Lanka Citizen

by Nalin de Silva

I have to thank “Kathika” study circle for the article “Neo-liberalism, Jathika Chinthanaya, and Citizenship” that appeared in The Island on 31st October 2005. “Kathika” has taken the trouble to study Jathika Chinthanaya, unlike some others who dabble on the topic without trying to understand what it is all about. “Kathika” has identified the Presidential Elections as that between two candidates, one of them following what is known as Neo-liberalism, and the other Jathika Chinthanaya. At the outset, I must admit that Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse, though he has called his manifesto Mahinda Chinthana, is unlikely to identify himself with Jathika Chinthanaya as such. Both Mr. Rajapakse and Jathika Chinthanaya are in transitional stages, with the former attempting to achieve an alternative to neo-liberalism, while the latter is in the process of formulating concepts and theories relative to the culture and the Chinthanaya of the country.

“Kathika” like many others have translated Jathika Chinthanaya as national ethos. However, Jathika Chinthanaya is the Chinthanaya of the nation, and the latter has been recognized (or defined, if one who is brought up in the western intellectual tradition may say so) as the thread that binds all that has been constructed by the humans belonging to a particular nation, community etc. Thus, the arts and crafts, music, literature, science, the attitudes, world view and any other human creation of a nation have something in common that can be called the Chinthanaya. Any Chinthanaya has at least a logic, and attitudes and a philosophy, which may be called the world view of the community or the nation. We do not wish to translate Chinthanaya into English or any other language as it could convey a different meaning. It is true that when Dr. Gunadasa Amarasekera used the words Jathika Chinthanaya way back in 1986, he used them as a translation of the words national thought. However, in the evolution of the concept, Chinthanaya has acquired a much deeper idea than thought, though even in Sinhala many people who hear the word Chinthanaya for the first time are likely to mean thought by it. The concept of Chinthanaya is both holistic and reductionist. It is both analytic as well as synthetic. One could think of Chinthanaya as a concept to which everything is reduced and (not or) that synthetically combines everything into a whole. The logic of Jathika Chinthanaya enables us to consider Chinthanaya as both holistic and reductionist.

One of the theories that has been formulated within Jathika Chinthanaya is that knowledge is a human construction, as opposed to say a discovery, and that it is constructed relative to the mind, the sense organs and the culture of a particular individual. One could say that there is a school of thought in the western tradition as well which claim that knowledge is a human construction. It may be so, but we differ from them, as in our formulation, the construction is due to avidya of anicca, dukka and anatta. In that sense any knowledge including science is due to avidya. It has to be mentioned that anicca, dukka and anatta are not concepts and a “person” who “understands” them would have achieved nibbana. The knowledge that is constructed is thus relative to a particular culture, and hence is constructed within a Chinthanaya. We claim that the modern western knowledge is relative to Judaic Christian culture and is constructed within what we call the Greek Judaic Christian (GJC) Chinthanaya.

The GJC Chinthanaya itself was created only about five hundred years ago in the west, and what is known as modernity, renaissance, reformation, western science have been created within this particular Chinthanaya. We have our own theories regarding the creation of the GJC Chinthanaya, published mainly in Sinhala in the newspapers “Irida Divaina” and “Vidusara” which I am afraid are not reputed international journals where intellectuals publish their research. (I continue to lose points for my promotions under the UGC circular No 723 as I do not have so called research papers in reputed journals) Western modernity is in essence a creation in the last five hundred years in the west and is based on the GJC Chinthanaya. It is a continuing process, and in this regard we agree with Habermass, as opposed to the so-called postmodernists, though for different reasons.

We do not wish to use the word tradition in opposition to modernity. We have a tradition, as much as modernity has a tradition. The tradition of Western Christian (we identify it as Christian as well, opposed to Catholic) Modernity is based on the GJC Chinthanaya. The western Christian Modernity emerged in the fifteenth century with the GJC Chinthanaya being created in opposition to the Catholic Chinthanaya that prevailed in Europe at that time. When the westerners refer to tradition they use the word tradition with some kind of degradation. Thus traditional knowledge is not scientific knowledge implying that it is bordering on mythology if not mythology itself. Also modern is to be preferred with respect to tradition which is ancient and not relevant. I am not that concerned with what the westerners have to say about us, but as most of us also follow the westerners, we should be careful in the words we use as unconsciously we may degrade ourselves. It is the English who are very particular about reading between the lines, but when it comes to using their concepts and theories we have not only to read between the lines, but between the words as well. It has to be mentioned that all knowledge is mythology as knowledge is constructed as a result of avidya. Everything including the mind is a construction of the mind. (Those who are interested may read Vidusara to find out how mind constructs the mind!) This follows from the logic of Jathika Chinthanaya, which is cyclic unlike the linear logic of the westerners.

“Kathika” has referred to the individual as against the community. Before the advent of the modernist tradition the westerners were community minded. The western Chinthanaya was Catholic then, and that word itself implies whole. However, the western logic has always been Aristotelian, with their attempts to being “dialectic” ending up in formal systems (Please read Apohakaye Rupikaya or The formalism of Dialectics for details). Though the westerners changed from Catholic Chinthanaya to GJC in the fifteenth century, they did not change their logic. The logic remained Aristotelian and they continued to think in terms of binary oppositions. When Derrida says the westerners think in terms of binary oppositions such as white- black, with one of the terms in the pair dominating the other he refers to this particular characteristic in the western tradition that has remained unchanged to date in spite of Hegel, Marx and Derrida himself. None of them was able to create a system different to that of Aristotle with Derrida not even making an attempt. However, in the eastern traditions, especially in the Sinhala Theravada tradition we have a logical system known as catuskoti which incorporates the Aristotelian logic as well. Thus the Aristotelian logic could be considered as a subset of catuskoti.

What “Kathika” has pointed out is the emergence of the individual in the Western Christian modernity. Within the Catholic Chinthanaya the community or the whole was the dominant term in the binary opposition individual – community. When the Chinthanaya changed to GJC the binary opposition as a pair remained the same. However, unlike during the so-called European medieval period when the Catholic Chinthanaya was the prevailing Chinthanaya, during Christian modernity, the individual became the dominant term in the binary opposition individual – community. The David of Michelangelo that was created five hundred years ago could be considered as a symbol representing the change from the community to the individual. It represented the victory of the individual David over the community Goliath. The westerners could change only the dominant term, they did not know how to drop the binary opposition altogether.

We consider Capitalism, that emerged later in the Europe as the economic mode of western Christian modernity, just as much feudalism was the economic mode of the European medieval period. In the medieval period the community dominated over the individual, but when the individual became the dominant term, the latter lost everything except the labour that he could spend or sell. The individual gradually lost the relationship with the extended family, then the nuclear family and now he has alienated from himself as well. The alienation that Marx mentions is associated with Capitalism. For Marx alienation is a result of Capitalism. For us alienation as well as capitalism is the result of the change of the Chinthanaya of the Europeans. Not only Capitalism but even Luther and Calvin, not to mention Copernicus and Galileo are the results of the change in the Chinthanaya that began in the fifteenth century. Lutheran God of the individual was opposed to God of the community and mass of the Catholic Church. The next stage of alienation would see the individual alienating from himself and more and more cases of schizophrenia as a social phenomenon would have to be dealt with.

In the western society the individual is the most important concept and his, now hers as well, freedom from the society (community), individual liberty, human rights have drawn the attention of the academics legal pundits and administrators. The small David has grown up to be a Goliath in five hundred years threatening not only the community but himself as well. It has become a case of protecting David not from Goliath but from himself. The economic component has become the dominant component and welfare has become synonymous with individual economic prosperity. In the process, not only the environment but even the health of the individual has been sacrificed. The adage prevention is better than cure has been replaced by get ill and then get well attitude. If one has money he could get well, after getting ill. Even meditation has become a way to train the mind how to spend energy efficiently on accumulating wealth. Ever since Adam Smith talked about wealth of the nation individuals have been spending more and more energy to grab more and more wealth. Adam Smith should have written on wealth of the individual and not on the wealth of the nation.

(To be continued)

“According to Tamil sources, the LTTE may well be waiting for the emergence of a clear picture of the election scene in Sinhala-dominated South Sri Lanka. In case the gap between Wickremesinghe and Rajapaksa narrows, and the support of the Sri Lankan Tamils of the Northeast becomes critical for one or both of them, the LTTE may try and strike a deal. Votes could be traded for crucial concessions.

As one Tamil politician said, the LTTE may try to extract a promise that efforts will be made to get the European Union’s travel ban on it lifted. A promise to discuss its controversial proposal for an Interim Self Governing Authority (ISGA) may also be pressed for.

But given the present delicate political situation, in which Sinhala nationalistic feelings are running high, neither Wickremesinghe nor Rajapaksa will dare to enter into any deal with the LTTE.”

P.K. Balachandran, Hindustan Times

Such racism [of Ranil] is inexcusable, even in a young man. It contrasts sadly with the response of his uncle, Bishop Lakshman Wickremesinghe, Chairman of the Civil Rights Movement, who was as critical of the abuses of the Jayewardene government, as he had been of those of the previous Bandaranaike government. In the days when now reawakened Christians like Lalith Kotelawala were silent, perhaps still making the money under Jayewardene’s new economic dispensation that they can now spend so freely, Lakshman Wickremesinghe was a voice of civilized pluralism.

Finally, we should note that he still continues with associates who are tainted by their activities during that time. Gone are Gonawala Sunil, and Kalu Lucky, who led the attack on the houses of Supreme Court judges, shortly after Ranil had signed the register at his wedding. Ranil is now more sophisticated, and he has instead Tilak Marapana, whom he made Minister of Defence, in preference to more able and experienced politicians.

UNDERSTANDING THE PAST
Prof.Rajiva Wijesinha

The papers this Sunday carried various advertisements featuring Lalith Kotelawala, designed evidently to stampede people into voting for Ranil Wickermesinghe at the forthcoming election. The most frightening contains of what seems to be a Tamil youth being tormented, beneath which, next to a smilingly cherubic Kotelawala, is the caption ‘Cast your vote wisely, so that we may not be dragged back to another monstrous war’.

Above the picture is the headline ‘Do those who sow the seeds of racism, wish to take us back to the past?’ The advertisement, along with one featuring a letter from the Archbishop of Colombo – which one hopes was not designed for the use to which Kotelawala has put it – has been placed by a ‘Society for Love and Understanding’.

Ironically, assuming understanding was really intended, the picture was taken during the July 1983 riots by Chandragupta Amarasinghe, who was working at the time for the ‘Aththa’ newspaper. The ‘Aththa’ was in the forefront then of exposing what the government was up to – which led to it being banned when, a week after the riots, the government accused the Communist Party, Vasudeva Nanayakkara’s NLSSP and the JVP of being responsible and proscribed them.

The irony of this was that previously, in his speech on television on July 28th, J R had declared that the riots had occurred because the Sinhalese had been persecuted beyond endurance. Jayewardene’s response therefore to the sufferings of Tamils was that he had been too soft on separatists, so he would now take measures to proscribe any parties that advocated separatism.

However, perhaps because of the further rioting that broke out the next day, the horror expressed internationally, and wiser counsel amongst those of his cabinet who were not associated with Cyril Mathew, the following week the government changed tack. Now, though not actually condemning the riots that their leader had attributed to patriots previously, they attributed them to leftist parties. Though later the proscription on the CP and the NLSSP was lifted, the JVP remained underground. They had evaded arrest, as had Vasudeva, understandably given that twice running prisoners had been massacred in jail. Thus the involvement of the JVP in the democratic process, which they had adhered to since J R released them from prison in 1977, was halted.

Further ironies abound. In those days Ranil Wickremesinghe, whose cause Kotelawala seems to be espousing so anxiously, showed by his pronouncements that he was still on Mathew’s wavelength. Wiser heads such as Premadasa and Athulathmudali had by now rejected the chauvinist approach. However, in an interview given to the ‘Daily News’ in early August, Ranil declared that what had happened in July 1983 to the Tamils was not so bad as what Sinhalese had suffered previously due to the policies of the Bandaranaikes. To quote from the article – ‘The governments of the Bandaranaikes aimed at the areas where Sinhala entrepreneurs operated. During the second and third Bandaranaike regimes, when manufacturing industries were encouraged, the bulk of the licences except for a few exceptions went to non-Sinhala ventures. Compensation was not paid to Sinhala ventures that were nationalised. To make matters worse a capital levy was imposed as was a ceiling on incomes. Enterprising Sinhala entrepreneurs like Upai Wijewardene and Buddy Wettasinghe went abroad to make their mark and returned only after the current UNP government assumed office.’

‘Mr Wickremesinghe opined that the tragedy that had now struck the non-Sinhala trader due to the machinations of an extreme political party as a result of their factories and business places being burnt down, was nothing compared to the tragedy imposed on the Sinhala entrepreneur by the Bandaranaikes since 1956. With capital being provided and know-how and expertise being available, the destroyed establishments could soon recover. The Sinhala businessman was stripped of his wealth, not paid any compensation and was sometimes driven to suicide and insanity.’

Such racism is inexcusable, even in a young man. It contrasts sadly with the response of his uncle, Bishop Lakshman Wickremesinghe, Chairman of the Civil Rights Movement, who was as critical of the abuses of the Jayewardene government, as he had been of those of the previous Bandaranaike government. In the days when now reawakened Christians like Lalith Kotelawala were silent, perhaps still making the money under Jayewardene’s new economic dispensation that they can now spend so freely, Lakshman Wickremesinghe was a voice of civilized pluralism.

In his last pastoral address, he deals also with the issues raised by Ranil, and provides a rebuttal of the excuses that had been proferred for the attacks on Tamils. He criticizes those who thought ‘that the enforced departure of indigenous Tamils from the professions, government services, universities and schools and of Tamils of Indian origin from retail trade and other occupations in South Sri Lanka was justified…. Because they feel that the undue advantage which the indigenous Tamils had in relation to the percentage of the population, and which the Tamils of Indian origin had in the internal trade, especially within the Sinhala areas, were not justified, they are not willing to condemn the methods adopted to get rid of them.’

Bishop Wickremesinghe’s conclusions were firm and forceful – ‘The arguments that have been stated so far point to one basic moral fact. It is that the massive retaliation mainly by the Sinhalese against defenceless Tamils in July 1983 cannot be justified on moral grounds. We must admit this and acknowledge our shame.’

Ranil Wickremesinghe, though Lakshman’s nephew, was incapable of acknowleding error, but rather played down the enormity of what had happened. Of course it is conceivable that he has changed, but Kotelawala’s advertisement, in bringing back the past, without looking at the realities of that past, forces us to think about how history could repeat itself.

And it makes one wonder about the moral perspectives of someone who, well into his thirties, could adopt the Cyril Mathew perspective. It would suggest that Ranil’s acquiescence in Tiger excesses during his Premiership also arose from joining a bandwagon. This does not bode well for the future, given also his recent somersault into populism after the doctrinaire disciplinarianism of his fiscal policies during his last period of government.

Finally, we should note that he still continues with associates who are tainted by their activities during that time. Gone are Gonawala Sunil, and Kalu Lucky, who led the attack on the houses of Supreme Court judges, shortly after Ranil had signed the register at his wedding. Ranil is now more sophisticated, and he has instead Tilak Marapana, whom he made Minister of Defence, in preference to more able and experienced politicians.

It was Marapana who served the government when they were covering up the massacre of Tamils in Welikada on July 25th and also on July 27th. To cite from the article by Rajan Hoole on the event, which is measured but damning -

‘in came Mervyn Wijesinghe, Secretary, Justice, with Mr Tilak Marapone, Deputy Solicitor General, and Mr C R de Silva, Senior State Counc\sel, ‘offering their assistance to this court’. As recorded by Wijewardene. It was hardly the kind of assistance to be rejected. We know how they led the evidence. Why were the counsels who were representing the victims and survivors not called?…..

An incident during the inquest, which began in the evening and lasted through the night until the 27th morning, is revealing. The AJMO, Dr Salgado’s assistant, a Tamil, Dr Balachandra, was taking photographs of the bodies during the post-mortem examinations as was normal. There was alarm among the minor staff that a Tamil was taking photographs for use as propaganda. A jail guard came in alarm and informed DSG Tilak Marapone about it. Marapone telephoned Dr Salgado from the prison to find out what was going on. Salgado assured him that the camera and the film were his, and it was he who had asked Balachandra to photograph the bodies. The proper thing was for Marapone to have informed the Presiding Magistrate if he thought something objectionable was going on. Such overbearing conduct by the Attorney General’s department to the cost of the judiciary is now endemic to our system…..

The Magistrate conducting the inquest should normally have handed over the bodies to the next of kin. That had become awkward or difficult. At this point Detectvie Superintendent Hyde Silva applied for possession of the bodies for disposal under Section 15A of the Gazette Extraordinary of 18th July 1983; Deputy Solicitor General Mr Marapone, presumably representing the Attorney General, said that he had no objection to the request. Magistrate Wijewardene perused the Gazette and agreed that it should be allowed in law. The relevant section, however reserves such authorization for Secretary, Defence, and not the Attorney General…..

The flames from the pyre leapt up against the glimmering dawn, as the dead were turned to ashes. However, unknown to the army officer, those above him, and the highest in authority, the ghosts of these victims were to haunt this land for a generation and more, denying it any prospect of peace.’

Lalith Kotelawala was conspicuously silent in the eighties when the seeds of racism were sown, and watered so assiduously by government action and inaction, at a time when a true Christian like Bishop Lakshman Wickremesinghe gave up his life for democracy and pluralism. It is to be hoped that Bishop Oswald Gomis will remember his great Christian predecessors, and not allow his name to be taken in vain by those who would pervert the past for their own ends.

courtesy Lanka Academic Network.

Political events in Sri Lanka are meanwhile overtaking the international peace initiative. Inevitably, there are varying opinions as to which of the two candidates will win November’s election. But it is quite clear that in any case, Sinhala ultra-nationalists have become a powerful political force that, as we have argued before, both Sri Lanka’s minorities and the international community will be compelled to confront them on the road to peace. The battle lines can already be discerned. The Co-Chairs have reiterated their commitment to a federal solution to end Sri Lanka’s protracted conflict. But Mahinda Rajapakse’s campaign hinges on his opposition to any ‘division of the country.’ Whereas to the international community and the island’s minorities, federalism is not division, to the Sinhala ultra-nationalists bearing him aloft, it most certainly is. Even if Ranil Wickremesinghe wins – an increasingly unlikely proposition – the Sinhala nationalists will yet undermine the peace process. The ignominious fate of the Post-Tsunami Operational Management Structure (P-TOMS) is likely to befall every advance in the peace process.

The international community has played an unwitting role in the ascendancy of the Sinhala nationalist forces in Sri Lanka. There is no compelling reason for these extremists to heed international sentiment, even when in power. In the recent past, donors have unilaterally and collectively breached the aid conditionality they themselves imposed. And whereas little aid has reached the hundreds of thousands of displaced people in the Northeast, the south continues to benefit substantially, not only from aid flows but indirect benefits such as investment flows. In other words, with their political constituency reaping the substantial benefits of peace already, why should Sinhala leaders compromise on the ethnic question?

This week the hardline monks of the JHU – now reversing the argument the Tigers have been expanding their military during the ceasefire – declared that southern leaders are over-estimating the potency of the LTTE. A new war could be won in short order they argue. The Tamils – and we suggest the international community, too – should brace themselves. It is inevitable that Sri Lanka will attempt a military solution again.

Editorial, Tamil Guardian, Sep 21 2005

http://www.tamilguardian.com/beta/news_details.asp?newsid=234