THE COMRADE LEADER

‘Forbes Burnham, the Life and Times of the Comrade Leader,’ by Linden F. Lewis, was published in 2024 and is available on Amazon for a modest US$36. It has attracted no attention in Guyana even though two well known academics in the political science field have commended it. Dr. Nigel Westmaas said: “Forbes Burnham is an exceptional work that masterfully portrays the life of its subject with extraordinary precision and depth.” Dr. David Hinds said: “A compelling account of the politics and leadership of Guyana’s most controversial leader.” 

Important organisations such as the PNCR, the political party founded by Forbes Burnham and associated bodies such as its youth and women’s arms, if they still exist, and the Burnham Foundation, have been silent. Maybe they have not read it as yet or are grappling with the nature of their responses. They may even be gripped by the fear “that he continues to engender fear in many Guyanese despite the fact that he was a leader who died in 1985,” as noted by Professor Lewis. He must be commended for tackling a difficult subject that is fraught with controversy in a political atmosphere in which the subject is revered and in which some may even see him as a visionary genius. In fact, Burnham was a deeply flawed political leader and Linden F. Lewis sought to present him, warts and all, in as honest a manner as he could. That does not detract from the positive aspects of Burnham’s rule and the contributions he made to Guyana’s and the Caribbean’s development.

Lewis traced his steps from his early student flirtation with the left, his prize-winning oratory, attempts to recruit him as chairman of the yet to be established PPP, his deviation to the League of Coloured People and Labour Party, to his eventual recruitment to the PPP as its first chairman and, after the famous victory of the PPP in the 1953 elections, to his ultimatum of “leadership or nothing.” Most of these issues have never been honestly addressed by the PNCR, except by way of giving excuses or “explanations.”

Burnham was shaped by personal ambition and for much of his career his political choices in terms of both local and foreign policies were shaped by that ambition.  He broke with the PPP in 1955 because he could not become its leader, thereby initiating the era of ethno-political dominance in Guyana’s politics. He stood with imperialism and the UF to gain power and rigged elections thereby depriving Indians of the right to vote to stay in power. The Declaration of Sophia, authored by the PNC, gave to the latter supremacy over the State. It also placed Guyana on the progressive left in politics. Guyana embraced the Third World and non-alignment, established diplomatic relations with China and, persuaded Jamaica, Trinidad and Barbados to join Guyana and in doing the same with Cuba. He eventually recognized the legitimate African freedom fighters and, while he always had an eye out for US opposition or hostility to his policies, his permission for Cuba to fly troops to southern Africa in its confrontation with South African apartheid was an act of political courage and boldness in direct confrontation with the US. His recognition and help for Maurice Bishop’s New Jewel Movement and the Grenadian Revolution also placed him in direct confrontation with the US.  These issues were all placed in context by Professor Lewis.

Rising oil prices, falling world prices for Guyana’s products, except sugar at one point, giving rise to the imposition of the sugar levy, seen as an act of political and ‘racial’ discrimination against sugar workers, lack of local and foreign investment in the economy, the virtual destruction of the rice industry, the breakdown of the electricity supply system, all added to Guyana’s woes. Into this era of a declining economy, the extensively rigged 1973 elections in which two PPP supporters were killed when they sought to confront the Guyana Defence Force from removing the ballot boxes, stepped Walter Rodney and the Working Peoples’ Alliance. It mobilized some of the militant youth and others in a multi-ethnic, vigorous style of opposition that both threatened and humiliated Burnham. Rigging elections against the Indian-dominated PPP was one thing, but assassinating Walter Rodney to behead the growing threat of the WPA was quite another level of political degradation. Professor Lewis dealt fairly and extensively with the report of the Commission of Enquiry, including its conclusions. 

Professor Lewis’s conclusions might not be acceptable to all, particularly PNCR’s members and supporters, but is one that many may be able live with. “Like so many other politicians from the Caribbean, Forbes Burnham was not a perfect man. His imperfections, however, were magnified by the authoritarian nature of his leadership, the manner in which he secured power, and how he reproduced himself in office…Burnham’s “peccadillos” were perhaps more egregious than most. This feature of his character accounts in large measure for the ambivalence of his legacy.” Professor Lewis noted that Burnham was viewed in the Caribbean as a major political figure, an ardent regionalist and a supporter of the struggles of the Global South. In his party he was viewed as a visionary. But he cautioned: “No legacy should be accepted uncritically.”