Connect with us

Features

The tusker from 5th lane

Published

on

by Maheen Senanayake

‘St. Peter denied Jesus no less than three times before he went on to start the Catholic church –’JOHN 18:25-27 Luke 22:58-62, The Holy Bible

It is no secret that it is fairly lonely at the top. Leadership comes with sacrifice and burden. And this be the case even in the animal world. I saw the national list as too demeaning an avenue to return to the legislature for someone of Ranil Wickremasinghe’s reputation and stature. I had met too many people who are today angry bystanders only wishing that he did something to ‘wake up the sleeping elephant’. This and this alone prompted me to come out of retirement to do a piece on the one man whose enigmatic political presence I felt deserved no less than to use a pun – a ‘soldier’s death’… though I must admit the man himself is unlikely to appreciate an end to a career spanning in excess of three generations.

Through the intercession of my editor, I had a meeting with the former four-time prime minister within 48 hours of the request. While I appreciated the speed with which with this happened, I was sorry there was so little time for preparation. I pored over election results of the previous decades, a host of annual reports from the central bank, reports from the ADB, IMF and other pieces written on the gentleman by local and foreign scribes for want of an approach. It was in the early morning hours that I decided on a different strategy.

I decided to ask three people who would not mind being named in print to raise one question each. Thereafter I planned to fill in the blanks and come about with a structure for the interview.

We arrived at Siri Kotha (coined as I had come to understand from the caretaker on location from Sir John Kotelawela’s with Sir becoming Siri followed by Kotha for Ketelawela) three minutes past the appointed hour a few days ago, with more security in attendance than green men we were personally ushered into the leader;s room at his party headquarters and affably greeted.

Some excerpts of an over hour-long discussion:

Do you mind making a few comments on the current political scenario and where the UNP as a one MP party stands?

The current political scenario is that we are in a big transition. At the last presidential elections, a large number of people, specially among the Sinhalese, Voted for Mr. Gotabaya Rajapaksa expecting a change, thinking that he will be different. Promises made included inquiry into the Easter Sunday bombings etc. Public confidence is therefore broken and (this) has not been captured by any of the other parties either.

Though the Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB) as a party received the largest number of non-SLPP votes i.e. 2.7 million at the parliamentary elections, this was much less than the 5.56 million votes Sajith Preamadasa polled at the presidential election, (explainable by the minority votes that Premadasa polled at the presidential election going to minority parties who ran at the parliamentary election – Maheen Senanayake) People who were against the former government had come together.

Sajith Premadasa polled 5,564,239 amounting to 41.99% of the votes at the presidential Election 2019.

At the Parliament Election 2020 the SJB polled  2,77 million votes accounting for 23% of the total polled votes. In Colombo where I believe Mr. Premadasa contested the SJB polled  0.39 million or 32.79% of the total Colombo votes.

People have demonstrated that they have no faith in political parties whether in government or opposition. So we have all got to start from the beginning. There has to be a new political party, new thinking in political parties, about political parties, about elected representatives, about the economy and policy. That is where we stand.

In this context it matters very little whether you are a one MP or 25 MP party. If the people don’t accept you, you are not political ‘tender’ any more. This however, doesn’t affect the UNP. Naturally this means a lesser presence in parliament. People don’t always look at parliament anymore. The other disadvantage is that the media doesn’t give you publicity unless you are a sitting MP.

Meanwhile, traditional media is losing readership/viewership which is shifting to social media. In this transition, whether you are one or 40 doesn’t make a difference. One has to look at the future, and its an open field for anyone in parliament or outside. It can also be a movement outside parliament that can win the confidence of the people. Today people expect more than just ‘negative slogans’.

Long time ago Dr. Colvin R de Silva told me that all of us make the mistake of looking for successors among incumbents. He said ‘look at the political history of this country. In 1960, March, nobody knew who Felix Dias was, except that he was the son of a Supreme Court Judge briefed by Julius and Creasy. But then came July 1960 and Mrs. Bandaranaike, as a tenderfoot prime minister first let Felix be the de facto leader of government (until she gained experience and found her feet). Rohana Wijeweera also showed up just before the JVP’s 1971 insurrection. So Colvin contended that it was a cardinal error to look for successors from among incumbents.

Since this is open, I say that he or she can come from within parliament or from a political movement outside’. It is more open now than at any other time in Sri Lanka.

You were criticized when the UNP was reduced to zero and you had said that you would resign in a few months time. But that did not happen. What would you say now?

I said ‘let the party decide who they want’ and then to go ahead and that I will move out. But then a lot of pressure came up that I should go to parliament and not anyone else, specially because we were all in a crisis. I said ‘alright’, but then it is up to you to organize the party. So as party leader other than going to parliament I leave it to them to organize and implement party affairs.

In fact I don’t come here (to Siri Kotha) much now. I don’t give many media interviews or go around the country making statements. Whatever I say I say in parliament now. They feel that they want to discuss future plans specially government policy with me because of my experience. So its basically becoming a school. In fact some of the next generation of leaders – those in their early twenties and going up to thirty will be presented to the public very soon. In fact more are coming in.

We meet once or twice a week, but I must emphasize that it is a drastic recast that is happening now. The challenge is convincing the conventional thinker, because they have to understand that the whole thing is changing.

How many years have you been in parliament?

Since 1977.

How would you rate your performance as an MP?

That’s for the country to do, not for me.

How would you rate your performance as a UNPer ( if I may use the term)?

I have always stood by the UNP. Long before I joined. My first vote was for the UNP in 1970. I have upheld the values, the main values that D S Senanayake had put down in the constitution. The opening of the economy, the 13th amendment to the constitution, and as time goes by, we ensure that whatever policies we make are in accordance with these basic principles.

How would you rate yourself as a party leader?

I don’t rate myself. The whole question is ‘is there anything called self’. If you are a Buddhist that is a very philosophical matter. I don’t rate myself, others can decide whether I am good, bad or ugly.

As a member of parliament you are responsible for an electorate. How do you course correct yourself? Specially being so experienced in these affairs. How do you see the subject of accountability as a member of parliament to an electorate?

Two things. Any member of parliament is accountable to the whole country. If he or she does not follow the principles of his or her party then there is a violation and he or she can be removed. So I continue to look at Sri Lanka as a full electorate. And I take up issues of the people within the confines of the party policy.

I brought with me a question from a Mrs Sitha Wickremanayake from Yatiyantota. She hails from a family which has actively supported Hon. D S Senanayake, Dudley Senanayake, and even president Premadasa with her father actively supporting the UNP at one time while providing accommodation to a young and active NM Perera in Yatiyantota. Her question to you is ‘Why could you not keep the UNP together’?

All parties change and sometimes people misjudge you. The UNP is the only party that has remained in Parliament since 1947. We have done that. At the last election we had people who thought Mahinda is the king after 2009. Then there are people who thought they can forge ahead with the SJB. They took those decisions. Whether those decisions were correct or not, I cannot tell you. You have to change with the people.

With respect to UNP membership, where do the SJB members stand? Are they UNPers today?

Some of the members of the SJB are members of the UNP who have now been suspended until disciplinary enquiries are over. One member has gone to court also.

Are you seeking their expulsion?

We cannot expel them from parliament. As far as we are concerned they did not contest (the last election) under the UNP. We have left the doors open for discussions to take place which in fact have taken place at different times on how we can work together. We have only pursued minimum disciplinary action because we have to be flexible in this endeavor. Anyone else however, who has worked against us we are taking full disciplinary action against.

You maintain that people change. However, we find that at each election the people are easily persuaded by the same old scheme or promise – as it were? In this light, how do you see the people of this country?

Look! You have to accept the electorate that is there. You can’t import another electorate. After 1970 there was a complete break in the system and something completely newhappened. It was something positive. Similarly you are coming to that stage now. The economy is breaking down, your political structures are breaking down, Social systems are breaking down and this is the case with every country in the world while Covid-19 is also having its impact around the world. Something new has to come up. We are also proposing that the new ideas that we put forth are positive. There will be others who will put up negative ones. That clash has to take place and people are thinking now.

In light of the fact that many voted for repealing the 19th amendment. What would your comments be on this subject?

I contend that the people did not vote to repeal the 19th amendment. Mr. Gotabaya Rajapaksa was elected while the 19th amendment was in force. Elections were held on the basis of the 19th amendment. No one brought up the matter. The government did not campaign to repeal the 19th amendment. They did not say that. As far as the ‘pohottuwa’ was concerned they did not say that either.

On the subject of people, what is your position on Sinhala Only?

My position is reflected in the present circumstances. Sinhala and Tamil are official languages. Sinhala and Tamil are national languages. And English is a co-ordinating language. This co-ordinating language is nonsense. No country has a co-ordinating language so you might as well make English a national language. Then more and more people can learn English. Why are we so frightened of English? In China they are teaching English, In India they are teaching English. Also English now has a Asian version. The Chinese and Indians will dominate the English market and not the Americans or the English.

All those who are saying they don’t want English are educating their children in English here and abroad. So I say, let us not be shy. We have two official languages. I must point out that India does not have Tamil as an official language. It is we, Singapore and I think Mauritius who have Tamil as a official language. Let there be three national languages – Sinhala, Tamil and English. English affects all our lives, all our cultures. Today when you are using a hand phone you are using it in English. So all I am saying is make English a national language’.

You have been in parliament for more than 40 years. What has the UNP done to bring that about?

We are the ones who brought in the 13th Amendment ( to the constitution ) which defines the language policy. I as education minister pushed for teaching of English but there were challenges like training English teachers. For instance the last government pushed for English and IT. All I am saying is make English a national language.

Do we call English a co-ordinating language?

We call it a co-ordinating or link language. All I am saying is let’s make It a national language. More than 20% of this country speak English. In fact the number of Tamil speakers equals the number of English speakers.

(I did the math in my mind. Do 4.6 mln people actually speak English? Not even some English teachers that I know can speak it. I had my reservations. I wondered)

I feel that the people of Lanka, the people within our territory have an identity crisis. What is your view on the matter of the national identity?

We have a Sri Lankan identity.

Do we actually have a Sri Lankan Identity (not a Sinhala, Tamil or Muslim identity)?

We have. We have it in our national anthem.. ‘Eka mawakage daru kela bavina’..’ [children of one mother]. But within it some people are trying to say ‘Tamil must be a separate state’, some others are saying it must be a ‘Sinhala Buddhist state’. Therefore there are different views on the subject. A majority may avoid the Sri Lankan identity saying they are being discriminated. It is not only ethnicity, people of different religion and even women who say they are discriminated as against men. So within our identity this debate will continue and it will never stop. We have to accept that we are all Sri Lankan and that all have to be treated equally subject to Article 9 of the constitution.

Furthermore we must impose it. We had the national anthem being sung in Sinhala and Tamil. Now you change that it and you have unnecessary problems.

Within that construct how would you describe the identity of a UNPer today? And are you as a party relevant today and how do you plan to make the party relevant or more relevant to the young ( 18+) voter?

A UNPer is someone who believes in the policies that we maintain including democracy, a Sri Lankan identity, a social market economy, social democracy which are our accepted views. On the question of whether ‘we are relevant?’ I don’t think that any political party today is relevant. So we have to make ourselves relevant to all those voters.

Right now there are discussions that are going on and in fact very soon we will be presenting our new leaders to the public – about ten who are all within their early thirties to forties. And more are joining. The UNP has been working in the background and the reason you don’t see us making too many public appearances is because we are working in the background and want to be prepared before we bring them out.

For instance I was interviewed by a group of young people from Royal College and I can tell you that the questions that they asked me are quite different to what you are asking me. And we did have a very useful discussion.

Do you think that the provincial councils are relevant?

We are a country of 20 million people. Between the division of the local authority and the top there has to be a intermediate player. Originally we came with the District Development Councils (DDC). After that you have the provincial councils. The issue is this – if you go to dismantle the provincial structure and put in place 22 district structures there will be utter chaos in the country. I accept the fact that there are three layers of government. They are duplicating expenditure unnecessarily. Let us look at a structure, which will ensure that this doesn’t take place.

The council is a body that is needed to pass legislation. There also we can use the American tradition where assemblies at the state level only meet two or three times a year. Once to pass the budget and they meet again once in four months. Then we must look at how the administration can cut off any expenditure. Right now we have a problem because the local authority digs drains, The provincial council also wants money for drains and the MP also wants money for drains. So finally what is the result? ‘All the money is going down the drain’ (laughter)

That is why I say that we have to radically transform it. You take that proposition to the national level, secondly you retain the powers of the thirteenth amendment. In the last parliament we appointed a committee by our constitutional committee. I think it was Susil Premjayanth who chaired it. The seven Chief ministers of the Southern provinces, That is excluding the North and East, and their leaders of the opposition gave a common report on what they want. So after obtaining the views at the provincial level, Susil Premjayanth put everything together and there is an exhaustive report on this. We can discuss this and see how we can go along. I believe that up to about 80% of the report can be agreed with. The rest, the parties with different views may have to come to consensus on and decide.

(To be continued next week)



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