The Fissures That Lie Beneath
Posted on January 12th, 2017

-Uditha Devapriya [Courtesy ceylontoday]

On Friday, 6 December a group of people calling themselves the National Joint Committee (“Jathika Ekabaddha Kamituwa”) met at the Sri Lanka Foundation Institute for the launch of Manohara de Silva’s book, “Bedumwaadeenge Upaya Marga Ha Vivastha Sanshodana” (The Methods of the Separatists and Constitutional Amendments). Manohara is a lawyer, a seasoned academic who has been moulded in the tradition of S. L. Gunasekara, H. L. de Silva, and Gomin Dayasiri. Probably on account of the resurgence of nationalism in the country, the event saw packed crowds, people who had come to listen intently to those who offered comment.

There were three speakers: Ven. Medagama Dhammananda, Gamini Marapana, and Gomin Dayasiri. All three spoke on the fatal coincidence of law and separatism: how, since the dawn of independence, those who promoted narrow, crass minoritarianism did so by resorting to the Constitution. Dhammananda Thera in particular, remembering the late Sirimavo Bandaranaike, argued quite correctly that more than the leader, it was those surrounding that leader who forced a great many Constitutional provisions which, at the end of the day, provided grist to the separatist’s mill. He offered his solution: lend an ear to the aspirations of the (numerical) majority.

Merits or demerits

I have not read Manohara de Silva’s book (yet), so I can’t comment on its (de)merits. I do know, however, that no one, at least from de Silva’s field, has attempted an enterprise of this sort. That probably explains why Dayasiri contended that every nationalist in the country must read and keep a copy of it in his or her household. The book focuses on those much vilified Constitutional amendments: the 13th (devolution), the 16th (language parity), the 17th (the Constitutional Council), and the 19th. Since spatial constraints prevent me from delving into each of these in-depth, I will instead comment on what I saw and could glean from that Friday evening.

First and foremost, I noticed a rupture in the nationalist movement. This is not something Sri Lanka has endured for too long, but then again one comes across such ruptures elsewhere. Gomin Dayasiri in particular, speaking on how the likes of S. L. Gunasekara, H. L. de Silva, and himself combated the separatist myth, argued that a national movement of this sort can easily be hijacked, if not contorted, from within. He went on to observe that quite a number of those who have been promoted to lead new political movements have pandered (and continue to do so) to forces that are quite anti-nationalist. He called on citizens to take the movement away from politicians. In this, he is correct.

Movements like this don’t always subscribe to pure strains. That is why they tend to fail after a point: they house different and virulently conflicting ideological persuasions, so much so that compromise quickly degenerates into an ugly mess. The way I see it, however, this is not the only problem that the nationalist movement in Sri Lanka lacks. I can enumerate three main weaknesses, not only on the part of those leading it but also on the part of those who subscribe to it, which can prove the movement’s undoing.

Rhetoric

The first: No movement can afford to substitute rhetoric for substance. The nationalist movement in Sri Lanka, however, has always preferred lofty ideals over cohesive action plans. What Manohara de Silva has tried to achieve in his book, at the outset that is, is to bring the movement closer to the legal sphere. In itself, this is laudable, though hardly enough. As I have always said or rather implied in my column, what the nationalists in this country lack isn’t support, but substance. I believe Gomin Dayasiri put it best: We are content in being jubilant after victory, rather than assessing the ground situation and planning for the future. Without a healthy dose of sobriety, can any nationalist campaign survive? I think not.

The second: If nationalism is the last refuge of the scoundrel, then it goes without saying that it’s a refuge of the politician. Being fixated on such politicians will not salvage the movement. If we are to combat separatism, we must first resort to ourselves. Given that we are entering the second year of a government that can’t say one thing without contradicting it days later (I will get to this in next week’s column), I believe that soon enough, the discordant voice of the nationalist will erupt. Whether we can prevail on ourselves to take the movement from the fringe is a question only time can answer, but I know this: Flirting with the political to win popularity cannot and will not result in a wholesome movement.

It brings me to the third (and most pertinent) problem. Most of those associated with this movement are, as everyone knows, deeply distrustful if not resentful of Western political agendas. This is reflected in their distrust of Western science, literature, and way of life. Theoretically, there isn’t anything wrong in this, but given that globalization has become a reality, and given that even many of those leading the movement can’t resist resorting to that same way of life they condemn, I suspect that they may be consumed by the self-contradiction that every ideological revolution houses: the tendency of the revolutionary to be subsumed by the very same forces he or she combats. Let me explain.

Western political practices

The likes of Gunadasa Amarasekara (who was there last Friday) and Nalin de Silva (who was not) have been vocal in their condemnation of Western political practices. That is understandable. Prof. Nalin de Silva, however, has been just as vocal in his critiques of Western science, religion, and literature. His ideological encounters with that eloquent believer in Western science and philosophy, Prof. Carlo Fonseka, should convince anyone that the man deeply believes what he says and writes. My question to those who believe (in) him, therefore, is this: since globalization (or Westernization) has become a reality we have to put up with, how are we going to reconcile the nationalist and the globalist resident in us?

Prof. Nalin de Silva, let’s not forget, was the man who brought out the political side of the Jathika Chinthanaya, a potent (post-modern) nationalist movement if ever there was one. A careful perusal of his writings (particularly “Mage Lokaya”) will indicate that he is attacking the very base on which modernity rests. I am not questioning the sincerity of the man (of his intellectual honesty and that of Gunadasa Amarasekara, no one should doubt), but I am worried: we are not living in the time of Mahatma Gandhi and the Anagarika Dharmapala. These were people who could combat Westernization because globalization wasn’t in the offing then. Times have changed, though. So have people. How do we adapt to that reality?

1956 revolution

While we’re at it, let us remember that this was precisely the point at which 1956 revolution failed. The man they opted for to lead their campaign then was someone who did away with his predecessor’s practice of eating egg hoppers in the morning press conference in favour of kiribath, only to spoil the effect by eating that kiribath with a spoon. No, I don’t deny that people have their personal lives, that there is a dichotomy between their public and private face, but I persist: if the contradiction between the public anti-Western thrust and concomitant personal tilt towards Westernization of this movement isn’t resolved, a Jathika Viyaparayak won’t result. An aberration will.

There are three problems and three issues. How will our nationalists solve them? Hard to answer, but an answer to it we must find. If the recent past is anything to go by, the next few months will be tumultuous. No less a figure than Dayan Jayatilleka (who is no astrologer) has predicted that 2017 may well be the final year of a unitary Sri Lanka. Whether or not you agree with the man, it’s hard to shake off such a prediction.

I believe Manohara de Silva, given his credentials, has given us something to resort to, in order for us to connect rhetoric with political and legal practice. His choice of language deserves commendation too: at a time when lawyers are making their case for going beyond the 13th Amendment in lofty, abstract terms, only the vernacular can or will awaken the people to the threat we’ve placed ourselves in.

Where does all this lead us to, though? I mentioned something about a rupture before, a rupture in the nationalist movement. I argued also that there are no pure strains. I can hence conclude on this note.

Peculiar creature

The nationalist is a peculiar creature. He can be a political animal, he can subscribe to the same ideologies that are against his practice, and yet return to his base and argue from the standpoint of the country’s welfare. In a context where there remains an (hitherto unresolved) dichotomy between societal freedom and individual freedom, between nationality and citizenship, I suspect that what we saw last Friday was an adjunct, and a valuable one at that, to the nationalist discourse. Whether or not this movement (the Joint National Committee) will transcend petty political jealousies and differences is a question we are not fit to answer. We can only watch, wait, and hope.

[ceylontoday]

5 Responses to “The Fissures That Lie Beneath”

  1. Ananda-USA Says:

    We can only watch, wait and hope?

    Not really, nor should we!

    We can organize, come together and ACT DECISIVELY, as Alley Gunawansa Nahimiyo is attempting to do!

    Yes, indeed, Manohara de Silva’s crystal clear exposition of the issues and consequences of the proposed Yamapalana consequences is a MUST READ for all Patriots!

    Let this book help CATALYZE a MASS MOVEMENT to OPPOSE the proposed Separatist Constitution, OUST the Yamapalana government that DARES to propose it, and create a new PATRIOTIC constitution and STABLE UNITARY form of National Government that RUDUCES all SEPARATIST DREAMS unrealizable fantasies never to be resurrected in any form in our Motherland!

    Contrary to Dayan Jayathilleke’s pessimism, I look forward to this OVERREACHING by the SEPARATISTS to FINALLY CRYSTALLINE a National Will and a National Solution to CRUSH SEPARATISM FOREVER in Sri Lanka!

    Embala Sinhalayeni, RISE UP TODAY to LIFT our Motherland to a GLORIOUS FUTURE as you did YESTERDAY to MILITARILY CRUSH the sepatatist TERRORISTS!

  2. Dilrook Says:

    A very good analysis. However, it has a few errors.

    Most notable is denying that Sri Lanka is already federal since 1987. The word unitary is retained and even under proposed further federalism, it will be retained. Federalism came to the open in 2013 when the Divi Neguma Bill was struck down by the Supreme Court as it violates the constitution especially 13A. Even with two thirds in parliament, it cannot trespass on powers of provinces! A perfect federal state. It again showed itself in 2016 when provincial councils rejected the super ministry. Even with the president supporting it and over two thirds of parliament supporting it, the act could not be passed without the consent of all provinces.

    Even the entire parliament cannot reduce powers of provinces! Even the president cannot. If it is not federalism, it must be autonomy.

    Sri Lanka ceased to remain a unitary country in 1987. From 1947 to 1972 it was unitary in fact but not officially. From 1972 to 1987 it was de facto and de jure unitary. Since 1987 it is federal with a sham unitary clause.

    Dayan has deflected this fact.

    I mostly agree with the 3 ailments. Lack of an action plan is the biggest problem. But trying to have an action plan splits the nationalist camp. An action plan requires prioritisation. Should we save Sinhala interests outside the north and east first as these are easily saved? There is no agreement.

    Nationalism ending up with the same rotten political camps is true.

    I have my disagreements on point 3. It does not matter what personal preferences are. The world has come a long way. I disagree the 1956 revolution failed. It didn’t. It succeeded in achieving a great deal although it failed to achieve all. This is acceptable for any movement. For instance, nationalists didn’t demand that we fought the war with locally made weapons!

    What the writer failed to observe is the availability of international actors and events that can propel nationalism beyond its power. While it is true no international actor would support our nationalism, their interests can be harnessed to advance nationalist interests. Mt enemy’s enemy is my friend.

    As the perennial enemy of the island nation, India is entangled in a difficult geopolitical situation, it favours Sri Lanka in many ways. The rise of Russian, China and Saudi Arabia as superpowers puts India into a spin. Most enemies of local nationalists are sponsored by Indian groups.

    So the three ailments affecting nationalists can be turned into opportunities. Nationalists must not strive to achieve a higher moral ground than the rest. To put it bluntly, nationalists must use even immoral (not illegal) means to achieve outcomes. Nationalists should not be tied down by political correctness. BREXIT and Trump are clear examples of nationalists prevailing despite allegations of lower morality over the rival position. If nationalism is the last refuge of the scoundrel, so be it. We should not fear it.

  3. AnuD Says:

    Who ever nationalist becomes the president, he won’t be able to change it. but, one day people will understand it change it overnight. Muslims will be the threat.

  4. Ananda-USA Says:

    Dilrook,

    You said it just right: Nationalists must not be tied down by political correctness; Brexit and Trump are examples of ditching political correctness in the National Interest!

    This is what I have been CONSISTENTLY advocating!

  5. Christie Says:

    We are already are separated. We are an Indian colony like Mauritius and Guyana. In those two countries the majority re Indians.

    In our case we are the majority but we in all practical terms we are the minority.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


Copyright © 2018 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress