Features
Of Turbans, Ties and Statesmen: Inaugural Session of the State Council of Ceylon and the election of its first Speaker
When the Donoughmore constitution was put into effect, one of the key changes that happened in Ceylon (as Sri Lanka was known then), was the abolition of the Legislative Council and the formation of the State Council. Among its most groundbreaking reforms was the introduction of universal suffrage—the right for every man and woman over the age of 21 to vote, regardless of class, caste, race or gender. Ceylon thus became the first country in Asia to adopt such a democratic principle, well ahead of its regional neighbours.
Under the Donoughmore Constitution, 50 members representing various constituencies of the country were elected to the State Council as well as 8 others were nominated and appointed by the Governor. Despite the obvious advantages of voting the State Council had, the candidates who prepared themselves for elections ran as mere individuals rather than as members of a political party.
Background
At that time, there were hardly any political parties in Ceylon. However, most of the candidates for the election were members of the Ceylon National Congress, the largest political organization in the country. Ironically, in the absence of a party system, there rose an awkward spectacle when fellow members of the CNC fought against each other for the same seat. The elections themselves were held across a few days in June 1931.
Four of the five constituencies in the North boycotted the election in opposition to the lack of communal representation under the Donoughmore Constitution. Even in this inaugural election of Ceylon, there was intimidation of voters and some violence on election day. Nevertheless, 46 out of 50 representatives were elected, marking a landmark achievement in Ceylon. Apart from these members and the nominated members, three others, known as the Officers of State, were appointed by the Governor were also deemed members of the State Council.
These three were the Chief Secretary, Legal Secretary (Attorney General), and Financial Secretary (Treasurer). These officers, though not having the legal power to vote in session, had many powers vested to them. Essentially, the State Council was a semi-parliamentary system, with the obvious lacking an Opposition. It was hybrid model of self-governance, blending colonial oversight with elected representation—an experimental step toward full independence. For the first time in the country’s legislature, the position of Speaker was introduced. The Speaker presides over Council sessions, maintains order, ensures fair debate, enforces rules, remains impartial, manages administrative functions, and represents the State Council in official and ceremonial capacities.
For the sessions of the State Council, a grand building was being constructed by the Public Works Department. By the time, the elections were completed, the building was also ready to host the first session of the State Council. Unlike in the Legislative Council, the State Council, by the new Constitution, required the appointment of a Speaker, Deputy Speaker and Deputy Chaiman of Committees. All these three positions were to be filled by 3 of the either elected or nominated State Councillors.

Two groups of State Councillors Left image: European Councillors and a Kandyan Councillor Right Image: S. A. Wickremasinghe, S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, George E. de Silva, A. Ratnayake, P.B. Nugawela Dissawe
Inaugural Session of the State Council
The inaugural session of the newly constituted legislative body unfolded with ceremonial grandeur and a curious blend of anticipation and solemnity. An interested crowd of onlookers lined the short wall which separated Lotus Road from the Council premises and watched the members stepping out of their conveyances. Scattered throughout the Chamber were several distinguished figures, including almost all the newly elected and appointed State Councillors. The only exception was Mr. G. C. S. Corea (later Sir Claude Corea) whose commanding popularity in Chilaw had earned him the largest majority. He was notably absent, having been admitted to a private hospital in Colombo due to a severe bout of influenza.
The Ceylon Daily News (July 8, 1931) made a candid report on the onlookers of the first session: “In the galleries of the Council the fair sex was well represented, and the ladies critically studied the members’ features and clothes”. The Times of Ceylon (July 7, 1931) made an even more interesting remark: “When the assembly bell rang there was hardly a seat vacant in the house. In the four galleries wives, daughters and friends of members were talking and looking down into the mon. below, to catch the eye of this or that member, and to give an embarrassed little wave in reply to a smile. The Ceylon Daily News reporter continued as follows:
“Mr. Jayathilaka (Sir Baron), in a very sober suit of clothes and a wing collar, was an early arrival in the Council Chamber and was soon followed by Mr. Bandaranaike in national dress. His sock suspenders and spectacles alone betrayed a foreign origin. A thin cane finished in Kandyan lacquer work completed the outfit. From a corner of the Chamber Meedeniya Adigar smiled with tolerance as he contemplated Mr. Bandaranaike. Nugawela Dissawe, in the full regalia of the Kandyan dress, brocaded collar and four cornered hat, came in the company of Mr. Abeyagoonasekera.
Mr. Abeyagoonasekera wore a navy-blue suit, mauve orchid and shiny locks over his neck in unconscious imitation of a Victorian statesman. If, like Samson, Mr. Abeyagoonasekera decides to crop his hair short, he would be a less picturesque figure.
Next on the scene were the two Labour members, Messrs. Goonesinha and Dassenaike in flaming red ties, and Mr. Dassenaike also wearing a red button on the lapel of his coat… Mr. Newnham could not but have helped noticing the only morning coat in the Chamber, elegantly encasing the courtly figure of Mr. Obeyesekere. Sartorially, uncle and nephew are Poles apart, and they are both whole-hoggers. The nephew of course, is the latest recruit to national dress… the turbans of the two elected Indian members were seen on the horizon. Mr. Peri Sunderam’s has a streak of gold on it, and he also wears a sash over a long white tunic court. Mr. Vyathialingam on the other hand, crowns a torso in European clothes with a snow-white turban.”
The first task of the State Council was to elect the Speaker.
The Election of the Speaker
The arrival of the Officers of State—Sir Bernard Bourdillon (Chief Secretary), Sir Wilfrid Woods (Financial Secretary), and Mr. E. St. J. Jackson (Legal Secretary)—signalled the formal commencement of business. These senior officials took their seats on the Speaker’s left, while three Tamil members assumed the front-centre benches once reserved for the executive leaders of the former Council. The other members who clad in the national dress were Robert de Zoysa, C. W. W. Kannangara and Dr. Saravanamuttu.
As the Assembly bell struck 10 a.m., the Clerk of the House stepped in to formally announce the Governor’s assent to the day’s first and most consequential order of business: the election of the Speaker. W. A. de Silva proposed A. F. Molamure, seconded by W. T. B. Karaliadde. In response, Sir Thomas Villiers—builder of Adisham Bungalow and author of Mercantile Lore—nominated Sir Stewart Schneider, with Macan Markar as seconder.
The press had already splashed the news across their front pages, complete with the names and credentials of the two contenders vying for the Speaker’s chair—even before their formal nominations. Molamure, a Kandyan Sinhalese congressman, commanded the support of all 17 members of the Ceylon National Congress. Schneider, a Dutch Burgher, was the preferred candidate of the European bloc. On July 6, a pivotal meeting at the Bristol Hotel, convened by Liberal League members under E. W. Perera and Kandyan delegates, attempted a compromise to avoid a contest—but neither candidate relented. After that, the result seemed inevitable.
Candidates, in Profile
Alexander Francis Molamure (1885–1951) was a striking personality. An alumnus of S. Thomas’ College, then at Mutwal, he captained the school’s cricket 1st XI in 1903. Called to the Bar, he practiced in Kegalle, occasionally serving as Police Magistrate and District Judge. His rise in politics was swift—first elected to the Legislative Council for Kegalle, and in 1931 returned unopposed from Dedigama to the State Council. The Times of Ceylon hailed him for his eloquence and mastery of parliamentary procedure, while Ceylon Causerie (1931, No. 4) described him as “a fluent and polished speaker… whose fairness and judicial temperament made him ideally suited to serve as the State Council’s first Speaker.”
Off the floor, Molamure was a celebrated cricketer. He represented both the Nondescripts and Sinhalese Sports Club, distinguishing himself in fielding and batting. He also played in the annual Ceylonese vs. Europeans match and was part of the team that faced M. A. Noble’s and P. Mac Allister’s Australians in 1909. A noted elephant hunter, he took part in several kraals. His charisma was legend—he was said to charm many with his quick wit. At a Governor’s function, he famously quipped to Lady Stubbs, “May I light my cigarette with the light in the eye of my Lady?”—a remark that earned him a lifetime ban from all gubernatorial events by a thoroughly displeased Sir Reginald Stubbs.
Sir Stewart Schneider (1864–1938) was a prominent Ceylonese legal luminary and public figure. He was admitted to the local Bar as an Advocate in 1898 and established a successful legal practice, while also serving as a lecturer at the Ceylon Law College. In 1917, he briefly held office as the 7th Solicitor General of Ceylon, and in 1921, served in acting Puisne Justice of the Supreme Court. For his service, he was knighted in 1928. Beyond his legal career, Schneider was actively involved in civic and religious life: he was a member of the Foreign and British Bible Society and a former President of the YMCA. A grandson of Gualterus Schneider, Ceylon’s first Surveyor-General, he hailed from a family with longstanding roots in Jaffna dating back to the Dutch colonial era.
Strikingly, both Molamure and Schneider were lawyers, affluent, and old boys of S. Thomas’ College—with cricketing legacies. Before Schneider rose to legal prominence, he had served as a teacher and cricket master at the College for 13 years—ironically mentoring young Molamure, the very man now contesting him for Speaker.
With nominations complete, the chamber moved to the secret ballot. The atmosphere, tense and hushed, evoked a Papal conclave. The secret ballot papers were distributed and duly filled in. A peon then carried around the ballot box—an unnecessarily large and cumbersome vessel for holding scarcely sixty slips of paper. Once the final vote was cast, the box was brought to the Clerk of the House, who summoned the Chief Secretary and the Legal Secretary to serve as scrutineers. With focused solemnity, Sir Bernard Bourdillon drew the slips one by one from the box. Votes cast for Sir Stewart Schneider were placed beneath a paperweight, while those for Mr. A. F. Molamure were handed to Mr. Jackson.
Every eye in the chamber was fixed upon the unfolding count.
“One, two—for Mr. Molamure.”
“One—for Sir Stewart.”
“Three, four, five—for Mr. Molamure.”
“Two, three—for Sir Stewart.”
Members and pressmen alike silently tallied the result, some visibly anxious, others quietly backing their favourites. By the time the Clerk officially announced the outcome, the result was already apparent:
A. F. Molamure – 35
Sir Stewart Schneider – 18
At last, the verdict was clear—A. F. Molamure secured 35 votes to Sir Stewart Schneider’s 18. Cheers echoed through the chamber as Members rose to extend their congratulations even before Schneider’s votes were announced. The House then adjourned until 2.30 p.m., having ceremonially ushered in a new chapter in the island’s legislative history.
Aftermath
Following his election, the newly appointed Speaker of the State Council, Hon. A. F. Molamure, was formally received at Queen’s House by Sir Graeme Thompson, the Governor. Accompanied by his proposer, W. A. de Silva, and seconder, W. T. B. Karaliadde, the Speaker was escorted from the Council Chamber by the Governor’s Private Secretary, Mr. H. S. M. Hoare.
At Queen’s House, the Governor warmly welcomed the Speaker and his party, proposing a toast to the Speaker’s health. In a message conveyed to the Council, His Excellency expressed his full approval, on behalf of His Majesty the King, of Mr. Molamure’s appointment. Upon returning, the Speaker took his oath of office and administered the oath to the other members. The Council then adjourned until 10 a.m. the following day.
Molamure was a controversial man, who was involved in alleged financial scandals and elephant kraals, the former prompting him to resign from his post as Speaker as well as his seat in 1934. However, as a Speaker and politician, he was par excellence. He re-entered State Council in 1943 through a by-election and was elected to the 1st Parliament of Ceylon in 1947 as was elected Speaker again, this time in Parliament. Thus, he had the unique record of being the first Speaker of both the State Council and Parliament of Ceylon.
Conclusion
The inaugural session of the State Council was a momentous chapter in Ceylon’s democratic evolution—an occasion steeped in ceremony, symbolism, and spirited contest. Through the election of A. F. Molamure as its first Speaker, the Council not only embraced a new constitutional framework but also reflected the island’s cultural diversity and political maturity. Molamure’s blend of oratory, charisma, and parliamentary acumen positioned him as a defining figure of the era.
Despite controversies that would later shadow his career, his ascent marked the beginning of a bold experiment in self-governance—one that laid the foundation for modern parliamentary democracy in Sri Lanka. Pieter Keneuman who served as an MP for 30 years (1947-1977) wrote one of the best tributes on Molamure as follows: “… Francis Molamure was the most outstanding of them all (Speakers). He was seldom at a loss in retaining the delicate balance between allowing free debate and maintaining order and decorum… Francis Molamure really loved the House, and it was typical of the man that, even when he collapsed in the Chair of a heart attack and was being carried out to his death bed, he tried his best – however weakly – to give the House his final bow of farewell.” (Souvenir of the Opening of the New Parliament, Daily News April 29, 1982)
By Avishka Mario Senewiratne,
Editor, The Ceylon Journal ✍️
Features
Buddhist Approach to Human Challenges
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
Features
How does the Buddha differ?
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
Features
Political violence stalking Trump administration
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.
-
News2 days agoTreasury chief’s citizenship details sought from Australia
-
News4 days agoBIA drug bust: 25 monks including three masterminds arrested
-
Business5 days agoNestlé Lanka Announces Change in Leadership
-
News5 days agoHackers steal $3.2 Mn from Finance Ministry
-
News4 days agoBanks alert customers to phishing attacks
-
News3 days agoGovt. assures UN of readiness to introduce ‘vetting process’ for troops on overseas missions
-
News1 day agoRooftop Solar at Crossroads as Sri Lanka Shifts to Distributed Energy Future
-
Business3 days agoADB-backed grid upgrade tender signals next phase of Sri Lanka’s energy transition


