Talk:Indo–Trinidadian and Tobagonian/Archive 1

Anon's edits
Can you please justify your deletion of content. Guettarda 22:52, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

On Your Misrepresentation
Please Sir, you are misrepresenting Trinbagonians on your articles, especially those that are on issues of Trinidadian Ethinc groups. I think what you are doing is commendable, but you do mot take into account the complexities of the historical truths and controversies of the twin islands. For example, your articles on politics lack depth and sacrifices expedienltly the complex,nuanced and controversial issues and articles in Wikipedia for the scant, superficial and debatable and, in instances plainly wrong. It seems that you have cocoa in the sun and looking for rain! Please correct yourself, or else I shall have to take this to the relevant WIkipedian authorities.I think you need to read overThe Five Pillars Of Wikipedia


 * Please be specific - I realise that these articles are thin, but simply removing information is not the way to go. What specific issue do you have with:
 * The Opposition United National Congress draws most of its support from the Indo-Trinidadian community. Historically they have supported a series of political parties which have opposed the Afro-Trinidadian-dominated People's National Movement.

Sad by true, Trini voting patterns have been pretty well predictable on racial grounds, especially since 1961. Obviously not every person's vote, but the broad trends can be described on the basis of race. I can't imagine how you could dispute this. Guettarda 04:47, 30 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Oh Really? Well then, based on such an "evidence", can you tell me who is going to win the next election? I mean,if you can predict the outcome of a Trinbagonian election, then it stands to reason that you can predict future ones.Obviously this is not the case....
 * A careful look at the statistics of our elections shows that the real reason why the PNM dominated the late 20th century....
 * (1) The PNM dominated the boroughs and areas with dense popoulation. They can only do this with the help of people outside of the so-called "Afro-Trinidadian majority" predominantly Indo-Trinidadians who also live in these areas eg. San- Juan, Barataria, Sangre Grande,Mayaro and Arima.
 * (2)The opposition, although ethnically varied, was too divided to organise itself. The opposition contaianed, Black intellectuals,(C.L.R. James) Black trade unionists(Errol McLeod), and even Syrians and Chinese. A party called the African National Congress falled to win any seat in parliament. All of them were divided among themselves and even bitterly opposed to any of the others gaining any leeway. It was only in 1971, during the "No-Vote" campaign that Basdeo Panday was able to gain a seat by default in parliament

Race politics doesn't work in Trinidad and Tobago.Other factors play an equal and, at other times, a more important role. It takes deeper research to do that. It was only after 1989 that Race became to play a more defined role in Trinidad and Tobago politics. Stop ignoring those things that do not fit into your mold of how Trinidad and Tobago politics works. These "broad trends" that you cliam to be are just not true. Please do not include them on your next assay. It is misleading and trite.

I'm sorry, but you are simply wrong in your analysis. While there have never been monolithic racial parties in TT, racehas been a pretty good predictor of voting, especially among Indians. The PNM has never attracted substantial Indian support except in 1956 (when it attracted Muslim and urban Presbyterian support). The idea that factors other than race were "equally" valid is ridiculous. The ULF was designed as a multi-racial party, it had a diverse leadership - but it only won Indian-dominated seats. It doesn't matter that it includes people like Weekes - they couldn't even win the Fyzabad or Pointe-a-Pierre seats. Have you looked ever looked at the breakdown of voting that people like Hamid Ghany have done? Have you ever looked at poll responses by race? After 1961 the DLP became a solidly Indian party. They were unable to take advantage of the anti-PNM feeling that led to the Black Power riots. But non-Indian opposition parties also attracted very little support. On the other hand, Indian support for Williams was never very great - and he was not interested in their support. Kamal was able to make Muslims feel like they were better off under the PNM because of him, ("we Mohammeds have to stick together", as he told a friend of mine), Errol tried to inherit the mantle of Winston Mahabir, who truly represented the interests of the San Fernando Presbyterians (I say that with family connections to Winston Mahabir, Errol Mahabir and Roy Joseph).

You really need to get your facts straight. Panday was not elected in 1971. After Richardson switched sides, he appoinited Panday to the Senate. In 1976 Bas was able to break the hold of the DLP and send them into oblivion - which is why I always thought Peter Jamadar should have recused himself from Panday's case, if not for substance, then for the sake of appearances. You should never sit in judgement over the man who destroyed your father's political career.

I'm sorry, but you simply are not making sense. Your position is misleading. As for predicting election results - the key has always been turnout. Well, except in 1961, when ANR Robinson got more votes (initially) than there were registered electors in his constituency. Some people cross racial lines, but sadly, if you look at turnout, with the exception of 1987, Afro-Trinis have either voted PNM or stayed home, and Indo-Trinis have either voted DLP/ULF/UNC or stayed home.

As for the idea that the PNM dominated "densely populated" areas, well, until recently these areas were overwhelmingly non-Indian. San Fernando was always the most Indian town (until Chaguanas grew up in the 80s and 90s), but it always had an African majority. Apart from everything else, the consituencies were gerrymandered to create safe seats in the Corridor. Outside of Muslims in San Juan, there is no evidence, even ancedotal, of large amounts of Indian support for the PNM after 1960. As for Mayaro, Grande and and Arima - they have never had predominantly Indian populations.

It isn't a matter of whether race worked or not. It's sad that people vote race, it's sad that because of the stranglehold of these parties we can't get decent government. But that is the case. Whether it is because they are intentionally voting race, or whether they see PNM or UNC leaders as being more in tune with their interests is a moot point. I find Meighoo's analysis very interesting. But we cannot get at unproven causation - that's not for Wikipedia. We can document what's out there. And racial voting is a reality in Trinidad politics, and has been since the apaan jaat politics of 1961. Guettarda 06:26, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you are simply wrong in your analysis. While there have never been monolithic racial parties in TT, racehas been a pretty good predictor of voting, especially among Indians. 


 * Sir, you are mis-using the word predict .To pre-dict means to say beforehand .Elections year after year cannot give any clear-cut outline of how it would turn out for any other future year. Ask yourself the question, how come Hamid Ghany, Selwyn Ryan and the others are woefully inadequate in their predictions? If race were a predominant means of voter-choice, for all these years, then elections would be easy to predict. The fact is that they are not.

 The PNM has never attracted substantial Indian support except in 1956 (when it attracted Muslim and urban Presbyterian support). The idea that factors other than race were "equally" valid is ridiculous.


 * You see, I just don't understand you. You have just given me the proof that I need! Here is it that two Indians, Winston Mahabir and Kamaludeen Mohammed are Indians. One is Christian and the other Muslim. Religion overriding Race. Do I need any other proof that other factors are indeed relevant?

The ULF was designed as a multi-racial party, it had a diverse leadership - but it only won Indian-dominated seats.


 * And it is at this time when it almost failed as a party to gain seats. When it becomes race-oriented it fails.What causes its failure?(I say almost, due to the NAR, another successful multi-ethnic party) another proof! Multi- ethnic parties are succesful (PNM UNC NAR) Race only parties are not. Q.E.D.!

It doesn't matter that it includes people like Weekes - they couldn't even win the Fyzabad or Pointe-a-Pierre seats.


 * They were not "included" and they do matter! You are not even curious to know why that is so. How absurd to suggest that they were "included",.. as if they were an afterthought! You are mis-representing the party. This is how I know that you are not equipped to grapple with the prickly issue of T&T politics.They were the sons and daughters of Afro and Indo Labourers-hence, the word <U><B>UNITED</B></U>.In the U.L.F.. As with any other party, to be a one-race-only party would doom you, hence the fleeting appearance of the African National Congress in the 1960s and so too with the Indian National Congress, both of which existed as political groups. (The INC didn't even put up strong candidates)! The United Labour Front knew that if Race was ever an issue, they would doom themselves. They used to argue that both Williams wanted to divide Sugar and Oil (this was true, not for the reasons they suggested, however.) The "Black- Majority" that worked in the Oil belt were Grenadian, Vincentian, Barbadian and Black-American emigrés which came there to look for work. One can even think of the ULF as a Young People's Labour party,... <U> not</U> an Indian party. That came later.

And another thing. Why is it that men like Errol Mc Leod and George Weekes, both Afros, couldn't get support from the members of the OWTU, most of which supported the PNM? Answer that!

<I>Have you looked ever looked at the breakdown of voting that people like Hamid Ghany have done? Have you ever looked at poll responses by race?</I>


 * Hamid Ghany's scholarship among others like Selwyn Ryan and John La Guerre, is as limited and as shoddy as your descriptions of Trinidad politics, even more so. I only cursorily glance them. Most of these pampered UWI hacks are really half educated prigs. Their scholarship lacks depth and they justify this and their partisanship under half-baked imported ideals from the North Atlantic which have no relevance to the whole Caribbean, Trinidad and Tobago in particular.

<I>After 1961 the DLP became a solidly Indian party. They were unable to take advantage of the anti-PNM feeling that led to the Black Power riots.</I>


 * Why? Why? Why is this so? You keep on pointing out that race is an issue,and overrepresent it by pointing out these examples which contradict what you claim to propose.Look, I am not saying that race does not ever matter. However,There is a reason why the PNM failed to attract Afros who were disillusioned by a supposedly Afro-dominated party. This points the way to other factors which sometimes override race and which you stubbornly fail to include.

<I>But non-Indian opposition parties also attracted very little support. On the other hand, Indian support for Williams was never very great - and he was not interested in their support.</I>


 * This is another untruth that is now envogue among some historical revisionists especially of the period of Panday's administration. Williams desperately wanted Indians to become part of his scheme. He tried to court their leaders and any of them who he thought was powerful enough to persuade their communities. He did so to his death. There is not any evidence to suggest that he disliked Indians. What frustrated him was that some of the Hindus, first led under the Syrian Roy Joseph and then under Rampartapsigh and Badase Sagan Maharaj were distrustful of creoles and black with inclinations to power. This is so of even Butler. They even suggested in parliament that the country be divided in half like Cyprus! This distrust is a legacy of slavery,indentureship and recent arrival,and lack of understanding between these groups, not true Racism and Race-hatred as in FIji. He tried to get those Hindus which were not Brahmanist such as those of the Capildeo family, (not the Capildeos themselves, mind you!) to join the PNM, without any luck. He hoped also to capitalise on the rift beteen The Brahmanist-traditional and the Gandhi- Aurobhindo Ghose-Vivekananda influenced groups in Trinidad. Williams was shocked and hurt to see that these same Hindus (Tobagonians also, with their own Nationalist movement) rejected him during the 1958 Federation vote. They were right to. No one man, much less a man who is alien to my culture has the right to be so arrogant as to suggest that what he has planned for me is better than what I have planned for myself thorough my own culture. Trinidadians and Tobagonians know this. But they do not know how to do politics. That is to convert one's wishes and desires in to action, conviction, responsibilty and choice. They are cop-outs who prefer the lazy minded option of votinng for who they know based. This nepotistic instinct is often mistaken for race, class, colour and creed, such as what you are doing. This is the reason why nobody would be able to govern based on any ideological stances such as Racism, hence why race is only one of the factors as Lloyd Best says not the only one.

<I>Kamal was able to make Muslims feel like they were better off under the PNM because of him, ("we Mohammeds have to stick together", as he told a friend of mine), Errol tried to inherit the mantle of Winston Mahabir, who truly represented the interests of the San Fernando Presbyterians (I say that with family connections to Winston Mahabir, Errol Mahabir and Roy Joseph).</I>


 * I do not care of your special pleads to authority to bolster your case. (Another instance of the pathology of association as a means of knowing!) Who you, or even I know for that matter, can't take the place of cold ruthless critical analysis.I can only think of this as just another fine example of how other factors (Islam, Christianity, their fear of opposing Williams) overrode their "Indianness".

And I am glad you mentioned Roy Joseph! Just like the thousands of other Politicoes in this country to numerous to mention (Morgan Job, Michael Als, Satnarine Maharaj, Karl Hudson-Philips and others) He depended, on their numerous confusing allegiances to people places and things and their charisma, charm and plain guile(Roy Loseph used his marriage to his Muslim wife to gain " access" as a representative for "Indians" as " The Protector of the Indians") to be a voted candidate. Some appealed to race, David Pitt, Ranjit Kumar, Simbhoonath Capildeo but this was mere expediency. These men were neither Racist nor racial( Ranjit Kumar and his family admitted in his memoirs tht he voted for Lloyd Best)

''You really need to get your facts straight. Panday was not elected in 1971. After Richardson switched sides, he appoinited Panday to the Senate. ''


 * To be elected means to be chosen, appointed. That is all. Richardson elected Panday. This is the dictionary definition. I tought that as a Wikipedian you would understand that. You see you can be elcleted to a position by an officer or by a group.You can be democratically electd or elected by an official. I am surprised that I have to correct and explain myself by your ignorance of these facts.

<I>In 1976 Bas was able to break the hold of the DLP and send them into oblivion - which is why I always thought Peter Jamadar should have recused himself from Panday's case, if not for substance, then for the sake of appearances. You should never sit in judgement over the man who destroyed your father's political career.</I>


 * Nonsense. The DLP were on their way out due to their antedilluvian and ineffective leadership by Rudranath, (I mean, theratening violence in 1966 and then running the party in absentia in London? Come on, give me a break!) Then Jamadar(Father)Sinanan Lequay and others were always bickering among themselves, a recipe ripe for dissolution. Really and truly if it hadn't been for that, Panday's wrestle of the Leadership of the Sugar Union from Rojas and Rampartapsingh, Williams stance on Sugar (and then going behind the ULF's back and making a secret deal with Panday for a wage increase) among other things ( backroom deals with the NAR, Manning and Robinson to name a few) Panday would have doomed himself to opposition also.

<I>I'm sorry, but you simply are not making sense. Your position is misleading. As for predicting election results - the key has always been turnout.</I>


 * No. You are wrong. For the electoral ties between 1995 and 2001 between the UNC and PNM is wasn't turnout. Realy and truly this <U>really was due to race</U>. Trinidad politics always  had low trunout this was so ever since limited franchise in 1928. At least 20 percent of all those who were eligiible in all elections didn't vote. This number was on the increase from 1995 to 2003 to almost forty pre cent this should tell you something.

<I >Well, except in 1961, when ANR Robinson got more votes (initially) than there were registered electors in his constituency. </I>


 * And 1971 with the no-vote and in 1981 wher the ONR got 100,000 votes and, as Lord Kitchener sang for the campaign, "not a damn seat for them!" Satnarine Maharaj was on a PNM Local gov't ticket at that time for Caroni, I think, Suruj Rambachan for the ONR. This should tell you something.

<i> Some people cross racial lines, but sadly, if you look at turnout, with the exception of 1987, Afro-Trinis have either voted PNM or stayed home, and Indo-Trinis have either voted DLP/ULF/UNC or stayed home.</I>
 * This is not true and, to make comment on the race line-crossing, which is <U>really my point</U>,mind you, this <B>is</B> the exact time when a party gains seats or is sucessful in elections. If a class line or party line is sugested, the party loses due to the <I> other factors</I>

<I>As for the idea that the PNM dominated "densely populated" areas, well, until recently these areas were overwhelmingly non-Indian.</I>


 * So? Are Indos the only ethnic group in Trinidad and Tobago besides Afros? What about Chinese? Syrians? Mixed Races? The Spanish - Black- and Amerindian admixtures that can be found in the rural villages of Biche, Talparo, Mundo Nuevo, Arima and Brazil? don't they matter? These are Ethnic groups too.Grande was a marginal seat which voted PNM from time to time. They have a lot of Indos there. The PNM Tobagonians for the first time was able to grasp all the seats in the THA. To bago never voted PNM. What does being Afro, or Indo for that matter, have to do with voting in the cities and boroughs?

''San Fernando was always the most Indian town (until Chaguanas grew up in the 80s and 90s), but it always had an African majority. Apart from everything else, the consituencies were gerrymandered to create safe seats in the Corridor.Outside of Muslims in San Juan, there is no evidence, even ancedotal, of large amounts of Indian support for the PNM after 1960.''


 * That is unimportant.The fact is that even if the Indos don't, which is not really true, the other races/ethnicities do! the Indo Muslims and Christians can sway electorial preferences. They are large enough to do so. And, due to the marginal vote patterns of Mayaro, St Patrick and Arima, they can do so too. These communities have large numbers of Mixed peoples. Indos do not need to vote for my statements to be true.

<I>As for Mayaro, Grande and and Arima - they have never had predominantly Indian populations.</I>
 * That isn't the point. You keep on missing the point! other factors in Trinidad and Tobago influence votes.

<I>It isn't a matter of whether race worked or not.</I>
 * It  does matter. For race to be considered to be important and a major factor, it must be unequivocably seen as so.You yourself must not be able to point out any exceptions. If you are, then by using your same assumption here, you must be able to explain the exceptions. If you can't,  DO NOT USE IT! DO NOT ASSUME IT TO BE TRUE! This is just plain Logic!

<I>It's sad that people vote race, it's sad that because of the stranglehold of these parties we can't get decent government.</I>


 * This is another assumptive confusion I need to clear up. <U> You can't vote in a government. Goverment is merely the Bureaucratic arm of the State.</U> You vote in Representatives.</U> The chief of which who can control the majority of elected members is the Prime Minister.  His success does not depend on total votes.This is the mistake the UNC made in the last election. You can have a billion more votes than the other group, if your group cannot put more people in parliament than your opponent then you do not have any majority. So it is not so much the falut of the politicians as it is the poeple who chose them to lead in the first place.

<I>But that is the case. Whether it is because they are intentionally voting race, or whether they see PNM or UNC leaders as being more in tune with their interests is a moot point. I find Meighoo's analysis very interesting. But we cannot get at unproven causation - that's not for Wikipedia. We can document what's out there. And racial voting is a reality in Trinidad politics, and has been since the apaan jaat politics of 1961.</I>


 * You know, it is a pity that you claim you have read Kirk Meighoo. Kirk mentions that in an article in the TnT review that what I have just said, race its not a preponderant factor. Other factors such as lomg colonialism and recent post-colonialism of Trinidad and Tobago, religion, wealth and other economical factors, recent histoical arrival of most of its ancestors, education, American and British influence, paterns of local migration within the island, family relations, Agricultural and religious seasons, loose class boundaries, electoral franchise before party organisation culture and so on all play a role. He and Lloyd Best, Novack Geore (whom I know well)Gordon Rohlehr argue this all the time when they chance a column in the Trinidad Express. They override one another develvop one another, split parties races (There was a PNM Muslim faction and a UNC Muslim faction for the 2000 election) and classes, town from country, port from plantation. All of these must be considered and even logged if one wants to seriously avoid errors in one's report. If you want to truly document what's out there, then you must include the other factors which influence Trinidad and Tobago politics. To not do so would be a grave injustice and make you a liar of your attept and giving information about the island and a <B>neutral point of view</B>. To do otherwise would be myopic and selfish.

Please stop misrepresenting your Nation, as you claim, and mine. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ishango (talk &bull; contribs) October 31, 2005.


 * You are totally missing my point. In the first case, I am using the word "predict" in a statistical sense - and in that sense, race predicts voting pretty damn well.  You can pick a hundred exceptions, but if you looked at voting in Trinidad, there would be at least a 70-80% correlation between voting and race for Afro and Indo Trinis.  It may, as Meighoo says, be a port-plantation thing.  I find his thesis both interesting and compelling.  But this isn't an article about race and voting.  Even Afro-Trini voting has probably been too complex to explain in terms of race.  But with the exception of the ONR in 1981 and the NAR in 1991, the vast majority of Indo-Trini votes have gone for the Indian party, and against the PNM.
 * Most of the points you made are irrelevant, but I must address two of them - one is that I find it hard to believe that Williams was actively courting Indos when he called them "stubborn and recalcitrant" and when he talked about seeing them in their "primative oriental splendour" (I know that's a misquote, but you know what I am talking about, can't remember which of his books). And the second is...Sat Maharaj.  Hmmm - opportunist is too nice a work, snake too vague.
 * It would be great if you could write an article on that - but given the type of issue it is, it would have to be well sourced. Guettarda 15:26, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Ishango
Two points answered: Read <I>Race And Nationalism In Trinidad and Tobago</I> and<I> Dr. Eric Williams speaks</I> by Selwyn Ryan. You can find it hard to beleive, but it is the truth. This is why Kamal, Errol, Winston were there in the first place. Only the Hindus had a problem. And they were,(and in a sense still are a numerical minority). I use "predict" in a statistical sense too. I mean, who doesn't? As a matter of fact I base my whole argument on Stats! You see, my Main problem is that if the race "Thesis" is true, Basdeo Panday would have won the last Election <B>outright</B> not by a mere 300,000 votes (scattered generally in 36 constituencies: about 1,000 per seat) but by about 400,000-600,000 as the NAR did. He would have consistently captured more constituencies per election and have more votes <B>per constituency</B>. The UNC's best effort was to barely capture the marginals and have less than 25 seats in the lower house. <B> This alone proves that Race is not a factor as many claim it is</B>

Page move
Please discuss page moves before doing them. Thanks. Guettarda (talk) 14:59, 17 January 2010 (UTC)