JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Thursday, May 15, 2025

IRC's separatist desire incontestable

by

20110623

Re: the In­di­an Re­view Com­mit­tee's let­ter of June 22, in re­sponse to my ar­ti­cle of May 18: In writ­ing the race se­ries I had to com­press an enor­mous amount of in­for­ma­tion in­to 900-word in­stall­ments. Per­haps the In­di­an Re­view Com­mit­tee did not use the word "In­desh," but their de­sire for sep­a­ratism, and the di­rect re­la­tion of their par­tic­u­lar "call" to the In­desh pro­pos­al, is in­con­testable. My source was the IRC-pub­lished book, HP Singh, The In­di­an Strug­gle for Jus­tice and Equal­i­ty Against Black Racism in Trinidad and To­ba­go, 1956-1962.

On pp 115-121 the is­sue of The Cre­ation of an In­di­an Home­land in the Amer­i­c­as is dis­cussed. The first ar­ti­cle speaks of "the 1960s yearn­ing for an In­di­an home­land" named "In­dus­tan." Columns by Ka­mal Per­sad pub­lished in the Ex­press, in­clud­ing the one on Jan­u­ary 20, 1991, were al­so pub­lished in this sec­tion. In that ar­ti­cle, Per­sad vis­its HP Singh's calls for par­ti­tion of Trinidad. He pro­pos­es that it could not be sup­port­ed, but called for the "uni­fi­ca­tion of the South Amer­i­can states of Guyana, Suri­name and Trinidad as one state, and that this state be the In­di­an home­land in the Amer­i­c­as."

The IRC's pro­pos­al de­vel­ops and is more am­bi­tious than Singh's par­ti­tion, and takes the jaun­diced fan­ta­sy to the realms of the ab­surd. Fur­ther­more, the IRC's let­ter on June 22 at­tempts to in­ject a lev­el­ness that was not present in the orig­i­nal ar­ti­cle, with talk of in­clud­ing "oth­er groups and com­mu­ni­ties who are cit­i­zens." How­ev­er, the da­ta sup­port the con­tention that the IRC's po­si­tion and Singh's are func­tion­al­ly iden­ti­cal. Both are sep­a­ratist. Singh ex­plic­it­ly calls for par­ti­tion. The IRC de­vel­ops this idea in­to a call for an In­di­an home­land con­sist­ing of three sep­a­rate, in­de­pen­dent states, which are pop­u­lat­ed by mul­ti­ple eth­nic groups and so is en­tire­ly, ir­rev­o­ca­bly, im­pos­si­ble. How­ev­er, I ad­mit that the IRC did not di­rect­ly use the word "In­desh"-they used the word "In­dus­tan." As for their con­fu­sion about "hid­den his­to­ry"-if you read ar­ti­cles look­ing for the bits that you want to find, and ig­nore the rest, you're go­ing to have that prob­lem. They can read my the­sis, lodged at the UWI.

Ray­mond Ram­char­i­tar

Via e-mail


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored