Connect with us

Features

Trump, Biden Tied At 46% In National Polls Pathetic Choice For 2024 Presidency

Published

on

by Vijaya Chandrasoma

Labor Day, Monday, September 4, marked the unofficial beginning of the US election season. The choice for the presidency in 2024 remains up in the air. Seventy five percent of Democrats polled don’t want Biden to run as their nominee, while 69% of Republicans don’t want Trump to be the Republican nominee.

The main objection, and probably the only one, against Biden, in spite of his outstanding performance so far during his first term, is his age. He will be 86 at the end of his second term. The main objection against Trump – one in at least 91 – is that he continues to be a threat to the nation’s democracy.

Nevertheless, both these candidates are currently prohibitive favorites of their respective Parties for the 2024 presidency. They are defined more by their weaknesses than by their strengths. What is most distressing – and mystifying – is that an incumbent president, having brought back sanity to a disgraced White House, cannot put any distance in the national polls between himself and his rival, a former twice impeached president, convicted of fraud and sexual assault, arrested and on bail on 91 felonies.

They are currently tied at 46% each. However, polls are “fragmentary snapshots of a moment in time” and can change rapidly as circumstances fluctuate.

This is the most pathetic choice for the presidency American voters have ever faced in its history. The one hope is that the whole political landscape will change in the next 14 months, and Americans will finally come to grips with the dangers they face to their very democracy with the election of either of these candidates.

Should Trump regain the White House, the guardrails protecting the nation’s democracy will be gone. Biden may not survive a second term, and Democrats may well be compelled to change horses in midstream.

America was not always like this. US presidents after WWII, Democratic and Republican, have been much like the curate’s eggs: some good and bad at the same time, others having distinct good and bad parts. But every single one of them, from Roosevelt to Biden, even Nixon, had always revered the sanctity of the Constitution, the inviolability of the Rule of Law and the dignity of the Oval Office.

Bar Trump, who has shamelessly violated these fundamental institutions of American democracy.

President Roosevelt guided the nation well on the path to social and economic justice with his New Deal after World War II, representing the beginnings of the social safety net in America. Progressive policies Republicans contemptuously decry today as “Commie” ideology. Social and economic benefits enjoyed by citizens of all other developed countries.

FDR was succeeded in on his death by President Truman, who in 1945 was faced with the most heartbreaking decision any president could face: to authorize the dropping of atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 6 and 9, 1945, killing an estimated 200,000 innocent civilians, men, women and children. Japan surrendered on August 15, 1945, officially ending a war in which 70 – 85 million people had perished. The alternative to this inhumane decision was to sacrifice millions more lives in the invasion of Japan, a nation which would not have surrendered under any other circumstance. Truman was considered to be one of the greatest presidents in US history.

Eisenhower continued with the New Deal programs, expanded social security, prioritized taxes where the wealthy paid taxes up to 90% which made for a thriving middle class. He played a major role in the construction of the nation’s highway network. Every Republican president who came after him pales by comparison.

Then came Kennedy, a war hero and the most charismatic president in the nation’s history who, with his charismatic style, soaring oratory and a beautiful wife, brought new glamor to the White House. His administration was renamed after Camelot, the mythical fifth century kingdom of King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table.

Kennedy is mainly remembered for his unflinching courage during the Cuban Missile Crisis, where he stared down Khrushchev to dismantle nuclear bases and weapons in Cuba; and for his determination to conquer space, when he famously said, “We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard”.

Kennedy was extremely popular with the ladies; his numerous extra marital affairs, notably with sex bomb Marilyn Monroe, were legendary. He is famously supposed to have told the British Prime Minister, Harold MacMillan in 1961, “if I didn’t slip the presidential sausage to a woman once every three days, I would get a splitting headache”. Poor MacMillan had probably not enjoyed any sausage action in years.

Lyndon B. Johnson succeeded to the presidency on Kennedy’s assassination. He presided over the enactment of the Civil Rights and the Voting Rights Acts. But he was most unpopular for his role in escalating the Vietnam War, which prompted him not to seek re-election in 1968.

Richard Nixon won the Presidency in 1968 and 1972 in landslide victories. He counted many signal achievements during his presidency, bringing about the end of the Vietnam War and negotiating a détente with the Peoples Republic of China.

However, his presidency will always be held in disgrace because of Watergate, an attempt at a cover-up of a break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate office building and hotel in Washinton D.C. Compared to the felonies of sedition and espionage surrounding the contemptible Trump, Watergate was a mere bagatelle.

Nixon’s vice-president, Gerald Ford succeeded him on his resignation. Ford’s only “achievement” during his presidency was his pardon of Nixon for crimes committed during Watergate.

Ford was succeeded by Democrat Jimmy Carter. He championed human rights, bolstered Social Security, added nearly eight million jobs and sought to improve the environment. He helped to bring amity between Israel and Egypt with the historic Camp David Agreement of 1978. He also established full diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China.

Carter was a fine president but a terrible politician. He was outmaneuvered by the Great Communicator, Reagan, after serving one term, in 1980.

Carter, deemed the greatest ex-president in history, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 “for his decades of untiring efforts to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social welfare”.

Since 1984, Carter and his wife of 77 years, Rosalynn, have been personally involved in building and renovating homes for the poor with Habitat for Humanity. At age 94, he is still actively engaged in the project, in spite of the sad fact that Rosalynn is suffering from dementia.

Reagan was a worse president than he was a mediocre Hollywood actor. His infamous trickle-down Reaganonomics, which cut the maximum tax rate of corporations and the wealthy from 65% to 40%, began the process of decimating a thriving middle class.

The two Republican presidencies of the Bushes, George H.W. and George W. served as disastrous bookends for a prosperous eight-year presidency of Bill Clinton (1992 – 2000).

The older Bush started the Gulf War against Iraq. The younger Bush tried to outdo daddy, and waged an illegal war against the same country, also doomed to failure, with enormous costs to lives, property and international reputation. Both left their presidencies in financial crises with massive budget deficits, to be rescued by their successors, Clinton and Obama, in 1992 and 2008, respectively.

Clinton’s two terms boasted of the longest economic expansion in American history, added 22 million new jobs, the largest expansion of education and college opportunities since the GI bill, among many other achievements. His administration ended in a budget surplus of $230 billion.

The charismatic Clinton also had a penchant for the ladies, though he was an altar boy compared to JFK. His presidency was marred by an affair with an intern, and was impeached for lying under oath for the consensual “crime” he was alleged to have committed with her. The case against him was “blown” away, as his crime did not fall within the dictionary definition of sexual intercourse.

The two-term administration of President Barack Obama extricated a nation on the brink of recession. In eight years, he transformed it to a prosperous country with 72 final weeks of continuous economic growth, well on the path to social and economic justice. A nation that adorned the mantle of the Leader of the Free World, winning international respect and admiration. Achieved in the face of Republican obstruction at every turn, without a whiff of political or personal scandal.

Four short years later, from 2016 to 2020, the USA became a different country. Trump’s America has lost the confidence of its allies as he consorted with its adversaries; sacrificed the threat of climate change at the altar of pollution and corporate profits; cost the avoidable deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans to the pandemic, in a cynical effort to safeguard the economy; employed unqualified family members to senior White House positions, which they used to steal the country blind; forsook the plight of the neediest for the benefit of billionaires and corporations; and, worst of all, rekindled racial and religious tensions simmering below the surface to the cusp of a second civil war.

For the first time in history, the nation’s budget deficit topped $ one trillion in 2020, at the end of Trump’s first and only term.President Biden, who defeated Trump by a landslide in 2020, has brought back a semblance of dignity to a White House which had been riddled with corruption, nepotism and a criminal repudiation of the Constitution and the Rule of Law.

There will be many twists and turns, for both Parties, before the November 2024 election. Biden did not run for the presidency in 2016, because of the grief after the death of his beloved son, Beau. Perhaps he could now take the honorable, save-face path to resignation because of the ongoing investigations and imminent indictment relating to gun charges and financial misconduct of his second son, Hunter, although there is no evidence of his own involvement. Take one for the team, as it were.

Such a resignation would open the door for younger, proven leaders like Vice President Harris, California Governor Newsom and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, to run for the Democratic nomination. Whoever wins, there will be a welcome breath of fresh air of young and vibrant leadership to the Party.

And the Republicans will be forced to field Trump, with all the legal baggage he is carrying, as their nominee. Should he be compelled to drop out by disqualification of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment or any other reason, up to and including imprisonment, they will have to find a suitable candidate at short notice, while the nation would probably be forced to cope with white supremacist violence that may erupt on the great big fall of Humpty Trumpty.

The 2024 presidential election will be one of the most momentous events in the nation’s history. Whatever the result, Trump has created a suspicion in one of the cornerstones of a democracy – the integrity of its electoral process. It is entirely possible that elections in the future may be decided not by the ballot but by the bullet.



Features

Humanitarian leadership in a time of war

Published

on

Sri Lanka Navy rescuing survivors of the US torpedo attack on IRIS Dena last week

There has been a rare consensus of opinion in the country that the government’s humanitarian response to the sinking of Iran’s naval ship IRIS Dena was the correct one. The support has spanned the party political spectrum and different sections of society. Social media commentary, statements by political parties and discussion in mainstream media have all largely taken the position that Sri Lanka acted in accordance with humanitarian principles and international law. In a period when public debate in Sri Lanka is often sharply divided, the sense of agreement on this issue is noteworthy and reflects positively on the ethos and culture of a society that cares for those in distress. A similar phenomenon was to be witnessed in the rallying of people of all ethnicities and backgrounds to help those affected by the Ditwah Cyclone in December last year.

The events that led to this situation unfolded with dramatic speed. In the early hours before sunrise the Dina made a distress call. The ship was one of three Iranian naval vessels that had taken part in a naval gathering organised by India in which more than 70 countries had participated, including Sri Lanka. Naval gatherings of this nature are intended to foster professional exchange, confidence building and goodwill between navies. They are also governed by strict protocols regarding armaments and conduct.

When the exhibition ended open war between the United States and Iran had not yet broken out. The three Iranian ships that participated in the exhibition left the Indian port and headed into international waters on their journey back home. Under the protocol governing such gatherings ships may not be equipped with offensive armaments. This left them particularly vulnerable once the regional situation changed dramatically, though the US Indo-Pacific Command insists the ship was armed. The sudden outbreak of war between the United States and Iran would have alerted the Iranian ships that they were sailing into danger. According to reports, they sought safe harbour and requested docking in Sri Lanka’s ports but before the Sri Lankan government could respond the Dena was fatally hit by a torpedo.

International Law

The sinking of the Dena occurred just outside Sri Lanka’s territorial waters. Whatever decision the Sri Lankan government made at this time was bound to be fraught with consequence. The war that is currently being fought in the Middle East is a no-holds-barred one in which more than 15 countries have come under attack. Now the sinking of the Dena so close to Sri Lanka’s maritime boundary has meant that the war has come to the very shores of the country. In times of war emotions run high on all sides and perceptions of friend and enemy can easily become distorted. Parties involved in the conflict tend to gravitate to the position that “those who are not with us are against us.” Such a mindset leaves little room for neutrality or humanitarian discretion.

In such situations countries that are not directly involved in the conflict may wish to remain outside it by avoiding engagement. Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath informed the international media that Sri Lanka’s response to the present crisis was rooted in humanitarian principles, international law and the United Nations. The Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) which was adopted 1982 provides the legal framework governing maritime conduct and obliges states to render assistance to persons in distress at sea. In terms of UNCLOS, countries are required to render help to anyone facing danger in maritime waters regardless of nationality or the circumstances that led to the emergency. Sri Lanka’s response to the distress call therefore reflects both humanitarianism and adherence to international law.

Within a short period of receiving the distress message from the stricken Iranian warship the Sri Lankan government sent its navy to the rescue. They rescued more than thirty Iranian sailors who had survived the attack and were struggling in the water. The rescue operation also brought to Sri Lanka the bodies of those who had perished when their ship sank. The scale of the humanitarian challenge is significant. Sri Lanka now has custody of more than eighty bodies of sailors who lost their lives in the sinking of the Dena. In addition, a second Iranian naval ship IRINS Bushehr with more than two hundred sailors has come under Sri Lanka’s protection. The government therefore finds itself responsible for survivors but also for the dignified treatment of the bodies of the dead Iranian sailors.

Sri Lanka’s decision to render aid based on humanitarian principles, not political allegiance, reinforces the importance of a rules-based international order for all countries. Reliance on international law is particularly important for small countries like Sri Lanka that lack the power to defend themselves against larger actors. For such countries a rules-based international order provides at least a measure of protection by ensuring that all states operate within a framework of agreed norms. Sri Lanka itself has played a notable role in promoting such norms. In 1971 the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution declaring the Indian Ocean a Zone of Peace. The initiative for this proposal came from Sri Lanka, which argued that the Indian Ocean should be protected from great power rivalry and militarisation.

Moral Beacon

Unfortunately, the current global climate suggests that the rules-based order is barely operative. Conflicts in different parts of the world have increasingly shown disregard for the norms and institutions that were created in the aftermath of the Second World War to regulate international behaviour. In such circumstances it becomes even more important for smaller countries to demonstrate their commitment to international law and to convert the bigger countries to adopt more humane and universal thinking. The humanitarian response to the Iranian sailors therefore needs to be seen in this wider context. By acting swiftly to rescue those in distress and by affirming that its actions are guided by international law, Sri Lanka has enhanced its reputation as a small country that values peace, humane values, cooperation and the rule of law. It would be a relief to the Sri Lankan government that earlier communications that the US government was urging Sri Lanka not to repatriate the Iranian sailors has been modified to the US publicly acknowledging the applicability of international law to what Sri Lanka does.

The country’s own experience of internal conflict has shaped public consciousness in important ways. Sri Lanka endured a violent internal war that lasted nearly three decades. During that period questions relating to the treatment of combatants, the protection of civilians, missing persons and accountability became central issues. As a result, Sri Lankans today are familiar with the provisions of international law that deal with war crimes, the treatment of wounded or disabled combatants and the fate of those who go missing in conflict. The country continues to host an international presence in the form of UN agencies and the ICRC that work with the government on humanitarian and post conflict issues. The government needs to apply the same principled commitment of humanitarianism and the rule of law to the unresolved issues from Sri Lanka’s own civil war, including accountability and reconciliation.

By affirming humanitarian principles and acting accordingly towards the Iranian sailors and their ship Sri Lanka has become a moral beacon for peace and goodwill in a world that often appears to be moving in the opposite direction. At a time when geopolitical rivalries are intensifying and humanitarian norms are frequently ignored, such actions carry symbolic significance. The credibility of Sri Lanka’s moral stance abroad will be further enhanced by its ability to uphold similar principles at home. Sri Lanka continues to grapple with unresolved issues arising from its own internal conflict including questions of accountability, justice, reparations and reconciliation. It has a duty not only to its own citizens, but also to suffering humanity everywhere. Addressing its own internal issues sincerely will strengthen Sri Lanka’s moral standing in the international community and help it to be a force for a new and better world.

BY Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

Language: The symbolic expression of thought

Published

on

It was Henry Sweet, the English phonetician and language scholar, who said, “Language may be defined as the expression of thought by means of speech sounds“. In today’s context, where language extends beyond spoken sounds to written text, and even into signs, it is best to generalise more and express that language is the “symbolic expression of thought“. The opposite is also true: without the ability to think, there will not be a proper development of the ability to express in a language, as seen in individuals with intellectual disability.

Viewing language as the symbolic expression of thought is a philosophical way to look at early childhood education. It suggests that language is not just about learning words; it is about a child learning that one thing, be it a sound, a scribble, or a gesture, can represent something else, such as an object, a feeling, or an idea. It facilitates the ever-so-important understanding of the given occurrence rather than committing it purely to memory. In the world of a 0–5-year-old, this “symbolic leap” of understanding is the single most important cognitive milestone.

Of course, learning a language or even more than one language is absolutely crucial for education. Here is how that viewpoint fits into early life education:

1. From Concrete to Abstract

Infants live in a “concrete” world: if they cannot see it or touch it, it does not exist. Early education helps them to move toward symbolic thought. When a toddler realises that the sound “ball” stands for that round, bouncy thing in the corner, they have decoded a symbol. Teachers and parents need to facilitate this by connecting physical objects to labels constantly. This is why “Show and Tell” is a staple of early education, as it gently compels the child to use symbols, words or actions to describe a tangible object to others, who might not even see it clearly.

2. The Multi-Modal Nature of Symbols

Because language is “symbolic,” it does not matter how exactly it is expressed. The human brain treats spoken words, written text, and sign language with similar neural machinery.

Many educators advocate the use of “Baby Signs” (simple gestures) before a child can speak. This is powerful because it proves the child has the thought (e.g., “I am hungry”) and can use a symbol like putting the hand to the mouth, before their vocal cords are physically ready to produce the word denoting hunger.

Writing is the most abstract symbol of all: it is a squiggle written on a page, representing a sound, which represents an idea or a thought. Early childhood education prepares children for this by encouraging “emergent writing” (scribbling), even where a child proudly points to a messy circle that the child has drawn and says, “This says ‘I love Mommy’.”

3. Symbolic Play (The Dress Rehearsal)

As recognised in many quarters, play is where this theory comes to life. Between ages 2 and 3, children enter the Symbolic Play stage. Often, there is object substitution, as when a child picks up a banana and holds it to his or her ear like a telephone. In effect, this is a massive intellectual achievement. The child is mentally “decoupling” the object from its physical reality and assigning it a symbolic meaning. In early education, we need to encourage this because if a child can use a block as a “car,” they are developing the mental flexibility required to later understand that the letter “C” stands for the sound of “K” as well.

4. Language as a Tool for “Internal Thought”

Perhaps the most fascinating fit is the work of psychologist Lev Vygotsky, who argued that language eventually turns inward to become private speech. Have you ever seen a 4-year-old talking to himself or herself while building a toy tower? “No, the big one goes here….. the red one goes here…. steady… there.” That is a form of self-regulation. Educators encourage this “thinking out loudly.” It is the way children use the symbol system of language to organise their own thoughts and solve problems. Eventually, this speech becomes silent as “inner thought.”

Finally, there is the charming thought of the feasibility of conversing with very young children in two or even three or more languages. In Sri Lanka, the three main languages are Sinhala, Tamil and English. There are questions asked as to whether it is OK to talk to little ones in all three languages or even in two, so that they would learn?

According to scientific authorities, the short, clear and unequivocal answer to that query is that not only is it “OK”, it is also a significant cognitive gift to a child.

In a trilingual environment like Sri Lanka, many parents worry that multiple languages will “confuse” a child or cause a “speech delay.” However, modern neuroscience has debunked these myths. The infant brain is perfectly capable of building three or even more separate “lexicons” (vocabularies) simultaneously.

Here is how the “symbolic expression of thought” works in a multilingual brain and how we can manage it effectively.

a). The “Multiple Labels” Phenomenon

In a monolingual home, a child learns one symbol for an object. For example, take the word “Apple.” In a Sri Lankan trilingual home, the child learns three symbols for that same thought:

* Apple (English)

* Apal

(Sinhala – ඇපල්)

* Appil

(Tamil – ஆப்பிள்)

Because the trilingual child learns that one “thought” can be expressed by multiple “symbols,” the child’s brain becomes more flexible. This is why bilingual and trilingual children often score higher on tasks involving “executive function”, meaning the ability to switch focus and solve complex problems.

b). Is there a “Delay”?

(The Common Myth)

One might notice that a child in a trilingual home may start to speak slightly later than a monolingual peer, or they might have a smaller vocabulary in each language at age two.

However, if one adds up the total number of words they know across all three languages, they are usually ahead of monolingual children. By age five, they typically catch up in all languages and possess a much more “plastic” and adaptable brain.

c). Strategies for Success: How to Do It?

To help the child’s brain organise these three symbol systems, it helps to have some “consistency.” Here are the two most effective methods:

* One Person, One Language (OPOL), the so-called “gold standard” for multilingual families.

Amma

speaks only Sinhala, while the Father speaks only English, and the Grandparents or Nanny speak only Tamil. The child learns to associate a specific language with a specific person. Their brain creates a “map”: “When I talk to Amma, I use these sounds; when I talk to Thaththa, I use those,” etc.

*

Situational/Contextual Learning. If the parents speak all three, one could divide languages by “environment”: English at the dinner table, Sinhala during play and bath time and Tamil when visiting relatives or at the market.

These, of course, need NOT be very rigid rules, but general guidance, applied judiciously and ever-so-kindly.

d). “Code-Mixing” is Normal

We need not be alarmed if a 3-year-old says something like: “Ammi, I want that palam (fruit).” This is called Code-Mixing. It is NOT a sign of confusion; it is a sign of efficiency. The child’s brain is searching for the quickest way to express a thought and grabs the most “available” word from their three language cupboards. As they get older, perhaps around age 4 or 5, they will naturally learn to separate them perfectly.

e). The “Sri Lankan Advantage”

Growing up trilingual in Sri Lanka provides a massive social and cognitive advantage.

For a start, there will be Cultural Empathy. Language actually carries culture. A child who speaks Sinhala, Tamil, and English can navigate all social spheres of the country quite effortlessly.

In addition, there are the benefits of a Phonetic Range. Sinhala and Tamil have many sounds that do not exist in English (and even vice versa). Learning these as a child wires the ears to hear and reproduce almost any human sound, making it much easier to learn more languages (like French or Japanese) later in life.

As an abiding thought, it is the considered opinion of the author that a trilingual Sri Lanka will go a long way towards the goals and display of racial harmony, respect for different ethnic groups, and unrivalled national coordination in our beautiful Motherland. Then it would become a utopian heaven, where all people, as just Sri Lankans, can live in admirable concordant synchrony, rather than as splintered clusters divided by ethnicity, language and culture.

A Helpful Summary Checklist for Parents

* Do Not Drop a Language:

If you stop speaking Tamil because you are worried about English, the child loses that “neural real estate.” Keep all three languages going.

* High-Quality Input:

Do not just use “commands” (Eat! Sleep!). Use the Parentese and Serve and Return methods (mentioned in an earlier article) in all the languages.

* Employ Patience:

If the little one mixes up some words, just model the right words and gently correct the sentence and present it to the child like a suggestion, without scolding or finding fault with him or her. The child will then learn effortlessly and without resentment or shame.

by Dr b. J. C. Perera

MBBS(Cey), DCH(Cey), DCH(Eng), MD(Paediatrics), MRCP(UK), FRCP(Edin), FRCP(Lond), FRCPCH(UK), FSLCPaed, FCCP, Hony.
FRCPCH(UK), Hony. FCGP(SL)

Specialist Consultant Paediatrician and Honorary Senior Fellow, Postgraduate Institute of Medicine, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka

Continue Reading

Features

SIMPSON’S … set to carve a distinct sonic identity

Published

on

SIMPSON’S: Quite active in the scene here

It is, indeed, encouraging to see our local artistes working on new formats, where their music is concerned.

Variety is the spice of life, they say, and I do agree, especially when it comes to music.

Blending modern synth textures, ambient layers and soulful undertones, the group SIMPSON’S is set to carve a distinct sonic identity within Sri Lanka’s contemporary music landscape.

Their vision, they say, is not simply to produce songs, but to create emotional atmospheres – experiences that elevate, energise and resonate, both locally and beyond.

This four-piece outfit came into the scene, less than two years ago, and they are already making waves with their debut single ‘Balaporottuwak’ (Hope).

The song, I’m told, marks the beginning of a new sound, and at the forefront of ‘Balaporottuwak’ is the group’s lead vocalist and guitarist, Ryo Hera, who brings a rich cultural heritage to the stage.

As a professional Kandyan Wes dancer, Ryo’s commanding presence and textured vocals bring a distinct energy to the band’s sound.

‘Balaporottuwak’

Ryo Hera: Vocals for ‘Balaporottuwak’

is more than just a debut single – it’s a declaration of intent. The band is merging tradition and modernity, power and subtlety, to create a sound that’s both authentic and innovative.

With this song, SIMPSON’S is inviting listeners to join them on an evolving musical journey, one that’s built on vision and creativity.

The recording process for ‘Balaporottuwak’ was organic and instinctive, with the band shaping the song through live studio sessions.

Dileepa Liyanage, the keyboardist and composer, is the principal sound mind behind SIMPSON’S.

With experience spanning background scores, commercial projects, cinematic themes and jingles across multiple genres, Dileepa brings structural finesse and atmospheric depth to the band’s arrangements.

He described the recording process of ‘Balaporottuwak’ as organic and instinctive: “When Ryo Hera opens his voice, it becomes effortless to shape it into any musical colour. The tone naturally adapts.”

The band’s lineup includes Buddhima Chalanu on bass, and Savidya Yasaru on drums, and, together, they create a sound that’s not just a reflection of their individual talents, but a collective vision.

Dileepa Liyanage: Brings
structural finesse and
atmospheric depth to the
band’s arrangements

What sets SIMPSON’S apart is their decision to keep the production in-house – mixing and mastering the song themselves. This allows them to maintain their unique sound and artistic autonomy.

“We work as a family and each member is given the freedom to work out his music on the instruments he handles and then, in the studio, we put everything together,” said Dileepa, adding that their goal is to release an album, made up of Sinhala and English songs.

Steering this creative core is manager Mangala Samarajeewa, whose early career included managing various international artistes. His guidance has positioned SIMPSON’S not merely as a performing unit, but as a carefully envisioned project – one aimed at expanding Sri Lanka’s contemporary music vocabulary.

SIMPSON’S are quite active in the scene here, performing, on a regular basis, at popular venues in Colombo, and down south, as well.

They are also seen, and heard, on Spotify, TikTok, Apple Music, iTunes, and Deezer.

Continue Reading

Trending