Partisan take

PNC apologetics
We know that Lurlene Nestor is fighting desperately to get back into the good graces of some godfather in the PNC, for a possible return to parliament. That in itself is a sad indictment of a party that was built by its strong cadre of women starting with Winifred Gaskin and Jane Phillips-Gay.
Be as it may, Nestor fired off her latest missive in which she tried valiantly to straddle two horses named PNC and APNU. The caption says it all: ‘The PNCR remains the most progressive political party in current day Guyana.’ But even in this sycophancy Nestor makes a Freudian slip: the initials of the most ‘progressive political party’ works out to be ‘PPP’!! Ah… truth will always out! Anyhow as we said we don’t have any beef with Nestor’s partisanship. A girl has to do what a girl has to do.
But her paean to the PNC needs a bit of a corrective, don’t you think? Nestor begins: ‘It is pellucid that activities of the PNC have always attracted much public attention and opinion from the wider Guyanese society and further afield.’ You bet your booty it did!!! What with its seizure of power with the Americans, its rigging to hold on to power, its ‘paramountcy’ and its murder of Rodney – just to scratch the surface – the ‘attention and activities’ were not the problem – it’s the type of ‘attention and activities’.
And if we were Nestor, we wouldn’t want to flaunt it! She then goes on: ‘During the early years of his leadership, the PNC’s Founder Leader L F S Burnham, having assessed the local political and social realities of Guyana, recognised the need for a government of national unity.’ Early years? National unity? Is Nestor smoking something (a spliff?) in her frustration? After he split the PPP in 1957 Burnham rejected every call of Jagan to come together again. Before 1961, he demanded to be leader and after he cut the deal with the Americans he happily toed their anti-Jagan line. He finally joined with D’aguiar, whom he’d announced was a racist.
But Nestor betrays her dissimulation when she can only cite the 1985 ‘unity’ talks. This was actually a ‘survival talk’ since by then the economy had collapsed and the Americans were tiring of Burnham’s ‘innovations’. Then Hoyte and shared governance? The man who said Jagan would only accede to power over his dead body? Whew!!! The rest of the drivel is in a similar vein.

Beyond irony
In referring to the protests in Linden it was reported that ‘David Hinds of the WPA emphasised that Guyana belongs to all citizens and as such all must be treated equally.’ Really? From where we sit it looks like ‘equal treatment’ is furthest from the minds of the Linden protestors and its partisans. In fact the whole contretemps has been brought on because Lindeners want special treatment on its rates of electricity from the rest of Guyana.
While obviously, we regret the unfortunate deaths of three Lindeners, we still are awaiting first the composition of the committee to inquire into the shooting and then its report. In the meantime the government has put a ‘hold’ on the increased tariffs which was scheduled to have kicked in since July 1. Aubrey Norton, who had early on gave the coded signal for the strategy of Lindeners to block the strategic roads to the interior, has now made the demand that rather than a ‘hold’ there should have been a ‘suspension’ of the increase. Yes, that’s the distinction the man made.
It’s a distinction in search of a difference for the simple reason that Norton and Co want to keep the initiative from the government.

UG Gobbledegook
A bunch of ‘academics’ want more academics on the UG Council. In theory there’s nothing wrong with this partisanship.
But one perusal of their convoluted petition is enough to disqualify them. Permanently.