WELL known newspaper columnist Freddie Kissoon (in several columns) has described the current PPP administration as fascist likening it to and often describing some features of PPP rule as worse than Burnhamism. I strongly disagree. There is no evidence to substantiate that thesis.

I hold no brief for the PPP. In fact, I think the government has made several blunders during its 15-year rule and its governance in some areas leaves much to be desired. But being fascist and governing worse than Burnhamism are not PPP’s hallmarks. Guyana thrives today under democratic rule.

As a university lecturer of government and a scholar of German history, I take it Freddie knows the subject of fascism very well. But no theorist or scholar (political scientist, historian, sociologist and economist) would apply fascism to the Jagdeo presidency or to governance in Guyana since the restoration of democracy.

I took several graduate courses on fascism at New York University (Prof Bertell Ollman) and CUNY Graduate School (Profs Greg Masell, Walter Struve, Brian Dangerfield, etc.) during the 1980s. The PPP rule does not even come close to being fascist. Freddie, like many other academics, use the term more “fascism” loosely as a “slur” to register their objection to the way a party or leader governs a country or to denigrate an opponent. Freddie has pointed

out some mistakes the PPP made while in office. But these mistakes don’t come close to fascism that the well known fascists practiced in their country or what experts on fascism would consider as fascist tendencies. The government is exposed by a vibrant opposition and perennial critics like Freddie whenever it errs as they should.

I am not writing to debate Freddie on the concept of fascism but merely to offer a brief explanation of it and why the PPP government cannot be equated with that of a fascist regime like Hitler’s Germany, Mussollini’s Italy, Franco’s Spain or the fascist governments that existed in Japan and parts of South America, Asia., etc., during and after WWII.

Scholars have engaged in furious debates concerning the exact nature of fascism and its core tenets. There is general agreement among political scientists (of which Freddie says he is not) that it is centered on the notion of “a larger commmunity” and is anti-individualistic at its core. Fascism refers to a socio-politico and economic ideology in which the state (government) is supreme and everyone’s interests is subordinated to it. The interests of the individual must coincide with that of the state. Also, there is only one party in the state and people are forced to pledge their loyalty to it to create a mass movement that stirs up the imagination of the nation towards productivity and the defense of the state. The leader of the party seeks to forge a type of national unity based on some popular construct such as race or ethnocentricity or phobia of a group or anti-colonialism, etc. Several websites and experts on fascism offer several of the following features as features of fascism: patriotism, press control, nationalism, statism, militarism, totalitarianism, anti-communism, corporatism, populism, collectivism, autocracy and opposition to political and economic liberalism.

Clearly the core concepts of fascism do not exist in Guyana. As a matter of fact, democracy, individualism and capitalism, and freedom have been entrenched since the restoration of free and fair elections in 1992. There is a perceived arrogance at various levels of government and poor decision-making but these do not fall under facism. The government appears to have poor advisors and bad managers of its well intentioned policies and programs are not effectively and properly implemented. But the government is not pursing a policy maliciously to build a facist one party state as we know fascism to be or to oppress Guyanese.

On the other hand, the Burnhamist era had features that tended towards fascism and the distinguished scholar Prof Clive Thomas addressed the matter in his book on the Rise of the Authoritarian State. Prof. Thomas wrote a brilliant essay in which he expounded on the fascistization of the Burnham state.

Freddie himself has written about suppression of dissent and the policy of brutalization of Guyanese for power’s sake or to impose stability by Burnham. Many others have written about how Burnham impoverished and pauperized Guyana. Who killed Prof Walter Rodney and Father Bernard Darke? Burnham victimized his own people when they critiqued his policy of oppression. He intimidated political opponents and religious figures. How can we forget the Rabbi’s thugs and the kick down policies? He took away the right to vote and to choose a government. He denied people their cultural diets. He tear-gassed workers and cracked down on the labour movement. Those were fascist characteristics.

Although some theorists have described aspects of a leader’s rule in third world democracies as “fascist”, that slur is inapplicable to Guyana. The nation is far from being fascist under Jagdeo’s rule and contrary to what Freddie thinks a mass movement towards a “Third Reich” is not in progress. No scholar on fascism would make the claim Freddie does.
VISHNU BISRAM