Features

The LSSP – 85 years on

Published

5 years ago

2020/12/20

by Vijaya Kumar

The Lanka Samasamaja Party, the oldest political party in the country celebrates its 85th anniversary on December 18, 2020. The Party grew out of its Youth Leagues which played a prominent part in the ‘Suriya-Mal’ movement – an alternative for indigenous ex-servicemen as against the Poppy Day where funds collected were for British ex-servicemen. The Marxist party from its early days heavily focused on the fight against the British colonial power were identified with people-friendly policies and the struggle for workers’ rights. The party has been instrumental or actively fought for the adoption of many of the progressive initiatives which we today take for granted.

The fight for full independence from Britain rather than constitutional reforms which was the aim of the so-called national parties was successful a mere 13 years after the party’s formation. The British bases which remained were removed under the SWRD Bandaranaike government nine years later and full freedom was achieved when Sri Lanka became a republic on May 22, 1972, under the stewardship of the party’s Colvin R de Silva. The fight for free education and free health services which was originated by the Communist Party’s SA Wickramasinghe, then an LSSP member of the First State Council, bore fruit with the CWW Kannangara Free Education Bill of 1945 and the Free Health Policy of 1951.

The party actively organized workers in both the urban and plantation sectors into its trade union movement led by NM Perera. These initiatives were dealt a heavy blow in 1940 when the Party leadership was arrested supposedly for opposing the British war effort but in reality to undermine its struggles in the estate sector. The Bracegirdle Affair and the Party’s militancy in the aftermath of the Mooloya Estate strike of 1939 which resulted in the shooting of Govindan had frightened the English planters.

Although the leadership broke jail at Bogambara, escaped to India and became actively involved using false names in the Quit India movement there, Party political activity was hampered. In 1945, by the time the leadership was released from prison after being arrested in India and the party became active once more in the trade union field, Indian pressure had facilitated the dominance of the Thondaman leadership in the plantations. However the Party fought and won better pay and working conditions including schooling and health, the right of trade union officials to enter estates, equal pay for men and women and ultimately nationalization of the estate sector although it was unsuccessful in its fight against the UNP’s disenfranchisement of the plantation worker.

It organized the general strikes of 1945, 1946 and 1947 aimed not only at workers’ rights but also as part of the independence struggle, the Hartal of 1953 which many believe was a lost opportunity to take power and many strikes particularly during the 1956 to 1959 period. Workers were able to win rights such as better pay, the eight-hour working day, pension, leave, payment for overtime, a provident fund scheme and the May Day holiday through these struggles.

The Party fought for and achieved to some measure the nationalization of the major foreign businesses in the country. It fought for Sinhala and Tamil to be given pride of place in the country’s administration but failed in its attempts to ensure that these rights were provided equitably to the Tamil speaking people. The 1972 Constitution in whose adoption the Party played a prominent role gave constitutional recognition to Buddhism as the foremost religion and Sinhala as the Official language of the country, a matter of discontent for many Party supporters.

The Party which was represented in the first State Council had 7-15% membership in Parliament from Independence to 1977 and NM Perera was Leader of the Opposition twice during that period. It held three Ministries in the Sirima Bandaranaike government of 1960 during its last few months and in 1970 holding 12 and 19 seats respectively in Parliament. It had four members and a Minister in the Chandrika Bandaranaike government of 1994 but in the recent past it has had to depend on being nominated through a National list in order to enter Parliament.

On the occasion of the 85th anniversary, it is worth reflecting on why the influence of the Party had declined sharply since 1977. Could the perennial Marxist discourse on the dangers posed by coalition politics with capitalist parties provide the answer? Unfortunately coalition politics in the early days was clouded by the world food and oil crisis of the seventies which led to popular discontent and further complicated by the JVP uprising of 1971. Could it have been a matter of personalities with the inability of later leaders to replicate the high energy of the original leaders, and the Party’s inability to retain possible leadership material like Anil Moonesinghe and Athauda Seneviratne who drifted to the SLFP; or Vasudeva Nanayakkara and Vickramabahu, who displeased by coalition politics and founded the NSSP, taking with them a large section of the party’s trade unions?

This together with JR’s tactics in dealing with the disastrous 1980 strike decimated the party’s trade union base, which had hitherto provided the muscle to its parliamentary politics. Or was it that the party’s programmes ceased to be relevant or critical to a nation, particularly its young generation which took for granted many of the rights and privileges they enjoyed through the early struggles of the Samasamajists.

An important reason contributing to the decline has been the new electoral system introduced by JR which required high investment on an election campaign. Neither the Party nor its members, brought up in a culture of high integrity and zero tolerance of corruption had the wherewithal for such a campaign, giving the Party no option than to align itself with other parties.

The Party was also unable to face up to patronage politics introduced by Felix Dias and JR which has become a crucial feature and an electoral expectation in today’s Sri Lankan politics. While individual politicians have contributed to the national debate even under these trying circumstances, like Batty Weerakoon’s successful prevention of the sale of the Eppawala phosphate resources and Tissa Vitarana’s valiant fight to address

the national problem, these efforts have not been appreciated by the major party. LSSP Ministers have been forced to vote for proposals like the 18th and 20th Amendments which went against everything they stood for to merely continue in politics. However, recent critical comments on government policy by Tissa Vitarana, relieved of Ministerial responsibilities although still a nominated MP augurs well for the party.

Displeasure against the Party’s approach to the 18th amendment resulted in a substantial group led by Lal Wijenayake and Jayampathy Wickremaratne to leave the Party and end up in the uncomfortable position of being part of the disastrous UNP dominated coalition of 2015. Many members of this group feeling the need for forging a strong left movement, then aligned with the JVP’s National People’s Power but this too has failed to win the backing of the people.

The left has a formidable task facing up to many challenges if it is to play a significant role in Sri Lankan politics given the prevailing culture of high cost elections, religious and racial intolerance, crony capitalism, corruption, suppression of dissent, a pliant court system and militarization. Is there any part of the left that can successfully overcome these issues and reclaim the glory of its past?

All News Advertisement

Features

US’ drastic aid cut to UN poses moral challenge to world

Published

19 hours ago

2026/01/1

Thilina Walpola

An UN humanitarian mission in the Gaza. [File: Ashraf Amra/Anadolu Agency]

‘Adapt, shrink or die’ – thus runs the warning issued by the Trump administration to UN humanitarian agencies with brute insensitivity in the wake of its recent decision to drastically reduce to $2bn its humanitarian aid to the UN system. This is a substantial climb down from the $17bn the US usually provided to the UN for its humanitarian operations.

Considering that the US has hitherto been the UN’s biggest aid provider, it need hardly be said that the US decision would pose a daunting challenge to the UN’s humanitarian operations around the world. This would indeed mean that, among other things, people living in poverty and stifling material hardships, in particularly the Southern hemisphere, could dramatically increase. Coming on top of the US decision to bring to an end USAID operations, the poor of the world could be said to have been left to their devices as a consequence of these morally insensitive policy rethinks of the Trump administration.

Earlier, the UN had warned that it would be compelled to reduce its aid programs in the face of ‘the deepest funding cuts ever.’ In fact the UN is on record as requesting the world for $23bn for its 2026 aid operations.

If this UN appeal happens to go unheeded, the possibilities are that the UN would not be in a position to uphold the status it has hitherto held as the world’s foremost humanitarian aid provider. It would not be incorrect to state that a substantial part of the rationale for the UN’s existence could come in for questioning if its humanitarian identity is thus eroded.

Inherent in these developments is a challenge for those sections of the international community that wish to stand up and be counted as humanists and the ‘Conscience of the World.’ A responsibility is cast on them to not only keep the UN system going but to also ensure its increased efficiency as a humanitarian aid provider to particularly the poorest of the poor.

It is unfortunate that the US is increasingly opting for a position of international isolation. Such a policy position was adopted by it in the decades leading to World War Two and the consequences for the world as a result for this policy posture were most disquieting. For instance, it opened the door to the flourishing of dictatorial regimes in the West, such as that led by Adolph Hitler in Germany, which nearly paved the way for the subjugation of a good part of Europe by the Nazis.

If the US had not intervened militarily in the war on the side of the Allies, the West would have faced the distressing prospect of coming under the sway of the Nazis and as a result earned indefinite political and military repression. By entering World War Two the US helped to ward off these bleak outcomes and indeed helped the major democracies of Western Europe to hold their own and thrive against fascism and dictatorial rule.

Republican administrations in the US in particular have not proved the greatest defenders of democratic rule the world over, but by helping to keep the international power balance in favour of democracy and fundamental human rights they could keep under a tight leash fascism and linked anti-democratic forces even in contemporary times. Russia’s invasion and continued occupation of parts of Ukraine reminds us starkly that the democracy versus fascism battle is far from over.

Right now, the US needs to remain on the side of the rest of the West very firmly, lest fascism enjoys another unfettered lease of life through the absence of countervailing and substantial military and political power.

However, by reducing its financial support for the UN and backing away from sustaining its humanitarian programs the world over the US could be laying the ground work for an aggravation of poverty in the South in particular and its accompaniments, such as, political repression, runaway social discontent and anarchy.

What should not go unnoticed by the US is the fact that peace and social stability in the South and the flourishing of the same conditions in the global North are symbiotically linked, although not so apparent at first blush. For instance, if illegal migration from the South to the US is a major problem for the US today, it is because poor countries are not receiving development assistance from the UN system to the required degree. Such deprivation on the part of the South leads to aggravating social discontent in the latter and consequences such as illegal migratory movements from South to North.

Accordingly, it will be in the North’s best interests to ensure that the South is not deprived of sustained development assistance since the latter is an essential condition for social contentment and stable governance, which factors in turn would guard against the emergence of phenomena such as illegal migration.

Meanwhile, democratic sections of the rest of the world in particular need to consider it a matter of conscience to ensure the sustenance and flourishing of the UN system. To be sure, the UN system is considerably flawed but at present it could be called the most equitable and fair among international development organizations and the most far-flung one. Without it world poverty would have proved unmanageable along with the ills that come along with it.

Dehumanizing poverty is an indictment on humanity. It stands to reason that the world community should rally round the UN and ensure its survival lest the abomination which is poverty flourishes. In this undertaking the world needs to stand united. Ambiguities on this score could be self-defeating for the world community.

For example, all groupings of countries that could demonstrate economic muscle need to figure prominently in this initiative. One such grouping is BRICS. Inasmuch as the US and the West should shrug aside Realpolitik considerations in this enterprise, the same goes for organizations such as BRICS.

The arrival at the above international consensus would be greatly facilitated by stepped up dialogue among states on the continued importance of the UN system. Fresh efforts to speed-up UN reform would prove major catalysts in bringing about these positive changes as well. Also requiring to be shunned is the blind pursuit of narrow national interests.

Features

Egg white scene …

Published

19 hours ago

2026/01/1

Thilina Walpola

Hi! Great to be back after my Christmas break.

Thought of starting this week with egg white.

Yes, eggs are brimming with nutrients beneficial for your overall health and wellness, but did you know that eggs, especially the whites, are excellent for your complexion?

OK, if you have no idea about how to use egg whites for your face, read on.

Egg White, Lemon, Honey:

Separate the yolk from the egg white and add about a teaspoon of freshly squeezed lemon juice and about one and a half teaspoons of organic honey. Whisk all the ingredients together until they are mixed well.

Apply this mixture to your face and allow it to rest for about 15 minutes before cleansing your face with a gentle face wash.

Don’t forget to apply your favourite moisturiser, after using this face mask, to help seal in all the goodness.

Egg White, Avocado:

In a clean mixing bowl, start by mashing the avocado, until it turns into a soft, lump-free paste, and then add the whites of one egg, a teaspoon of yoghurt and mix everything together until it looks like a creamy paste.

Apply this mixture all over your face and neck area, and leave it on for about 20 to 30 minutes before washing it off with cold water and a gentle face wash.

Egg White, Cucumber, Yoghurt:

In a bowl, add one egg white, one teaspoon each of yoghurt, fresh cucumber juice and organic honey. Mix all the ingredients together until it forms a thick paste.

Apply this paste all over your face and neck area and leave it on for at least 20 minutes and then gently rinse off this face mask with lukewarm water and immediately follow it up with a gentle and nourishing moisturiser.

Egg White, Aloe Vera, Castor Oil:

To the egg white, add about a teaspoon each of aloe vera gel and castor oil and then mix all the ingredients together and apply it all over your face and neck area in a thin, even layer.

Leave it on for about 20 minutes and wash it off with a gentle face wash and some cold water. Follow it up with your favourite moisturiser.

Features

Confusion cropping up with Ne-Yo in the spotlight

Published

19 hours ago

2026/01/1

Thilina Walpola

Ne-Yo: His management should clarify the last-minute cancellation

Superlatives galore were used, especially on social media, to highlight R&B singer Ne-Yo’s trip to Sri Lanka: Global superstar Ne-Yo to perform live in Colombo this December; Ne-Yo concert puts Sri Lanka back on the global entertainment map; A global music sensation is coming to Sri Lanka … and there were lots more!

At an official press conference, held at a five-star venue, in Colombo, it was indicated that the gathering marked a defining moment for Sri Lanka’s entertainment industry as international R&B powerhouse and three-time Grammy Award winner Ne-Yo prepares to take the stage in Colombo this December.

What’s more, the occasion was graced by the presence of Sunil Kumara Gamage, Minister of Sports & Youth Affairs of Sri Lanka, and Professor Ruwan Ranasinghe, Deputy Minister of Tourism, alongside distinguished dignitaries, sponsors, and members of the media.

Shah Rukh Khan: Disappointed his fans in Sri Lanka

According to reports, the concert had received the official endorsement of the Sri Lanka Tourism Promotion Bureau, recognising it as a flagship initiative in developing the country’s concert economy by attracting fans, and media, from all over South Asia.

Nick Carter: His concert, too, was cancelled due to “Unforeseen circumstances

However, I had that strange feeling that this concert would not become a reality, keeping in mind what happened to Nick Carter’s Colombo concert – cancelled at the very last moment.

Carter issued a video message announcing he had to return to the USA due to “unforeseen circumstances” and a “family emergency”.

Though “unforeseen circumstances” was the official reason provided by Carter and the local organisers, there was speculation that low ticket sales may also have been a factor in the cancellation.

Well, “Unforeseen Circumstances” has cropped up again!

In a brief statement, via social media, the organisers of the Ne-Yo concert said the decision was taken due to “unforeseen circumstances and factors beyond their control.”

Ne-Yo, too, subsequently made an announcement, citing “Unforeseen circumstances.”

The public has a right to know what these “unforeseen circumstances” are, and who is to be blamed – the organisers or Ne-Yo!

Ne-Yo’s management certainly need to come out with the truth.

However, those who are aware of some of the happenings in the setup here put it down to poor ticket sales, mentioning that the tickets for the concert, and a meet-and-greet event, were exorbitantly high, considering that Ne-Yo is not a current mega star.

We also had a cancellation coming our way from Shah Rukh Khan, who was scheduled to visit Sri Lanka for the City of Dreams resort launch, and then this was received: “Unfortunately due to unforeseen personal reasons beyond his control, Mr. Khan is no longer able to attend.”

Referring to this kind of mess up, a leading showbiz personality said that it will only make people reluctant to buy their tickets, online.

“Tickets will go mostly at the gate and it will be very bad for the industry,” he added.