Connect with us

Features

Abrogation of the B-C Pact and what followed

Published

on

(Excerpted from Render Unto Caesar by Bradman Weerakoon, Secretary to the Prime Minister)


Yet, as was to happen over and over again in the country’s politics, the vocal minority, in this case the hardliners finally won the day (in getting SWRD to abrogate the B-C Pact). In October 1957 the UNP under the leadership of J R Jayewardene set out on a march from Colombo to Kandy to protest against the pact. On the first day they covered 11 miles amidst some obstruction and skirmishes with government sponsored elements.

On the second day after going three miles they were met at Imbulgoda by a blockade of the road led by the local MP for Gampaha, S D Bandaranayake. The MP, a distant relative of the prime minister, was well-known as an eccentric and was referred to as an ‘unguided missile’. Many of us did not believe that Mr Bandaranaike had any responsibility for this. It was regarded as a purely local endeavour in showing opposition to the pact and the police behaved impartially in keeping the marchers and the obstructors apart.

Altogether it was somewhat of an embarrassment to the prime minister who felt that the march would have lost steam on its own as it proceeded up country. J R Jayewardene had no hesitation in calling off the march but went on four days later to the Dalada Maligawa in Kandy to worship the Sacred Tooth relic of the Buddha and offer puja to the gods of the four devales “to stop the pact.”

The attempt of the UNP to undermine the prime minister by mobilizing people with the march to Kandy, palpably failed and the tension over the BC Pact subsided; but not for long. By February 1958, the FP put pressure on the prime minister to move the agreement into legislation which would guarantee regional councils and their powers.

Mr Bandaranaike, whose authority in the Cabinet was being challenged by minister Philip Gunewardene over his proposed reform of the Paddy Lands legislation, now found himself increasingly besieged. Those who were against concessions to the Tamils began to assert themselves and asked not only for details of the regional councils draft legislation but the abrogation of the pact itself. Foremost among Mr Bandaranaike’s critics were the self-same bhikkus who had helped to ensure his victory in 1956.

In March of 1958, the ministry of transport made a decision – in hindsight a major blunder given the fragile situation – to send some nationalized buses to the North with the Sinhala letter `Sri’ on the licence plates. The northern militants began to deface the licence plates and the southern extremists retaliated with a widespread campaign of smearing tar over Tamil name boards wherever they occurred.

I recall that the Tamil lettering of the name board in the prime minister’s office in Senate Square itself and even the Tamil lettering on the prime minister’s official gold-coloured Cadillac, which read ‘left hand drive’, were not spared in this virulent tar-brush campaign. There was much confusion in the city at the time but after police shooting, things were brought under control in a few days.

The Tamil leaders, especially Chelvanayakam, who was always for non-violent protest to win rights, did what they could to restrain the militants but the die had been cast. At the Cabinet meeting held on April 9, 1958, some ministers urged that the pact be scrapped but the prime minister managed to hold them off. What finally undid Mr Bandaranaike’s genuine bid for accommodating with the Tamils was the action of around 150 bhikkus who attempted to march to 65, Rosmead Place and compel the prime minister to withdraw from the pact.

The police had stopped the procession about 100 yards away on McCarthy Road but the group refused to move until they had won their demand. Mr Bandaranaike went down to meet them and tried to explain, but the monks would have none of it. Finally, at noon that day he drove to Radio Ceylon and announced that given the militant behaviour of the Tamils and the popular opposition this had caused, he was unilaterally abrogating the pact. Some political commentators have called this the most ‘grievous blunder of his career’.

The Tamil leaders responded immediately by calling for a civil disobedience mass campaign and planned for a conference on May 23 in Vavuniya to organize the protest. While this was going on serious violence was breaking out between groups of Sinhalese and Tamils in several parts of the country. Reports began to come in to the PM’s office first from Polonnaruwa where G A Derek Aluvihare had to give orders to the police to fire and stop lorry loads of Land Development Department labour from raiding Tamil settlements.

On the 24 May, a former mayor of Nuwara Eliya, Seneviratne, and two friends were waylaid and killed in Eravur. As news of this spread, vehicles and trains were halted and Tamils were searched for, in Polonnaruwa and other towns in the North Central Province. The violence quickly spread to Colombo and the larger towns were fanned by the most fantastic rumours. In Mount Lavinia on Hotel Road, where my mother lived, a Tamil man had petrol thrown on him and was being burnt to death. He was saved only by the most courageous exertions of the Warden of St. Thomas’ College who fought off the miscreants. This, some of my family members personally witnessed.

It became clear that the only way to quell the widespread rioting was to bring in the Emergency and after some consultation with the Governor-General Sir Oliver Goonetilleke Emergency was declared at mid day on May 27, 1958. This meant that the press was censored, night and day curfews imposed; and public meetings, processions and strikes in essential services prohibited.
However, as the news was taken to the north and east by persons fleeing from the violence in the capital, rioting against the small temporary settlements of migrant Sinhalese fishermen from Dondra and Negombo and business establishments in the towns followed. One of the worst incidents was the attack on the Buddhist Naga vihare in Jaffna town sparked by the news of the burning alive of the pusaries in the Panadura kovil.

On May 30 news came in to the small coordinating unit set-up in the prime minister’s office of the destruction of the temple on the island of Nagadipa. This piece of information of the sacking of an important place of Budddhist pilgrimage — by tradition believed to be a site hallowed by a visit of the Buddha to settle a conflict between the Nagas and the original inhabitants of the land — could have led to a massacre of Tamils in the south. The news was deliberately withheld from the public.

Emergency ’58 was undoubtedly the most serious communal outbreak the country had suffered in modern times. I was at the centre of things conveying information to the prime minister as the news came in from the police desk. Having served for a year in Jaffna four years earlier, I was particularly stricken by the turn of the events took. I recalled how on Independence Day in 1955, as the Civil Service Cadet in office, I was chosen by the government agent, the pious and gentle M Sri Kantha, to represent the government and hoist the national flag at the ceremonies on the island of Delft.

It was a small but impressive function with the school children in their starched white uniforms singing the national anthem with great gusto, of course in Tamil. It was a two-hour journey by Navy boat to the island, which boasts a population of 8,000 people and hundreds of wild ponies, introduced by a Dutch governor in the 17th century when the protectorate of Jaffna was under Dutch rule. In British times a Lieutenant Nolan and his men were rumoured to have sown some ‘wild oats’ as well. This was still evident in the fair complexion, blonde hair and blue eyes of some of the village lasses.

It was a full day of pony races, singing and dancing and a tearful farewell procession back to the jetty late in the evening. The journey back to Kayts remains etched in my memory; of the luminescence of the spray as the boat cut through the water, the soft moonlight that bathed the serene night and the quiet chatter of the seamen seated on the gunwale.

Sir Oliver, who was a very able and persuasive administrator with a long track record of crisis management, was given the job of handling the emergency by the prime minister and soon brought things under control.

Tarzie Vittachi who described Emergency ‘58 with minute attention to detail and great perspicacity relates a story of the bluff and bluster with which Sir Oliver managed his difficult role. Sir Oliver apparently invited the press to meet him soon after taking charge. As the pressmen moved into his room at Queens House, now converted into some kind of Command Headquarters, they saw Sir Oliver seated before a battery of telephones.

The phones would ring very often during the press briefing and lifting one phone after the other and without a moment of hesitation Sir Oliver would intone – he always had a slight stammer – “shoot, shoot” and replace the instrument. It was dramatic and very telling and there was no doubt after that as to who was in charge.
There was much for us to do and to think about in the prime minister’s office those days. It was difficult to discern any specific pattern in what had taken place. There were elements of both ethnic rivalry and hate and plain criminality. Most of the looting was indiscriminate with the looters plundering whatever they could lay their hands on. Boutiques and little food outlets – those selling plantains and the Jaffna cigars, seemed to be especially attractive to local thugs who made merry while `law and order’ was busy elsewhere.

In great measure, the police and the army when called out later, acted promptly and equitably. The police in the main did not take sides, as has unfortunately happened in later communal clashes, and sometimes to the great surprise of some militant organizations, shot at Sinhalese looters as well. Perhaps Sir Oliver’s command helped and the more multi-racial make-up of the law enforcers, especially at the higher levels, would have made a difference.

It was different in 1983 when I was directly concerned as commissioner-general of essential services. In 1958, the police and armed forces generally won the respect of the people for their broadly impartial behaviour and there were virtually no attacks on service personnel directly. An unfortunate trend was the incursions into the estate line-rooms, where the Indian Tamil population on estates close to the up-country towns were subject to pillage and harassment. Things on the estates had got particularly bad around the towns of Matale and Badulla.
While Sir Oliver appeared to be the man in charge of the Emergency – a role he was glad to take on at the prime minister’s bidding – there was no doubt that Mr Bandaranaike was always very much in the picture. The Emergency continued to be in force for several months and the Federal Party members were detained, albeit in some comfort, at the Galle Face Hotel. Mr Bandaranaike took a firm stand against the Sinhalese rioters and kept them in jail for as long as possible. This caused resentment among some government supporters.

As the tension subsided, Bandaranaike thought it time to present to the Parliament the legislation which provided for the `reasonable use of Tamil’. This was passed but neither the FP nor the UNP participated in the debate. However, the Act which was intended to permit a wide official use of Tamil in the Northern and Eastern provinces was not implementable without the regulations which the Act provided for being brought into law. It took almost 10 more years before the operative regulations were brought into effect. By this time the FP had become, for the first time, a part of the national government.

Towards the third quarter of 1958, things began to become very difficult for Mr Bandaranaike and there were frequent convulsions in the Cabinet. In addition there erupted a series of strikes especially in the nationalized port and transport sectors, including the post and telecommunication services and the plantations. Organized labour, very much controlled by the LSSP and CP, and on the estates by the CWC and DWC, had been brought into powerful federations.

The Unions were restive, not having yet received the fruits of the ‘socialist’ peoples’ revolution, which they, the workers had brought into being in 1956. Some of the trade union leaders like D A Piyadasa of the All Ceylon Harbour and Dock workers union, D G William of the State Employees Federation and Bala Tampoe were then important and powerful people. Tension between the unions, flexing their muscles, and the bureaucracy were not uncommon.

One morning, Vernon Peiries, a civil service colleague, a few years senior to me who was deputy port commissioner, came rushing into my room holding his jaw and asking for a hot-water compress. Apparently he had been having a heated discussion with D A Piyadasa, whose union was on strike on why a salary increase could not be given. Piyadasa had suddenly jumped up and slapped him across the face. Vernon whose office was also in Senate Square had come to me for treatment, solace and recompense for the indignity, more than to complain of the pain, he had suffered.

The civil service bush telephones began to hum and Shirley Amerasinghe, then a rising star as director of establishments called a confab for the afternoon and the CCS association decided that it was time to take a stand. They would take-up the issue with the prime minister on a non-negotiable condition, that Piyadasa must be both, criminally charged in the courts and suspended from entering the Port. The problem was a complex one for the prime minister since the higher echelons of the bureaucracy had now decided to dig their heels in while the political union leadership including Philip Gunawardene, his minister of agriculture and food, who had connections with Piyadasa, were for settling the matter with an apology or similar face-saving device.

I will never forget a particular high-level meeting called by the prime minister in his Senate Square office when he pleaded and tried to cajole the permanent secretary to the ministry of transport and works, the diminutive and implacable M F de S Jayaratne, under whom the Port then functioned, to step down from the high position that he was taking and agree to some compromise so that the deadlock could be broken.

To emphasize his point Bandaranaike got up and walked round the table, to Jayaratne but the permanent secretary who remained sitting throughout, would not budge. `Not on my life’ was all he did not say. Bandaranaike’s pleas were of no avail and the case against Piyadasa was filed. In this particular contest the prime minister had lost.

Actually, the prime minister and M F de S Jayaratne were good friends and often played billiards against each other at the Orient Club in Colombo 7 where they were both members, but this relationship had nothing to do with the performance of duty. Jayaratne was one of the best officials I have ever seen in that respect.

There were other points of contention developing in the coalition, which Mr Bandaranaike had, with ingenuity and persuasive skill, put together. The fundamental contradictions between right and left, which he had managed with such resourcefulness, were emerging and they burst out into the open with Mr Philip Gunawardene’s Paddy Lands draft legislation.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Buddhist Approach to Human Challenges

Published

on

Life, by its very nature, invariably presents a myriad of challenges that are fundamental to the human experience. The various social ills that afflict humanity cannot be understood without recognizing the profound human dynamics at play. Navigating these challenges according to Buddhism involves shifting from attempting to control external circumstances to mastering one’s internal responses. Central to these challenges are certain detrimental drives stemming from pernicious distortions in the functioning of the human mind.

According to Buddhism, human suffering—both on a personal and societal level—arises from three unwholesome roots: greed, hatred, and ignorance or delusion. These roots manifest primarily as the unbridled proliferation of these negative states, serving as the foundation for our conduct. The Buddhist perspective offers profound insights for confronting these difficulties by emphasizing the nature of suffering, known as dukkha. Buddhism teaches that suffering (dukkha) is an inevitable part of life and is fueled by greed, hatred, and ignorance or delusion. This approach promotes mental transformation through mindfulness, ethical living, and the cultivation of wisdom, empowering individuals to confront their struggles with clarity and resilience.

Furthermore, accepting that suffering and difficulty are inherent parts of the human experience—while expecting life to be free of challenges—is, in itself, a cause of suffering. It is also important to recognize that all situations, whether good or bad, are temporary. This understanding helps reduce anxiety when facing difficult times, as these will eventually pass, and it prevents possessiveness during happy moments. Cultivating mindfulness (sati) and living in the present moment without dwelling on the past or worrying about the future is essential.

Understanding that all things—emotions, situations, relationships, and physical bodies—are constantly changing and in a state of flux helps reduce the fear of loss and provides comfort during difficult times, ensuring that we know pain will pass. Moreover, recognizing that the self, or ego, is not a fixed entity minimizes selfish grasping, arrogance, and the tendency to perceive challenges as personal attacks.

At the core of many human challenges lie the three unwholesome mental qualities identified by Buddhism: greed (raga), hatred (dovesa), and ignorance or delusion (avijja or moha). These states of mind serve as obstacles to spiritual progress and underlie a spectrum of harmful thoughts and actions. The Buddha employed powerful metaphors to illustrate these forces, referring to them as the three poisons or fires that ignite suffering and trap beings in the cycle of samsara.

Greed leads to insatiable desires that obscure our awareness of others’ needs, creating a cycle of frustration. Greed encompasses all forms of appetite, such as desire, lust, craving, and longing, manifesting in both physical and mental forms. It embodies the concept of grasping, leading to clinging and an inability to let go. As an unwholesome mental state, greed can become insatiable and inexhaustible. People are often drawn to pleasant things, and no amount of forms, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, or mental objects can satisfy their desires. In their intense thirst for possession or gratification of desire, individuals may become trapped in the wheel of samsara, overlooking the needs of marginalized groups based on religion and ethnicity (as noted by Piyadassi Thera). Those who overcome greed realize that all mundane pleasures are fleeting and transient. In a society driven by consumerism, people may find themselves endlessly chasing after things of little value, becoming enslaved by them.

Hatred is another unwholesome mental state that fosters division and conflict, distancing us from genuine relationships. It encompasses unwholesome mental states such as ill will, enmity, hostility, and prejudice. Hatred can be subtle, lying dormant in a person’s mind until it finds expression in unexpected moments. This destructive emotion can degenerate into mass-scale violence and bloodshed within society. Today, hatred and hostility against minorities based on religion and ethnicity are prevalent in many countries. People are often targeted by bigotry and hate, leading to a rise in antagonistic and derogatory behavior toward certain religious and ethnic groups. Hatred, enmity, and retaliation do not foster spiritual well-being; rather, they vitiate our own minds. Buddhists are encouraged to cultivate metta (loving-kindness). Greed and hatred, coupled with ignorance, are the chief causes of the evils that pervade this deluded world. As noted by Narada, “The enemy of the whole world is lust (greed), through which all evils come to living beings. This lust, when obstructed by some cause, transforms into wrath.”

The most profound of these afflictions, ignorance (avijja) or delusion (moha), clouds our judgment and obscures our capacity for understanding, causing us to harm ourselves and others through misguided actions. Addressing bhikkhus, the Buddha declared, ” I do not perceive any single hindrance other than the hindrance of ignorance by which mankind is obstructed, and for so long as in samsara, it is indeed through the hindrance of ignorance that humankind is obstructed and for a long time runs on, wanders in samsara. No other single thing exists like the hindrance of ignorance or delusion, which obstructs humankind and make wander forever. This unwholesome mindset generates negative speech, actions, and thoughts, perpetuating our own suffering. As stated in the Dhammapada, “All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; if one speaks or acts with an evil mind, suffering follows.”

Buddhism urges us to go beyond merely addressing the symptoms of our problems. Instead, it invites us to explore the roots of our suffering and examine how greed, hatred, and ignorance manifest in our lives. By uncovering these sources of distress, we can cultivate essential qualities such as compassion, loving-kindness (metta), and acceptance. These virtues are crucial for ethical engagement with significant societal issues, including environmental challenges and social inequality.

In a world marked by material prosperity and emotional chaos, many individuals may feel lost or overwhelmed. The teachings of the Buddha remain relevant today, reminding us that the origins of our struggles often reside within our own minds. By practising ethical self-discipline and steering clear of destructive emotions like jealousy, anger, and arrogance, we can transform our experiences and relationships.

Buddhism teaches that cultivating wholesome mental qualities is essential for spiritual advancement. The positive counterparts to the three unwholesome states are non-greed (alobha), non-hatred (adosa), and non-delusion (amoha). These virtues represent not merely the absence of negativity but also the active presence of beneficial qualities such as generosity (dana), loving kindness (metta), and wisdom (panna). Each of these six mental states serves as a foundation for both personal growth and societal harmony.

Human beings are often tempted by moral transgressions rooted in unwholesome qualities. Actions driven by greed, hatred and ignorance require wisdom and mindful awareness to overcome them, allowing us to see the interconnectedness of all beings and act accordingly.

As we strive to abandon these unwholesome states of mind and cultivate awareness, we contribute positively to our lives and the broader world. By embracing Buddhist teachings, we learn that transforming our minds can significantly impact our experiences and the lives of those around us. Through this mindful practice, we can aspire to create a more compassionate, harmonious existence, transcending the limitations of unwholesome mental states and fostering a deeper connection with ourselves and others.

by Dr. Chandradasa Nanayakkara

 

Continue Reading

Features

How does the Buddha differ?

Published

on

Buddhism, perhaps, is not a religion if the definition of religion is strictly applied. However, by an extension of that definition, as well as by consensus, Buddhism is considered a religion and is the fourth largest religion with about half a billion followers worldwide. Of the four great religions in the world, Christianity is still way ahead with 2.6 billion adherents, followed by Islam with 1.9 billion and Hinduism with 1.2 billion followers. In most Western Christian countries church attendances are on the decline whilst the numbers following Islam are increasing with Islamic youth displaying signs of increasing religious ardour. There are recent reports that Buddhism has also joined the ranks of shrinking religions. Is this cause for concern? Is this happening by the very nature of Buddhism?

Hinduism, the world’s oldest living religion rooted in the Indus Valley Civilization and dating back at least four millennia, is considered to have evolved from ancient cultural and religious practices than being founded by a single individual, unlike the other three religions. The Buddha differs from Jesus Christ and Prophet Mohammed in many ways, the most important being that there is no higher power involved in what the Buddha discovered.

Jesus Christ is considered the ‘Son of God’ and Christianity is built on the life, resurrection and teachings of Christ with emphasis on the belief in one God expressed through the Trinity: God the Father, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit. Therefore, there is no room for questioning the words of the Almighty passed through the Son.

Islam, with its Five Pillars of faith, frequent daily prayers, charity, fasting during Ramadan and pilgrimage to Mecca, is founded on revelations made by Almighty God, Allah, to Mohammed, the last of his Prophets, which are recorded in verse in the Holy Book, Quran. Muslims consider the Quran to be verbatim words of God and the unaltered, final revelation. This leaves even less room for questioning.

In contrast, the Buddha achieved everything by himself with no help from any higher source. Rebelling against some of the practices in the religion to which he was born and seeking a solution to the ever-pervading sense of dissatisfaction, Prince Siddhartha embarked on a journey of discovery that culminated in Enlightenment, under the Bodhi tree on the full moon day of the month of Vesak.

Hinduism, or Sanatana Dharma as traditionally referred to by followers, encompasses the concepts of Karma, Samsara, Moksha and Dharma with a creator Brahma, preserver Vishnu and destroyer Shiva. In addition, there are multitudes of gods serving various functions and there are ritual practices of Puja (worship), Bhakti (devotion), Yajna (sacrificial rites) in addition to meditation and Yoga. The one thing that has blighted Hinduism, on top of sacrifices, is the caste system. The uncompromising attitude of Brahmins led to the formation Sikhism as well, long after the establishment of Buddhism.

Prince Siddhartha studied under eminent teachers of the day, of which there were many, but realised the limitations of their knowledge. Having already given up the extreme of luxury, he went to the other extreme of self-deprivation which after a search for six years, he realised also was not the solution to the problem. Exploring through his mind he realised the truth and came up with the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path. He shunned extremes and proposed the Middle Path which seems to hold sway in many spheres of life, even today.

Buddha’s greatest achievement was the analysis of the mind and scientists are only now establishing the accuracy of the concepts the Buddha elucidated, not with the help of supernatural powers or sophisticated machinery at the disposal of modern-day scientists but by the exploration of the mind by turning the searchlight inwards.

Having discovered the cause of universal dissatisfaction and the path to overcome it, the Buddha walked across vast swathes of India, most likely barefoot, preaching to many, in terms they could understand, as evidenced by the different suttas illustrating the same fact in different ways; to the intelligent it was a short explanation but for others it was a more detailed discussion.

In sharp contrast to all other religious leaders, the Buddha encouraged discussion and challenge before acceptance. What the Buddha stated in the Kalama Sutta, acceptance only after conviction, laid the foundation for scientific thinking.

The Buddha, being a human not supernatural, never claimed infallibility as evidenced by his agreement with his father King Suddhodana that ordaining his son Rahula without permission was a mistake and took steps to ensure that this did not happen again. In fact, the entire Vinaya Pitaka is not an arbitrary rule book laid down by the Buddha, but are the rules the Buddha laid down for the Sangha, based on errant actions by Bhikkhus. Long before the legal concept of retroactive justice was established, the Buddha implemented it in the Vinaya Pitaka.

In an interesting video on YouTube titled “Nature of Buddhism”, Bhante Dhammika of Australia (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY8WfGJq2FI) discusses some unique aspects of Buddhism. Some religions are ‘high demand’ religions where the followers are required to strictly adhere to certain rules which is not the case in Buddhism and he opines that this has led to the gentleness of Buddhists, at times leading to even being lackadaisical! Interestingly, as a widely travelled person, he describes his personal experience of the change of people’s attitudes on going from places with Buddhist influence to others. Speaking of Sri Lanka, where he spent many years, he commends the traditional hospitality as well as lack of cruelty to animals. He refers to “Law based religions” where some things are compulsory whereas in Buddhism there is no compulsion. Buddha was not a lawgiver but recommended good behaviour, giving reasons why and encouraged thinking. Some religions are exclusivist, claiming that there is nothing in other religions. Buddhism is not and Bhante Dhammika refers to an incident where the Buddha encouraged a disciple who converted from Jainism to continue to give alms to his former Jain colleagues.

Have all these strengths of Buddhism become its weakness and the reason for the shrinking number of followers? Had Buddhism demanded more from followers would it have flourished better? Is the numbers game that important? These are interesting questions to ponder over and I am sure, in time, researchers would write theses on these.

Whilst total numbers may diminish in traditional Buddhist areas, more people in the West are recognising the value of the philosophy of Buddhism. Mindfulness, a concept the Buddha introduced is gaining wide acceptance and is increasingly applied in many spheres of modern life. Perhaps, what is important is not the numbers that practise Buddhism as a religion but the lasting influence of the Buddha’s concepts and foundations he laid for modern scientific thinking and analysis of the mind!

By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

Continue Reading

Features

Political violence stalking Trump administration

Published

on

A scene that unfolded during the shooting incident at the recent White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington. (BBC)

It would not be particularly revelatory to say that the US is plagued by ‘gun violence’. It is a deeply entrenched and widespread malaise that has come in tandem with the relative ease with which firearms could be acquired and owned by sections of the US public, besides other causes.

However, a third apparent attempt on the life of US President Donald Trump in around two and a half years is both thought-provoking and unsettling for the defenders of democracy. After all, whatever its short comings the US remains the world’s most vibrant democracy and in fact the ‘mightiest’ one. And the US must remain a foremost democracy for the purpose of balancing and offsetting the growing power of authoritarian states in the global power system, who are no friends of genuine representational governance.

Therefore, the recent breaching of the security cordon surrounding the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington at which President Trump and his inner Cabinet were present, by an apparently ‘Lone Wolf’ gunman, besides raising issues relating to the reliability of the security measures deployed for the President, indicates a notable spike in anti-VVIP political violence in particular in the US. It is a pointer to a strong and widespread emergence of anti-democratic forces which seem to be gaining in virulence and destructiveness.

The issues raised by the attack are in the main for the US’ political Right and its supporters. They have smugly and complacently stood by while the extremists in their midst have taken centre stage and begun to dictate the course of Right wing politics. It is the political culture bred by them that leads to ‘Lone Wolf’ gunmen, for instance, who see themselves as being repressed or victimized, taking the law into their own hands, so to speak, and perpetrating ‘revenge attacks’ on the state and society.

A disproportionate degree of attention has been paid particularly internationally to Donald Trump’s personality and his eccentricities but such political persons cannot be divorced from the political culture in which they originate and have their being. That is, “structural” questions matter. Put simply, Donald Trump is a ‘true son’ of the Far Right, his principal support base. The issues raised are therefore for the President as well as his supporters of the Right.

We are obliged to respect the choices of the voting public but in the case of Trump’s election to the highest public position in the US, this columnist is inclined to see in those sections that voted for Trump blind followers of the latter who cared not for their candidate’s suitability, in every relevant respect, and therefore acted irrationally. It would seem that the Right in the US wanted their candidate to win by ‘hook or by crook’ and exercise power on their behalf.

By making the above observations this columnist does not intend to imply that voting publics everywhere in the world of democracy cast their vote sensibly. In the case of Sri Lanka, for example, the question could be raised whether the voters of the country used their vote sensibly when voting into office the majority of Executive Presidents and other persons holding high public office. The obvious answer is ‘no’ and this should lead to a wider public discussion on the dire need for thoroughgoing voter education. The issue is a ‘huge’ one that needs to be addressed in the appropriate forums and is beyond the scope of this column.

Looking back it could be said that the actions of Trump and his die-hard support base led to the Rule of Law in the US being undermined as perhaps never before in modern times. A shaming moment in this connection was the protest march, virtually motivated by Trump, of his supporters to the US Capitol on January 6th, 2021, with the aim of scuttling the presidential poll result of that year. Much violence and unruly behaviour, as known, was let loose. This amounted to denigrating the democratic process and encouraging the violent take over of the state.

In a public address, prior to the unruly conduct of his supporters, Trump is on record as blaring forth the following: ‘We won this election and we won by a landslide’, ‘We will stop the steal’, ‘We will never give up. We will never concede. It doesn’t happen’, ‘If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.’

It is plain to see that such inflammatory utterances could lead impressionable minds in particular to revolt violently. Besides, they should have led the more rationally inclined to wonder whether their candidate was the most suitable person to hold the office of President.

Unfortunately, the latter process was not to be and the question could be raised whether the US is in the ‘safest pair of hands’. Needless to say, as events have revealed, Donald Trump is proving to be one of the most erratic heads of state the US has ever had.

However, the latest attempt on the life of President Trump suggests that considerable damage has been done to the democratic integrity of the US and none other than the President himself has to take on himself a considerable proportion of the blame for such degeneration, besides the US’ Far Right. They could be said to be ‘reaping the whirlwind.’

It is a time for soul-searching by the US Right. The political Right has the right to exist, so the speak, in a functional democracy but it needs to take cognizance of how its political culture is affecting the democratic integrity or health of the US. Ironically, the repressive and chauvinistic politics advocated by it is having the effect of activating counter-violence of the most murderous kind, as was witnessed at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Continued repressive politics could only produce more such incidents that could be self-defeating for the US.

Some past US Presidents were assassinated but the present political violence in the country brings into focus as perhaps never before the role that an anti-democratic political culture could play in unraveling the gains that the US has made over the decades. A duty is cast on pro-democracy forces to work collectively towards protecting the democratic integrity and strength of the US.

Continue Reading

Trending