to ignore these costs because they are diffuse, borne by all taxpayers, while the
    benefit to businesses is obvious. Policy makers, however, must be sensitive to fiscal considerations.
    If there are net costs, then this could have a significant impact on the availability
    of public services or the tax burden on Americans. If the costs are very large, then the
    problem is certainly more urgent. And devoting significant resources to reducing illegal
    immigration may be justified because doing so would leave taxpayers with a significant net
    savings. On the other hand, if illegals impose little or no costs on taxpayers, this too should
    play some role in shaping policy.
    Legalizing Illegals. Many politicians have indicated their strong desire to give illegal aliens


  33. David seem to be encouraging Gresham and his misrepresentations – by constantly appealing to that missing ingredient – common sense and honesty in analysis.

    Many commenters have asked David and other bloggers to ignore the rubbish Gresham writes,yet David keeps explaining and appealing to him that he is concerned about the social and economic impacts of these unwanted illegals.

    You think Gresham cares,as long as he is given leeway to keep on repeating his mantra and David/BU and others keep responding to it,then he is happy,and the discussion gets skewed.

    Ah well.


  34. […] Norman Faria (Guyana’s Honorary Consul) Responds To Indo-Guyanese Debate [image]At the risk of being subjected to the abuse of being called racist we have decided to continue with our analysis […] […]


  35. The Caribbean and the Singapore Crime Model

    Selwyn Ryan

    Sunday, February 17th 2008

    The issue is crime, stupid! That is the refrain one hears most frequently in Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica and the Bahamas. More than ever, crime seems to be overwhelming Caribbean societies. The Economist of February 2 in fact describes the Caribbean, with some exaggeration, as”the world’s most violent region” No government seems to have a clue as to what to do about the phenomenon. I dare say, no opposition party has an answer either, their claims to the contrary notwithstanding. Most seek to play politics with the issue, using it as a wedge to propel themselves into power

    Recent events in Guyana are especially worrying for the region as a whole, especially since they have already had a mirror effect in Laventille, and may do so in other parts of the Caribbean. What we have heard in respect of Guyana is that a gang of some 20 heavily armed escapees from prison shot up a police station and a number of homes which were reportedly inhabited by persons who had assisted the police. When the smoke lifted in the mainly Indo-Guyanese village of Lusignan, eleven persons were killed, five of whom were children. Three other persons were wounded. The gang was also said to have been responsible for killing the Minister of Agriculture in 2006.

    An outraged President Jagdeo described the gang as “sick and demented criminals who had to be hunted down”. Jagdeo was savaged by an outraged citizenry, including members of his own party, for not doing nearly enough to deal with the outlaw element. The leader of the PNP, Mr Robert Corbin, was equally enraged. “We see such killings as horrible and senseless; they have no place in our society”. Corbin chastised the Guyana President for his Government’s failure in the area of security. As he complained, “the Guyanese people are reaping a bitter harvest from the incompetence, neglect, mal-administration and poor governance of the Jagdeo/PPP/C regime.”

    Corbin also accused the Guyana President of rashly and unfairly blaming residents of the Afro-Guyanese village of Buxton-Friendship for supporting and sheltering the criminals.

    What began as a heinous crime, has in fact now become an ethnic issue in which Afro-Guyanese villagers and their defenders were being pitted against Indo-Guyanese villagers, their co-ethnics, and the Government. If the matter is not delicately handled, Guyana could again become the tinder box of the Caribbean.

    What is also becoming evident in Guyana and the Caribbean generally, is that a besieged citizenry has grown impatient with the police, and is calling on authorities to use unorthodox and extra-judicial measures to search for and destroy the criminals. They do not want to be told that the problem is a worldwide one that will take time and a great deal of resources to fix “holistically,” all of which is of course true. They want action now. The complaint is that democratic policing strategies are not working.

    There is however a stubborn minority which insists that authoritarian solutions could become transformed into monstrosities which would in time constitute a greater danger to the society as has already happened in Guyana, and which has become the norm in Latin America. The fear is that the police could become the problem rather than the hoped-for solution.

    Some who support alternative strategies of policing have been looking at the Singapore model. Singapore’s low crime rate is attributed to its elaborate system of citizen surveillance, a strong police force, and a very punitive justice system. All Singaporeans have to be registered and fingerprinted and must also carry identification cards. There is also a dense network of citizen committees which monitor the movement of individuals.

    The Internal Security Act also gives police the authority to detain suspects without trial. Judges are also kept on a tight leash and some have been fired. Appeals to the Privy Council have also been discontinued.

    Political dissent and other forms of social deviance have likewise been criminalised and Singaporeans have to be careful what they communicate via the internet. Many in fact censor themselves for fear that they might be caught in the electronic dragnet that they know exists.

    In sum, the price that Singapore has had to pay for its low incidence of crime is that it has become a veritable garrison state.

    One study of the Singaporean model (Race and State in Independent Singapore), authored by John Clammer, in fact had the following to say. “The Singapore experience demonstrates that economic development does not abolish crime. What it does is displace it. While street crime is very low, white collar crime is on the increase Singapore, [a society of fear], perhaps exists as a warning that crime can indeed be minimized, but at the cost of excessive control and the suppression of non-criminal deviance Singapore has in a sense institutionalized the whole population, if not in a prison, then certainly in a gigantic school ”

    The Minister of National Security, Mr Martin Joseph, has observed that the “challenge we face is that we do not want to create any kind of garrison community.” One suspects that he is correct in his belief that Trinidadians, being who they are culturally and historically, would not be willing to give up their cherished “freedoms”, even if that is what is required to save the society from becoming virtually “imprisoned” by the criminal element, which we are told is expanding its operations from Laventille to other parts of the island as the heat is applied to that enclave. The issue however has to be put on the table for democratic discussion since choices have to be made.


  36. Another massacre in Guyana:

    Gunmen murder 12 at Bartica
    Large gang came by river, attacked police station, fired wildly, three cops among dead

    By Nigel Williams and Miranda La Rose
    Monday, February 18th 2008 – Stabreek News. Guyana

    http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article_general_news?id=56539330

    Analyst


  37. Gunmen kill 12 and many more injured in the lastest massacre in Guyana. I think we need to revert back to a British colony. Well some folks are saying bring back the British.


  38. It astounds me that Bajans are as zenophobic as this Guyanese debate continues to illustrate…Ask Sir Hilary Beckles about how Guyana took in Bajans in the thousands not too long ago – in our time of need. Also – the racial tension being raised only speaks to the simmering ethnic tension in our own post-colonial society – with or without Indo-Guyanese. In this world of global culture and disappearing state lines, divisions within a small island (and within a small region) are entirely pointless. Let’s heal and move forward as one people – West Indians.


  39. Ask Sir Hilary Beckles about how Guyana took in Bajans in the thousands not too long ago – in our time of need.
    ………………………………………………………..
    Not so long ago? Please inform us when, who,where, how this migration to Guyana took place Freebajan. Hilary Beckles credibility is at same level as Clyde Mascoll and George Belle. I need evidence to believe anything Beckles say.
    Bottom line is Thompson and gob has to manage our immigration situation. Owen Arthur and Norman Faria used the ‘thousands not so long ago’ to intimidate Bajans in their own country. I dont hate Guyanese but our police are picking up illegal Guyanese here who are wanted for murder back in Guyana. We are playing a dangerous game. Our beloved pecaeful island can easily descend into a Trinidad or Guyana if we are not vigilant and control our borders.
    Illegals must leave. The legal ones can remain. Its simple. Are you following the massacres taking place in Guyana so called FreeBajan?


  40. FreeBajan // February 18, 2008 at 8:27 am

    It astounds me that Bajans are as zenophobic as this Guyanese debate continues to illustrate…Ask Sir Hilary Beckles about how Guyana took in Bajans in the thousands not too long ago – in our time of need. Also – the racial tension being raised only speaks to the simmering ethnic tension in our own post-colonial society – with or without Indo-Guyanese. In this world of global culture and disappearing state lines, divisions within a small island (and within a small region) are entirely pointless. Let’s heal and move forward as one people – West Indians.
    ==============================

    This is a distortion of historical events. Barbadians are joined by many other societies around the world whose leaders and economic theorist have unleashed the theory of open borders as an economic tool to further expand economies. This label of being xenophobic is wishy washy designed to silence legitimate opposition as part of an organize attack to desensitize, Jam, and convert opposition to open borders. Not that you are responsible for this approach as it is most likely that you are just regurgitating what sounds good and is emotionaly acceptable to you.

    I listen to Hillary Beckles last night in TV and while his presentation shed a new understanding of people changing identities over long periods of time,….an example would be that slaves would have seen themselves as mandingo, yoruba etc, and after a period in the west Indies their decendants would then view themselves as creoles, and their decendents would then take on the identity of Barbadian, Jamaican etc…. This is a clear and precise historical interpretation of the African in the caribbean over a period of time. I was hoping for a similar synopsis of the Indian in Trinidad and Guyana. I would argue that these people for the most part continue to see themselves as Indian first and that the transformation that is so clearly delineated in the decendentcy of the African in the caribbean is not to be found in the Indian in the caribbean. This brings me back to what is to be found in Guyana and Trinidad, the racial divide that many of those who are quick to label Barbadians as xenophobic are not in the least bit addressing. It cannot be denied that the Indian in Guyana and Trinidad have for sometime exercise racial attitudes towards their afro neighbour,….the prodominantly black population in Barbados witnessing these things and as a result voices concern that these people are allowed into our space is now to be concidered as being xenophobic demonstrates to me a recklessness on the part of those who so do. It cannot be denied that Barbadians have not being so animated and united against the presense of St.Lucians, Vicentians, Jamaicans and other world citizens in Barbados as they are against the Indo guyanese why is this? why is there this unwillingness to look at the cultural practices of the Indo-guyanese to see if the answer can be found there? Is it because there is no willingness to find the correct answer?


  41. Barbados will never become like Guyana. Look the people want to come to Barbados and I say allow them in. Just this morning the white appearing foreign minster of Guyana appeared on the news saying that you all not acting appropriately regarding the free movement of skills and that Guyana is not backing down in regard to Barbados’ behavour regarding this matter.


  42. What race is Norman Faria? Enquiring Guyanese wants to know. Is he English and who is he married to? If he loves Guyana so much why is he Barbados. He should be in Guyana/


  43. Maybe we should partition Guyana. The Indians can have Berbice, which is near Suriname, and we in Essequibo and Demerara. Our capital would be Georgetown and their New Amsterdam.


  44. FreeBajan // February 18, 2008 at 8:27 am

    In this world of global culture and disappearing state lines, divisions within a small island (and within a small region) are entirely pointless. Let’s heal and move forward as one people – West Indians.

    ==============================

    How do you become “ALL” west Indians. IF it is accepted that the English speaking Afro Caribbean person has transcended his African identity (Mandingo, Yoruba etc) to become creoles and now Barbadian, Jamaican, etc with the next logical step of becoming West Indian, can we say the English speaking In-do-Caribbean person has so done? I don’t think so. I have no interest in forming alliances or forging new identities with unwilling partners.


  45. Sister Baby // February 18, 2008 at 9:49 am

    Maybe we should partition Guyana. The Indians can have Berbice, which is near Suriname, and we in Essequibo and Demerara. Our capital would be Georgetown and their New Amsterdam.
    ==============================

    Can’t happened you cannot make changes to the landscape to give to the indo and afro Guanese what Suriname and Venezuela still maintain claims too. I maintain that Guyana is a failed state and that the only thing that has any chance of reuniting it’s people is a direct and imminent military threat from either of it’s nieghbours.


  46. Well, General Chavez next door just waiting to pounce pun we, well as for Suriname they are like we, hand to mouth, so we don’t expect anything form them


  47. Anonymous // February 18, 2008 at 10:24 am

    Well, General Chavez next door just waiting to pounce pun we, well as for Suriname they are like we, hand to mouth, so we don’t expect anything form them
    ==============================

    Don’t be so sure of Suriname’s unwillingness to invade Guyana, in fact it is more likely to be initiated by the economically weaker of the two neighbours. The economics of never ending expansion is followed by Suriname too, and what is a quicker way to derive economic benefit than plundering the land and resource of a foreign people? Guyan has shown no interest in the vast interior of their country prefering to settle if not huddle on the cost line, the potential for oil, and other minerals is huge. If we believe that the US invaded Iraq for oil, don’t you think that Suriname can bolster their historic claim with such thinking at this time?


  48. Thanks for all the responses.

    I just feel, and thats what all these posts are – just feelings, that the Guyanese are our neighbours and close historical cousins. I agree that in an island as small as Barbados we need checks that will put a halt to illegal migration.

    However, the argument seems to be a scaremongering operation, for us to be wary of a particular racial set. I do not accept this!

    Steady on Adrian Hinds – regurgitating what feels good? I suspect its what we all do – unless you were born educated and opinionated?

    I know that many Barbadians have family trees that lead back to Guyana – that is evidence surely of our cultural connection.

    In the UK, it is only the National Front who terms xenophobia as “wishy washy”. It means what it says – and very much revolves around fear.

    What about the wonderful work done by skilled Guyanese (Indo and otherwise) in our fair land? They have improved the quality of food by a mile if you ask me!

    I’m a regionalist – what is the point of this CSME initiative, if we’re suspicious and fearful of eachother?! We were so disappointed in the Jamaicans for jumping ship from the Federation for fear of weaker nations pulling them down – yet we seem to be creating barriers between us and our “failed state” of a neighbour. It probably speaks to why we have not properly exploited the connection to our benefit – Guyana could be our bread basket now that we can’t afford to feed ourselves.

    I thought that Barbados was “friend to all and satellite of none”?


  49. I bet that the people who killed those 12 people in Guyana will be in Barbados chilling out by this evening.


  50. FreeBajan…you have my support. Racism is racism where-ever and however it tries to present a different face.If there is a problem with illegal immigration, then the Gov,t must deal with it ,as with criminal activity.
    Many of the Afro-guyanese I have met, claim Bajan roots so there must have been B,dos-to-Guyana immigration.
    Also, just because someone has a doctorate does not mean that that individual is always basing his or her opinions on factual evidence.
    I certainly hope that Barbadians would examine all the facts (not assumptions) and base their ideas and decisions on evidence.

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading