|
|
|
  |
| Sunday, 26 December 2004 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Language and religion in the politics of Sri Lanka by Jayatilleke de Silva
The Uncle Nephew Party used to boast that it won independence for Sri Lanka without a drop of blood being shed. Students of history, however, know that there is only a grain of truth in that statement, the truth being that we won independence not through revolutionary means but through a shallow reformist movement. No serious historian could confine the origins of our movement within the contours of the UNP or for that matter even within the contours of the Ceylon National Congress. The truth is our people never reconciled to foreign domination. They had been rebelling incessantly. It is an insult to the memory of the fallen martyrs of the 1818 and 1848 rebellions as well as the several intermittent mini-rebellions in between them to claim that independence was won without a drop of blood being shed. Certainly, no UNPer shed his blood for freedom. The independence won was also a sham. The best the bourgeois who led the independence movement could bargain for and get was dominion status. It was the Left and the Jaffna Youth League that fought for full self-rule. Not only was the bourgeois content with dominion status that left allegiance to the British Crown unaltered, it followed a servile policy of continuing the same economic and political programs bequeathed by the colonial masters. The Brown Sahibs who replaced the White Sahibs even imitated their dress- top hat, tail coat and all and even indulged in a little bit of fox hunting in England. It was in 1956 that the defence pact with the UK was abrogated and British troops left our shores. Finally, it was in 1972 that Sri Lanka became a Republic severing its link with the British Crown, albeit by some type of a Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) through a Constituent Assembly and a new Constitution. As SWRD BAndaranaike said on Independence Day 1948 political independence without economic independence was meaningless. The latter still eludes us. It was the mass Hartal of August 1953 that infused a new dynamism to the struggle of the people against the servile economic and political policies of the UNP. The Left, which led the Hartal, however, failed to live up to people's expectations and the leadership of the struggle fell into the hands of the national bourgeoisie whose platform of language and religion appealed to the petty-bourgeoisie and the rural masses. The transition in 1956 was predominantly cultural. It was a cultural revolt of some sort, not akin, however, to the Maoist variety that destabilised China in the 1970s. Pressed by popular pressure and in deference to its own class interests the national bourgeoisie that came to power had to consolidate their power through a series of popular measures, which included the Sinhala Only Act and the building up of a state sector in the economy. The former, of course, proved disastrous as it antagonised the minority communities and further aggravated their alienation from the majority community. Nevertheless, it had a positive effect in dethroning the Brown Sahibs from power and opening up new vistas to the Sinhala educated. Even belated introduction of the Tamil Language (Special Provisions) Act could not repair the damage done. Despite the pronouncements of modern day followers of the Washington Consensus in the Central Bank, the academia and the NGO sector, state capitalism was instrumental in laying the foundation of an indigenous industry. In the geopolitical climate of the day, it was a policy successfully adopted by many developing countries. What went wrong was its continuation even after its potency and necessity faded. In contrast to the transition in 1956, the 1977 transition was predominantly in the economic sphere. Under the cloak of a cultural renaissance in the form of ushering in a dharmishta samajaya (Just Society), JRJ let loose the demons of market capitalism giving complete freedom to the multinational corporations to exploit us uninhibited. Today, after 26 years of the open economy the rich are richer and the poor are poorer. Development remains skewed as aptly described by the popular epithet Colombata kiri apata kekiri (Bread for Colombo and crumbs for us). Policies of market fundamentalism pursued by successive governments since 1977 have eroded the safety network for the poor and the poorest of the poor. On the cultural front almost all gains of 1956 are being reversed, if not already reversed. Western cultural hegemony, an accompaniment of economic globalization sweeping across the globe is threatening to swallow up indigenous cultures and even the existence of the Sinhala language is threatened. In the absence of a genuine secular popular movement of the national bourgeoisie or the working masses, once gain petty-bourgeoisie forces aligned with sections of capital are raising the banners of ethnicity and religion. History of the 20th Century provides ample proof that absence of secular class based leadership often gives rise to the emergence of obscurantist and religious fundamentalist forces to fill the void, as religion is a potent force amongst the masses. We witnessed it in Iran, Afghanistan and many other countries. Once again the ascent of Islamic fundamentalist groups is witnessed in many Arab countries that are authoritarian in character. Religious fundamentalism, however, is not without its negative and tragic consequences. In Iran it was responsible for the decimation and annihilation of many Leftwing forces that actively participated in the overthrow of the hated Shah regime. Individual freedoms and human rights are being curtailed under theocratic rule. In addition to religious puritan slogans the adherents of religious fundamentalism also put forward anti-imperialist and anti-colonial slogans. The latter very often do not concern the prime economic foundations of imperialism, colonialism or neo-colonialism but are generally based on claims that tend to divide rather than unite anti-imperialist forces, thus in effect helping the enemy. That is why Tariq Ali called it the anti-imperialism of fools. In our own country we are witnessing the rise of religious fundamentalism. Extremist chauvinist forces that are unable to get the consent of the masses at democratic elections are appealing to the masses capitalising on the religious convictions of the masses to achieve their ulterior objectives. In order to obtain legitimacy to their cause they are invoking avatars of 1956 and are chanting anti-imperialist slogans. The Sinhala Buddhist fundamentalists of Sri Lanka have been emboldened by the antics of their class brothers in India - the Vishawa Hindu Parishad(VHP) and the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak (RSS) who advocate the ideology of Hindutva. Following the attack on non-Hindus, espeially Christians in India local fundamentalists too have begun attacking isolated Christian missions in their efort to cleanse the country of alien elements. They are adding religious discord to the already simmering racial discord. They are now issuing fatwas to musical shows and secular forces. Many are puzzled by the deadly grenade attack on the Shah Rukh Khan show. They are unable to find a link between the teachings of the Buddha who preached and practised Maha Karuna (Great Compassion) and the use of violence on unarmed civilians disturbing their right to entertainment. The main demand of the protestors was to postpone or cancel the musical show that fell on the day prior to the first anniversary of the death of Ven. Gangodawila Soma Thera. It was not even the day of the death but the preceding day. Can these venerable monks find a day in which no noble bhikku had passed away? Is it going to be a new tradition? One can imagine how life would be under the Dharma Rajyaya promised by the JHU? Isn't it a violation of human rights to decree that all should behave on a certain day in the way certain others behave or would like to behave? This is nothing but sheer madness. Why was the Shah Rukh Khan show singled out of all musical performances? There was another show by a Western singer the day before. Earlier several pop musicians came and entertained crowds in Colombo. More seductive programs were telecast over various TV channels. Only the Shah Rukh Khan Show was targeted? There must be some reason, some logic. How does one trace this reason, this logic? It was Lenin who said: "People always have been foolish victims of
deception and self-deception in politics and they always will be until
they have learnt to seek out the interests of some class or other behind
all moral, religious, political and social phrases, declarations and
premises." |
|
| News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
| Produced by Lake House |
