Features
80th Anniversary of the Communist Party & The Communist Movement: Potentials & Problems
by Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka
The Communist Party of Sri Lanka (CPSL) will celebrate its 80th anniversary early next month. That will mark the 80th birthday not merely of the Communist Party but the broader Communist movement – as distinct from generic Left movement–in Sri Lanka.
As I have argued in an earlier article (The sins of the fathers: The Old Left’s two traditions – The Island), the communist tradition has been considerably consequential on this island and is alive and well in the form of a strong and dynamic contemporary left which derives from and identifies with the communist ideological heritage.
To illustrate, and if I may be pardoned a personal note, in the early-mid 1970s, i.e., despite the terrible repression of the April 1971 uprising, both Prof Rohan Samarajiva and I, who hold antipodal economic and political perspectives today, were, as an undergraduate and high-school student respectively, members of a revolutionary Left organization, Mitipahara (‘Hammer Blow’), founded by the youngest member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, an intensely intelligent alumni of Moscow State University, who broke away from the party. Still awaiting university entrance, that was the first time I was taken in for questioning by the Intelligence Services Division.
This widely shared heritage alone would make the 80th anniversary of the parent or grandparent party, the Communist party, something well worth celebrating.
There are two other specific reasons to do so. Firstly, the CPSL is due to launch its alternative national economic program. Recalling the knowledgeable and often prescient contribution to economic debates in parliament over decades by DEW Gunasekara who is now the elder statesman guiding the Communist Party, and aware of the group of stellar young economists around the party or sympathetic to it currently, I’d say this document would be a most valuable contribution and a policy event of considerable significance. This is more so because the two main left formations on the island today have not launched such a document (the NPP-JVP’s being an amateurish effort which has suffered the fate that befalls a lead balloon).
Secondly, however small a party it may be, the CPSL has a vital role to play because of its international connections. It is the only party in Sri Lanka that is officially and organically linked to the ruling communist parties of China, Cuba and Vietnam, and thereby the international network and conclaves of communist parties.
This endows the CPSL with the potential to punch quite considerably above its weight. The ruling Communist parties lead countries of historic (China) or stellar (Vietnam) economic achievement or have huge moral-ethical prestige (Cuba). In turn this would permit the CPSL to play two roles.
One, to firm up multifaceted economic ties between Sri Lanka and these countries, even securing economic and social advice, in a situation in which the CPSL is part of a progressive center-left or social democratic administration after the next Presidential and parliamentary elections.
Two, to use the prestige of its international connections and the political incentive provided by such connections—the two main left formations in Sri Lanka today would dearly love affiliation-to serve as intermediary and facilitator of a Left Bloc, which may or may not broaden through evolution into a Center-Left bloc.
LINKING-UP THE LEFT
In short, the CPSL can return to the initiative it undertook in 1979, of a united Left platform, which succeeded briefly, as manifested in a public gathering at Hyde Park, with Rohana Wijeweera as a speaker. That initiative tragically collapsed not chiefly because of the ultra-sectarianism of the JVP, but because of the combination of ‘parliamentary cretinism’ and sectarianism of the LSSP (which had introduced the infection to the island’s left) which insisted that its candidate Victor Ivan (‘Podi Athula’) be the left candidate at the Galle by-election.
Today, the CPSL is the only entity that can conceivably bring the JVP-NPP and the FSP around the same table or onto the same platform and hopefully into a Left Bloc around which smaller left parties and groups can gather.
Such a bloc is vital to resist the imminent rollback of labour laws and land reform laws, IMF austerity, and Ranil Wickremesinghe’s free-market fundamentalism. The President harks back to his father’s “BR Shenoy Plan” of 1965 and is advised by Dr Ricardo Hausmann who was the appointee IDB of Juan Guaido, the rightist Venezuelan pretender to the Presidency and puppet of the Trump administration.
There is no contradiction between a Left Bloc, and a Left Democratic Bloc. Firstly, because it is the Left that has the strength to fight for democracy today, in the streets if needs be, at a time the President has de-funded elections and the UNP Chairman is advocating a Referendum as in 1982. Secondly, any Left and Democratic Bloc, or more simply a Center-left Bloc requires a Left Bloc as its foundational core and motor-force.
DEVIATION & OBSTACLE
There is a problem though; an obstacle to the CPSL playing the most crucially constructive role it can at the crossroads that Sri Lanka has arrived at in terms of its socioeconomic and political model and therefore the fate of people and its geopolitical destiny as an island.
It is once again in the wrong company. This brings us to another, lesser-known anniversary. It was exactly 45 years ago that the CPSL, mangled by the voters after its long stint with the SLFP under the latter’s dominance, began the serious process of self-criticism. The first document was in internal circulation in 1978, the last of its kind in 1980. They were excellent documents though the contents began to be diluted and the process reversed after 1980.
The self-criticism centered on two main themes– of deviations to the right. First, the error of tailing behind the bourgeoisie as represented by the SLFP. It was seen as a gross misapplication of, and a right deviation from, the ‘four class bloc including the national bourgeoisie’ line of the Communist party, endorsed at the 4th Congress in Matara in 1950, upon Dr SA Wickramasinghe’s return from the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) Congress in Beijing in 1949 where he met Mao Zedong and Liu Shaoqi.
This part of the self-criticism culminated in a revision in the formulation of the stage of social transformation (the ‘stage of the revolution’), veered towards the designation as ‘anti-capitalist/socialist’ but finally settled on ‘socialist-orientation’ (which was the ideological trend in Moscow). In its Sinhala version, it was a tighter, more correct usage: ‘samaajavaadayata ellavoo’ or ‘samaajavaadaya ilakka kala’ i.e., directly aimed at socialism.
The second point of the self-criticism is far more pertinent today. It is the error on the Nationalities question and succumbing to or countenancing Sinhala chauvinism in the name of anti-imperialism.
This was painfully ironic. In their twin submissions to the Soulbury Commission in 1944-1947, it was the Communist party and its affiliate the Ceylon Trade Union Federation (CTUF), which had urged either regional autonomy or even federalism as a solution to Ceylon’s nationalities question. In point of fact, they were the first to designate the problem scientifically as a nationalities question—which the LSSP failed to.
There is a particularly poignant little personal tale here. The racist “Dudley-gey Badey, Masala Vadai” slogan (later known remonstratively as ‘the Masala Vadai line’) of 1966 did not originate with the CPSL but with the LSSP—specifically its newspaper the Janadina. But it was picked up by the CPSL. The iconic editor of the Aththa, BA Siriwardena, put down his pen refused to write anything racist and walked out of the office—and drowned his sorrows at the Press Club (known as Simeon’s, after its proprietor) relating the story in anguish and disgust to my father, Mervyn (and me).
Today, the CPSL is in an alliance with the current avatars of the Masala Vadai line, though it could be called the ‘Kurundi Vihara line’. They are the loose cannon who cannot be controlled by the CPSL. They will discredit the CPSL while forestalling its potential to play the valuable role I have suggested in outline in this article.
REVISIT HISTORY
As it arrives at its 80th birthday, the CPSL should perhaps re-examine two moments in its history. Firstly, the 3rd Congress in Atureliya 75 years ago, in 1948, which is better known for its abortive ‘armed occupation’ action than the insights of its political line under Gen. Sec Harry Abeygoonewardena. The line was abandoned in 1950 in Matara. I’d say the correct line was (and perhaps is) a synthesis of Atureliya and Matara, which we never saw.
Secondly, the huge missed opportunity of 1972, when Dr SA Wickramasinghe and Sarath Muttetuwegama crossed over to the Opposition in protest at the retroactive character of the Criminal Justice Commission (CJC) Bill under which the rebels of April 1971 were tried. That more principled faction of the CPSL was supported by the newspaper Aththa and its respected editorialists. The paper, which had been banned from public transport by Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake, was sealed shut by Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike.
The split in the CPSL was healed by the return of Gen Sec KP Silva from Moscow. Lenin however, had made clear that a split was to be preferred to either confusion or opportunism. Had the CPSL rebels, led by the party’s founder-leader, followed the example of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) and stayed independent, it could have been the nucleus of a left alternative to the SLFP-led Government and deprived the UNP of a 5/6ths majority in Parliament in 1977.
The lesson for today is clear: the foreign policy of any ruling Communist Party however exalted and must not become the domestic policy – or even the foreign policy–of any other Communist party. Taking the line from Moscow of Beijing is a cardinal error that the Cubans and the Vietnamese never made, which is why most revolutionary left movements in the global south, especially Latin America, saw themselves on a ‘Hanoi-Havana line’ in the 1970s and 1980s.
BELATED BIRTH
When all is said and done, the positive contributions of the Communist party in Sri Lanka as elsewhere, have certainly outweighed the negative.In the case of Sri Lanka/Ceylon, there is another factor of a historical anomaly which perhaps explains the errors and failures of the island’s Communist movement and the Left movement as a whole.
Strikingly, Sri Lanka’s Left, including the Communist left, was born late—even by Asian standards. The Communist Party of China was founded in 1921. The Communist Party of Vietnam in 1930. It took till 1935 for the LSSP to be born. It was 1943 when the Communist party was founded.
This belated birth meant that the Communist Party of Ceylon was born with a great disadvantage. It was formed after the Third International — the ‘Comintern’–founded by Lenin, had been dissolved by Jospeh Stalin to remove the ‘foreign’ stigma from local Communist parties and to enable them to be more national when implementing the anti-Fascist Popular Front (which proved hugely successful). This was not a mistake at the time, or was a ‘necessary error’ (to use an Althusserianism) because in the statement of dissolution it was correctly observed that the Communist parties had grown and matured sufficiently as national mass parties.
Not so, the Communist Party of Ceylon which had not yet been born. It’s year of birth being the year of dissolution of the Comintern, it did not have the vital spirit and tough-mindedness of the Lenin-Stalin-Dimitrov-Togliatti ‘enrolment’. Zhou Enlai and Ho Chi Minh were Comintern communists.
The looser successor to the Comintern, the Cominform, was founded in 1947. By then, the Communist Party of Ceylon had been born, shaped, formed and mentored in the gap between the Comintern and Cominform, by the Communist parties of Great Britain and India—hardly the most militant and experienced of parties.
No leader of the Communist Party of Ceylon ever met Stalin. The International Communist Movement was organizationally non-existent as a single framework, between 1943, the year of the dissolution of the Comintern and 1947, the year of the founding of the Cominform. It was, in a sense, a vacuum.
The CPSL and the larger Communist movement of the island (right up to the JVP and FSP) bear the genetic weaknesses of this oddly belated birth and the absence of a direct connection with the great revolutionary parties, their complex theoretical and steely militant tradition and their leaders of titanic stature.
Nobody—person or party–can be blamed for the year and circumstances in which, and into which, they were born. But they are marked by it, and often have to fight hard to transcend the limitations of that moment.
Features
Sustaining good governance requires good systems
A prominent feature of the first year of the NPP government is that it has not engaged in the institutional reforms which was expected of it. This observation comes in the context of the extraordinary mandate with which the government was elected and the high expectations that accompanied its rise to power. When in opposition and in its election manifesto, the JVP and NPP took a prominent role in advocating good governance systems for the country. They insisted on constitutional reform that included the abolition of the executive presidency and the concentration of power it epitomises, the strengthening of independent institutions that overlook key state institutions such as the judiciary, public service and police, and the reform or repeal of repressive laws such as the PTA and the Online Safety Act.
The transformation of a political party that averaged between three to five percent of the popular vote into one that currently forms the government with a two thirds majority in parliament is a testament to the faith that the general population placed in the JVP/ NPP combine. This faith was the outcome of more than three decades of disciplined conduct in the aftermath of the bitter experience of the 1988 to 1990 period of JVP insurrection. The manner in which the handful of JVP parliamentarians engaged in debate with well researched critiques of government policy and actions, and their service in times of disaster such as the tsunami of 2004 won them the trust of the people. This faith was bolstered by the Aragalaya movement which galvanized the citizens against the ruling elites of the past.
In this context, the long delay to repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act which has earned notoriety for its abuse especially against ethnic and religious minorities, has been a disappointment to those who value human rights. So has been the delay in appointing an Auditor General, so important in ensuring accountability for the money expended by the state. The PTA has a long history of being used without restraint against those deemed to be anti-state which, ironically enough, included the JVP in the period 1988 to 1990. The draft Protection of the State from Terrorism Act (PSTA), published in December 2025, is the latest attempt to repeal and replace the PTA. Unfortunately, the PSTA largely replicates the structure, logic and dangers of previous failed counter terrorism bills, including the Counter Terrorism Act of 2018 and the Anti Terrorism Act proposed in 2023.
Misguided Assumption
Despite its stated commitment to rule of law and fundamental rights, the draft PTSA reproduces many of the core defects of the PTA. In a preliminary statement, the Centre for Policy Alternatives has observed among other things that “if there is a Detention Order made against the person, then in combination, the period of remand and detention can extend up to two years. This means that a person can languish in detention for up to two years without being charged with a crime. Such a long period again raises questions of the power of the State to target individuals, exacerbated by Sri Lanka’s history of long periods of remand and detention, which has contributed to abuse and violence.” Human Rights lawyer Ermiza Tegal has warned against the broad definition of terrorism under the proposed law: “The definition empowers state officials to term acts of dissent and civil disobedience as ‘terrorism’ and will lawfully permit disproportionate and excessive responses.” The legitimate and peaceful protests against abuse of power by the authorities cannot be classified as acts of terror.
The willingness to retain such powers reflects the surmise that the government feels that keeping in place the structures that come from the past is to their benefit, as they can utilise those powers in a crisis. Due to the strict discipline that exists within the JVP/NPP at this time there may be an assumption that those the party appoints will not abuse their trust. However, the country’s experience with draconian laws designed for exceptional circumstances demonstrates that they tend to become tools of routine governance. On the plus side, the government has given two months for public comment which will become meaningful if the inputs from civil society actors are taken into consideration.
Worldwide experience has repeatedly demonstrated that integrity at the level of individual leaders, while necessary, is not sufficient to guarantee good governance over time. This is where the absence of institutional reform becomes significant. The aftermath of Cyclone Ditwah in particular has necessitated massive procurements of emergency relief which have to be disbursed at maximum speed. There are also significant amounts of foreign aid flowing into the country to help it deal with the relief and recovery phase. There are protocols in place that need to be followed and monitored so that a fiasco like the disappearance of tsunami aid in 2004 does not recur. To the government’s credit there are no such allegations at the present time. But precautions need to be in place, and those precautions depend less on trust in individuals than on the strength and independence of oversight institutions.
Inappropriate Appointments
It is in this context that the government’s efforts to appoint its own preferred nominees to the Auditor General’s Department has also come as a disappointment to civil society groups. The unsuitability of the latest presidential nominee has given rise to the surmise that this nomination was a time buying exercise to make an acting appointment. For the fourth time, the Constitutional Council refused to accept the president’s nominee. The term of the three independent civil society members of the Constitutional Council ends in January which would give the government the opportunity to appoint three new members of its choice and get its way in the future.
The failure to appoint a permanent Auditor General has created an institutional vacuum at a critical moment. The Auditor General acts as a watchdog, ensuring effective service delivery promoting integrity in public administration and providing an independent review of the performance and accountability. Transparency International has observed “The sequence of events following the retirement of the previous Auditor General points to a broader political inertia and a governance failure. Despite the clear constitutional importance of the role, the appointment process has remained protracted and opaque, raising serious questions about political will and commitment to accountability.”
It would appear that the government leadership takes the position they have been given the mandate to govern the country which requires implementation by those they have confidence in. This may explain their approach to the appointment (or non-appointment) at this time of the Auditor General. Yet this approach carries risks. Institutions are designed to function beyond the lifespan of any one government and to protect the public interest even when those in power are tempted to act otherwise. The challenge and opportunity for the NPP government is to safeguard independent institutions and enact just laws, so that the promise of system change endures beyond personalities and political cycles.
by Jehan Perera
Features
General education reforms: What about language and ethnicity?
A new batch arrived at our Faculty again. Students representing almost all districts of the country remind me once again of the wonderful opportunity we have for promoting social and ethnic cohesion at our universities. Sadly, however, many students do not interact with each other during the first few semesters, not only because they do not speak each other’s language(s), but also because of the fear and distrust that still prevails among communities in our society.
General education reform presents an opportunity to explore ways to promote social and ethnic cohesion. A school curriculum could foster shared values, empathy, and critical thinking, through social studies and civics education, implement inclusive language policies, and raise critical awareness about our collective histories. Yet, the government’s new policy document, Transforming General Education in Sri Lanka 2025, leaves us little to look forward to in this regard.
The policy document points to several “salient” features within it, including: 1) a school credit system to quantify learning; 2) module-based formative and summative assessments to replace end-of-term tests; 3) skills assessment in Grade 9 consisting of a ‘literacy and numeracy test’ and a ‘career interest test’; 4) a comprehensive GPA-based reporting system spanning the various phases of education; 5) blended learning that combines online with classroom teaching; 6) learning units to guide students to select their preferred career pathways; 7) technology modules; 8) innovation labs; and 9) Early Childhood Education (ECE). Notably, social and ethnic cohesion does not appear in this list. Here, I explore how the proposed curriculum reforms align (or do not align) with the NPP’s pledge to inculcate “[s]afety, mutual understanding, trust and rights of all ethnicities and religious groups” (p.127), in their 2024 Election Manifesto.
Language/ethnicity in the present curriculum
The civil war ended over 15 years ago, but our general education system has done little to bring ethnic communities together. In fact, most students still cannot speak in the “second national language” (SNL) and textbooks continue to reinforce negative stereotyping of ethnic minorities, while leaving out crucial elements of our post-independence history.
Although SNL has been a compulsory subject since the 1990s, the hours dedicated to SNL are few, curricula poorly developed, and trained teachers few (Perera, 2025). Perhaps due to unconscious bias and for ideological reasons, SNL is not valued by parents and school communities more broadly. Most students, who enter our Faculty, only have basic reading/writing skills in SNL, apart from the few Muslim and Tamil students who schooled outside the North and the East; they pick up SNL by virtue of their environment, not the school curriculum.
Regardless of ethnic background, most undergraduates seem to be ignorant about crucial aspects of our country’s history of ethnic conflict. The Grade 11 history textbook, which contains the only chapter on the post-independence period, does not mention the civil war or the events that led up to it. While the textbook valourises ‘Sinhala Only’ as an anti-colonial policy (p.11), the material covering the period thereafter fails to mention the anti-Tamil riots, rise of rebel groups, escalation of civil war, and JVP insurrections. The words “Tamil” and “Muslim” appear most frequently in the chapter, ‘National Renaissance,’ which cursorily mentions “Sinhalese-Muslim riots” vis-à-vis the Temperance Movement (p.57). The disenfranchisement of the Malaiyaha Tamils and their history are completely left out.
Given the horrifying experiences of war and exclusion experienced by many of our peoples since independence, and because most students still learn in mono-ethnic schools having little interaction with the ‘Other’, it is not surprising that our undergraduates find it difficult to mix across language and ethnic communities. This environment also creates fertile ground for polarizing discourses that further divide and segregate students once they enter university.
More of the same?
How does Transforming General Education seek to address these problems? The introduction begins on a positive note: “The proposed reforms will create citizens with a critical consciousness who will respect and appreciate the diversity they see around them, along the lines of ethnicity, religion, gender, disability, and other areas of difference” (p.1). Although National Education Goal no. 8 somewhat problematically aims to “Develop a patriotic Sri Lankan citizen fostering national cohesion, national integrity, and national unity while respecting cultural diversity (p. 2), the curriculum reforms aim to embed values of “equity, inclusivity, and social justice” (p. 9) through education. Such buzzwords appear through the introduction, but are not reflected in the reforms.
Learning SNL is promoted under Language and Literacy (Learning Area no. 1) as “a critical means of reconciliation and co-existence”, but the number of hours assigned to SNL are minimal. For instance, at primary level (Grades 1 to 5), only 0.3 to 1 hour is allocated to SNL per week. Meanwhile, at junior secondary level (Grades 6 to 9), out of 35 credits (30 credits across 15 essential subjects that include SNL, history and civics; 3 credits of further learning modules; and 2 credits of transversal skills modules (p. 13, pp.18-19), SNL receives 1 credit (10 hours) per term. Like other essential subjects, SNL is to be assessed through formative and summative assessments within modules. As details of the Grade 9 skills assessment are not provided in the document, it is unclear whether SNL assessments will be included in the ‘Literacy and numeracy test’. At senior secondary level – phase 1 (Grades 10-11 – O/L equivalent), SNL is listed as an elective.
Refreshingly, the policy document does acknowledge the detrimental effects of funding cuts in the humanities and social sciences, and highlights their importance for creating knowledge that could help to “eradicate socioeconomic divisions and inequalities” (p.5-6). It goes on to point to the salience of the Humanities and Social Sciences Education under Learning Area no. 6 (p.12):
“Humanities and Social Sciences education is vital for students to develop as well as critique various forms of identities so that they have an awareness of their role in their immediate communities and nation. Such awareness will allow them to contribute towards the strengthening of democracy and intercommunal dialogue, which is necessary for peace and reconciliation. Furthermore, a strong grounding in the Humanities and Social Sciences will lead to equity and social justice concerning caste, disability, gender, and other features of social stratification.”
Sadly, the seemingly progressive philosophy guiding has not moulded the new curriculum. Subjects that could potentially address social/ethnic cohesion, such as environmental studies, history and civics, are not listed as learning areas at the primary level. History is allocated 20 hours (2 credits) across four years at junior secondary level (Grades 6 to 9), while only 10 hours (1 credit) are allocated to civics. Meanwhile, at the O/L, students will learn 5 compulsory subjects (Mother Tongue, English, Mathematics, Science, and Religion and Value Education), and 2 electives—SNL, history and civics are bunched together with the likes of entrepreneurship here. Unlike the compulsory subjects, which are allocated 140 hours (14 credits or 70 hours each) across two years, those who opt for history or civics as electives would only have 20 hours (2 credits) of learning in each. A further 14 credits per term are for further learning modules, which will allow students to explore their interests before committing to a A/L stream or career path.
With the distribution of credits across a large number of subjects, and the few credits available for SNL, history and civics, social/ethnic cohesion will likely remain on the back burner. It appears to be neglected at primary level, is dealt sparingly at junior secondary level, and relegated to electives in senior years. This means that students will be able to progress through their entire school years, like we did, with very basic competencies in SNL and little understanding of history.
Going forward
Whether the students who experience this curriculum will be able to “resist and respond to hegemonic, divisive forces that pose a threat to social harmony and multicultural coexistence” (p.9) as anticipated in the policy, is questionable. Education policymakers and others must call for more attention to social and ethnic cohesion in the curriculum. However, changes to the curriculum would only be meaningful if accompanied by constitutional reform, abolition of policies, such as the Prevention of Terrorism Act (and its proxies), and other political changes.
For now, our school system remains divided by ethnicity and religion. Research from conflict-ridden societies suggests that lack of intercultural exposure in mono-ethnic schools leads to ignorance, prejudice, and polarized positions on politics and national identity. While such problems must be addressed in broader education reform efforts that also safeguard minority identities, the new curriculum revision presents an opportune moment to move this agenda forward.
(Ramya Kumar is attached to the Department of Community and Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Jaffna).
Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.
by Ramya Kumar
Features
Top 10 Most Popular Festive Songs
Certain songs become ever-present every December, and with Christmas just two days away, I thought of highlighting the Top 10 Most Popular Festive Songs.
The famous festive songs usually feature timeless classics like ‘White Christmas,’ ‘Silent Night,’ and ‘Jingle Bells,’ alongside modern staples like Mariah Carey’s ‘All I Want for Christmas Is You,’ Wham’s ‘Last Christmas,’ and Brenda Lee’s ‘Rockin’ Around the Christmas Tree.’
The following renowned Christmas songs are celebrated for their lasting impact and festive spirit:
* ‘White Christmas’ — Bing Crosby
The most famous holiday song ever recorded, with estimated worldwide sales exceeding 50 million copies. It remains the best-selling single of all time.
* ‘All I Want for Christmas Is You’ — Mariah Carey
A modern anthem that dominates global charts every December. As of late 2025, it holds an 18x Platinum certification in the US and is often ranked as the No. 1 popular holiday track.

Mariah Carey: ‘All I Want for Christmas Is You’
* ‘Silent Night’ — Traditional
Widely considered the quintessential Christmas carol, it is valued for its peaceful melody and has been recorded by hundreds of artistes, most famously by Bing Crosby.
* ‘Jingle Bells’ — Traditional
One of the most universally recognised and widely sung songs globally, making it a staple for children and festive gatherings.
* ‘Rockin’ Around the Christmas Tree’ — Brenda Lee
Recorded when Lee was just 13, this rock ‘n’ roll favourite has seen a massive resurgence in the 2020s, often rivaling Mariah Carey for the top spot on the Billboard Hot 100.
* ‘Last Christmas’ — Wham!
A bittersweet ’80s pop classic that has spent decades in the top 10 during the holiday season. It recently achieved 7x Platinum status in the UK.
* ‘Jingle Bell Rock’ — Bobby Helms
A festive rockabilly standard released in 1957 that remains a staple of holiday radio and playlists.
* ‘The Christmas Song (Chestnuts Roasting on an Open Fire)’— Nat King Cole
Known for its smooth, warm vocals, this track is frequently cited as the ultimate Christmas jazz standard.

Wham! ‘Last Christmas’
* ‘It’s the Most Wonderful Time of the Year’ — Andy Williams
Released in 1963, this high-energy big band track is famous for capturing the “hectic merriment” of the season.
* ‘Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer’ — Gene Autry
A beloved narrative song that has sold approximately 25 million copies worldwide, cementing the character’s place in Christmas folklore.
Other perennial favourites often in the mix:
* ‘Feliz Navidad’ – José Feliciano
* ‘A Holly Jolly Christmas’ – Burl Ives
* ‘Let It Snow! Let It Snow! Let It Snow!’ – Frank Sinatra
Let me also add that this Thursday’s ‘SceneAround’ feature (25th December) will be a Christmas edition, highlighting special Christmas and New Year messages put together by well-known personalities for readers of The Island.
-
News18 hours agoMembers of Lankan Community in Washington D.C. donates to ‘Rebuilding Sri Lanka’ Flood Relief Fund
-
Midweek Review7 days agoHow massive Akuregoda defence complex was built with proceeds from sale of Galle Face land to Shangri-La
-
News6 days agoPope fires broadside: ‘The Holy See won’t be a silent bystander to the grave disparities, injustices, and fundamental human rights violations’
-
News6 days agoPakistan hands over 200 tonnes of humanitarian aid to Lanka
-
Business5 days agoUnlocking Sri Lanka’s hidden wealth: A $2 billion mineral opportunity awaits
-
News7 days agoBurnt elephant dies after delayed rescue; activists demand arrests
-
Editorial7 days agoColombo Port facing strategic neglect
-
News5 days agoArmy engineers set up new Nayaru emergency bridge


