Even a cursory glance of the recent articles of Freddie Kissoon reveals that he is on a crusade to take down Afro-Guyanese leaders and, more presumptuously, to tell Blacks when to feel disrespected and insulted by these leaders. By this two-pronged strategy, is Kissoon hoping to be seen as the sole voice and conscience of Afro-Guyanese?
His latest target is Dr Mellissa Ifill, in his KN column of 8th October, titled “Is UG’s Deputy Vice Chancellor, Melissa Ifill, displaying ethnic instinct.” Dr Ifill, no doubt, is highly capable of dealing with Freddie should she care to respond.
I write here to respond to the recurring fundamental fallacies in Kissoon’s columns whenever he speaks about Blackness or, for that matter, Indianness or any other ethnic identity. His comments in his Oct 8th column on feminism also expose the same flawed and loose thinking. Let me summarize his wrong-headedness as tightly as possible, given the word limit on letters.
One, Kissoon is wrong to assume that Blackness (or Indianness) is, by definition or default, a consciousness that rejects or disrespects other ethnicities. Blackness, at its core, is a belief, feeling and practice that seek due recognition for Black people no more or no less than what other ethnicities claim or have. Blackness is therefore not about Black supremacy. It is not about Black domination. It is not about Black selfishness. It is about due rights and freedoms for Blacks. Likewise, feminism (the belief in the equality of the sexes) is not equivalent to sexism (the belief that one’s gender is superior to others).
Two, Kissoon is wrong as he does not know that people are more complex than one or two of their self-identities. We have multiple intersecting identities, even within a political context alone. A person can identify as Afro-centric and at the same time, say, as a Guyanese nationalist, a socialist, a pacifist or a humanist.
![](https://continuedpovertyisnotanoption.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/frederick-kissoon.jpg)
Three, Kissoon is wrong because, outside of our multiple political identities, he ignores the fact that Blackness does not capture our full moral and social shelves. People’s consciousness is shaped by, apart from their ethnicity and gender, the fact that they also belong or relate to families, social classes, occupations, religions, among others.
Fourth, Kissoon is wrong for he assumes that the answer to his own question “Should non-African employees and students at UG feel they will be treated fairly when the deputy head of the institution openly exclaims that she lives her life as a black woman?” is no, they should not. Kissoon is denying the possibility and reality that people can and do act fairly and professionally. Yes, discrimination can and does occur. But people also are pro-social and have moral compasses. Kissoon’s mind is fogged to believe that the cure to unfair treatment lies in people denying all their identities and maybe becoming soulless robots, to believe that Hindu administrators must conceal their religion when dealing with Christians or Muslims, or to believe that perceived or actual fair treatment in hospitals is not possible unless doctors declare no identity or declare the same identity as their patients.
Finally, Kissoon is wrong to believe he can successfully denigrate Black leaders in the eyes of Black people, and worse, he can replace them with his voice.