Sri Lanka does not need more slogans, more populist rhetoric, or more failed experiments. It needs a movement that can deliver genuine social democracy
by Luxman Aravind
In a time of crisis, political transitions often become dangerous experiments. Sri Lanka’s upcoming presidential election has ushered in the rise of the National People’s Power (NPP) under the ‘Compass (Malimawa).’ But will this symbol of direction and change steer the nation towards a brighter future, or will it stumble into the same political abyss that has trapped the country for decades?
History is littered with revolutions and political experiments that strayed far from their intended path. Consider the French Revolution, which promised a republic but descended into chaos, ultimately producing an emperor. These historical parallels may not perfectly mirror our situation, but they highlight a fundamental truth: change often breeds instability, and the outcomes are rarely what the revolutionaries imagined.
 |
| Anura Kumara Dissanayake addressing the event [NPP] |
Unlike those times, we now have democracy—a stabilising force meant to protect societies from the wild swings of political upheaval. Yet, democracy itself has been infiltrated by capitalism, corrupting its ideals and widening the chasm between the wealthy and the impoverished. Sri Lanka, like many nations, is caught in this web of contradictions. The country’s political elite has failed to build a system that balances free-market policies with social justice, leaving a gaping wound in the body politic that the NPP now promises to heal.
But is the NPP truly the answer, or is it yet another mirage? Anura Kumara Dissanayake, the party’s leader, claims to be the untainted alternative, offering a fresh path to a social-democratic state. Yet history tells us that anti-establishment figures, when thrust into power, often find themselves enmeshed in the very systems they vowed to dismantle. Revolutionaries become bureaucrats; ideals become diluted.
The seductive slogan of “those who have ruled for 75 years have destroyed the country” resonates deeply with the disillusioned masses, especially after Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s catastrophic presidency. But slogans are easy. Governing is not. Sri Lanka’s long-standing issues—rampant corruption, a crumbling political culture, a yawning income gap—require far more than rhetoric. The top 20% of society enjoys 50% of the nation’s income, while the bottom 20% barely scrapes by with 5%. The question is: does the NPP have the political and economic clarity to fix this entrenched inequality?
Let’s be blunt: the NPP, like many movements born out of frustration, is riding a wave of emotional devotion, not reasoned belief. Its supporters, driven by anger and a desire to topple the establishment, may not fully grasp the practical realities of governance. The party’s economic policies are murky at best, and while it touts anti-corruption as its primary mission, fighting corruption alone won’t fix the systemic rot that has plagued Sri Lanka for generations. Social democracy requires robust institutions, balanced economic models, and policies that protect the vulnerable while fostering growth. Has the NPP articulated a roadmap for this? Not convincingly.
Devotion, however passionate, is dangerous. It clouds judgment, inflates expectations, and often results in bitter disappointment. The recent controversy surrounding the popular musical band, forced to apologise to NPP supporters for perceived insults, is a stark reminder of how unchecked fervour can spiral into authoritarian behaviour, even from those supposedly fighting for democratic values.
If the NPP is to succeed, it must transcend the blind loyalty of its followers and build a pragmatic, transparent political platform. Governing requires more than railing against the system; it demands solutions—clear, actionable, and realistic. Sri Lanka’s challenges are profound, and without a coherent strategy, the NPP risks becoming just another failed experiment in a long line of political movements that promised change but delivered more of the same.
Sri Lanka does not need more slogans, more populist rhetoric, or more failed experiments. It needs a movement that can deliver genuine social democracy—one that can balance free-market economics with protections for the vulnerable, create opportunities for all, and restore trust in the institutions that hold the nation together. The NPP may claim to be that movement, but the jury is still out.
So, will the ‘Compass’ lead Sri Lanka in the right direction, or will it become another symbol of broken promises and political delusion? The path forward is fraught with peril, and the stakes couldn’t be higher. If the NPP fails, it won’t just be another political party that collapses—it will be the hopes of an entire generation that are shattered.
Post a Comment