It takes a puny mind and a cynical outlook to be celebrating a dictatorship. The intellectual tradition of Colombo has created many such puny minds and visionless ‘intellectuals’. These include Mervin de Silva and all. Dayan Jayatilleka is only an offshoot of this ‘tradition’. There is nothing to be surprised about in his admiration for Joseph Stalin, JR Jayawardene, R Premadasa and Mahinda Rajapaksha. Within the last few days, he has demonstrated the nature of his ‘capacities’ and the tradition he represents. He is quite a homemade product.
by Basil Fernando
(September 18, Hong Kong, Sri Lanka Guardian) The Burmese people are still struggling to overcome the ruin of their country by the Dictator Ne Win. Ne Win’s authoritarian system destroyed all the basic institutions of Burma. Over several decades, the dictatorship destroyed all the traditions of pluralism. However, it could not destroy the resistance. The resistance still goes on despite the devastation caused to the whole nation which has ruined the hopes and expectations of all the peoples of Burma. Ne Win represented himself as a patriot. His patriotism was not about the well-being of the people.
The people of Indonesia were able to defeat the military rule of Suharto. However, the devastation caused by the dictatorship has affected all the areas of Indonesian life. It is difficult to imagine how long it will take for Indonesia to emerge as a nation within which the well-being of the population can be brought to anything that can be closer to what may be called a normal situation, even within the context of poorer nations.
The people of The Philippines were able to defeat the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos within a shorter time than the people of Burma and Indonesia. However, the devastating effect of his authoritarian rule still lives on. The possibility of an organized way of life within which the well-being of the majority of the Filipinos can be ensured remains a distant dream. All the basic institutions of democracy in the Philippines have been undermined by Marco’s dictatorship and, even with the People’s Power Revolution, and many efforts, nothing very much has substantially changed. It is easy to destroy liberal democracy. It is a much more formidable task to recreate it.
The people of Pakistan were under several military dictatorships. They have overcome these dictatorships from time to time. At the moment, Pakistan has a democratically elected government. However, the terrible effect of these dictatorships lives on. All the basic institutions, such as the police, the court systems and civil administration, have been affected and it has proved almost an impossible task to create an organized way of life that can create the conditions of well-being for the people of Pakistan. I visited a Pakistani family a few hours ago. They have just come back from a visit to their home in Karachi. The situation of the city was described by my friend’s wife by saying that, ‘Within the house, we are safe. But outside it’s a terrible situation.’ Her husband described how in order to avenge one murder about 150 people have been killed. The legacy of lawlessness that is created by dictatorship makes that kind of a hell for the citizens of the country.
These are only a few examples from Asia. The other well-known examples from the west illustrate this same problem. The devastation caused by Stalin’s dictatorship created such a ruin that creating a sense of order and stability has remained a problem beyond description for the people of Russia. Alexandr Solzhenitsyn described the situation caused by Stalin’s dictatorship as ‘abysmal lawlessness’. Once recreating possibilities for people’s participation in the affairs of life and the organization of their own well-being after such a situation has remained a problem even after a period of change initiated by the famous speech of Nikita Khruschev in 1956.
Germany faced such a situation after the First World War. It created the background for the emergence of Hitler and all the cruelties of followed. It was only due to the intervention of the western powers through the Marshall plan that conditions were created in which German people were able to deal with the effects of the Nazi dictatorship. This process allowed them to understand the conditions which created the possibilities for the dictatorship of Hitler. Almost every area of life was rethought and reorganized within Germany to get over the effects of the dictatorship and to prevent its reoccurrence. In the constitutional sphere, the limitations of the Weimar Constitution were examined and many constitutional and legal reforms were introduced to overcome those limitations. The creation of an extraordinary court, known as the constitutional court, was also a product of the attempt to deal with the devastating effects of authoritarian rule.
Sri Lanka entered into a period of authoritarian rule in 1978. The course of this authoritarian rule has been chronicled by many. Among such works is Dr. Rajiva Wijesinha’s Declining Sri Lanka, 2007. He narrates how JR Jayawardene’s personal ambitions created a political system that caused the conditions for the ethnic conflict to turn into the kind of war that we now know about. Would there have been that war if there the 1978 Constitution was not introduced and there was room left for solving the problem by other means? The 1978 Constitution destroyed all the public institutions and is a story that is very well known and discussed.
R Premadasa, getting into the shoes of JR Jayawardene, followed by Chandrika Bandaranayake and then by Mahinda Rajapaksha, did not make any change for the better as far as the authoritarian system was concerned. The change of one leader for the other did not cause fundamental changes in the system that was introduced through the 1978 Constitution. The 18th Amendment has completed the course of authoritarianism. The problem for the future is not as to when and who will replace Mahinda Rajapaksha, but about the manner in which the authoritarian scheme of 1978 could be replaced. Like the people of the countries cited above, for the people of Sri Lanka this will not be an easy task.
It takes a puny mind and a cynical outlook to be celebrating a dictatorship. The intellectual tradition of Colombo has created many such puny minds and visionless ‘intellectuals’. These include Mervin de Silva and all. Dayan Jayatilleka is only an offshoot of this ‘tradition’. There is nothing to be surprised about in his admiration for Joseph Stalin, JR Jayawardene, R Premadasa and Mahinda Rajapaksha. Within the last few days, he has demonstrated the nature of his ‘capacities’ and the tradition he represents. He is quite a homemade product.
In my last comment in this series, I asked what will be the next stupid question of Dayan Jayatilleka. In his response he has raised that question. He asked what the likes of me will do when Sajith Premadasa becomes the UNP leader next week. Such stupid questions require no answer.
In the lives of Sri Lankans the authoritarian system will continue to cause havoc. It will destroy the right to fair trial and the right to all basic freedoms, including the freedom of expression and association. Above all, people will lose the right to representation. All this causes practical problems to people in their daily lives. The ordinary folk, who the likes of Dayan would like to think of as illiterates, will bear the brunt of all these problems. It is for the people themselves to find the solutions to all these riddles caused by their selfish leaders. If selfishness is patriotism, then Dayan is right when he describes Sri Lanka’s dictators as patriots.
Please refer to previous article: RESEARCH THIS!
Post a Comment