By Harsha Gunasena –

Harsha Gunasena

There was a commemoration ceremony of the late Gamini Dissanayake on the occasion of his 84^th birthday. Sajith Premadasa, Leader of SJB and the Leader of the Opposition, delivered a  speech in which he outlined his political viewpoint. He has expressed these sentiments previously as well and he operates in this line. The following are the quotes of his speech and the translation was by the writer.

“Today a lot of people talk about different camps of ideologies. The late Gamini Dissanayake was in the camp of people. In todays world the Left as well as the Right are unsuccessful. Those leftist and rightist theories were imported to our country and those are foreign theories. The country needs today a people friendly theory. The theories which safeguard the people and which promote prosperity and wellbeing of the people…The late Gamini Dissanayake rejected lumpen capitalism, notorious crony capitalism and leftist socialist extreme… JR Jayewardene, Lalith Atulathmudali, Gamini Dissanayake and R Premadasa walked in one path. It was not capitalism, socialism or liberalism. That path was people’s path.”  He was suggesting a political movement which rejected lumpen capitalism, crony capitalism, extremist liberalist theories and extremist communism and which embraces populist and people centric movement with humane capitalism.

The term humane capitalism was brought into Sri Lanka by Chandrika Kumaratunga who came from a leftist political  movement since she wanted to carry on with the liberal capitalism introduced by JR Jayewardene. She wanted to do that since the old socialist model was no longer valid. Lumpen capitalism ( I do not know how  capitalism became lumpen ) and crony capitalism were established in Sri Lanka by the political movement comprised of the politicians he mentioned  including his father which came to power in 1977. This was the direct result of the crony socialism practiced in Sri Lanka by the government established in 1970.

In 1977 we have seen a new era which started giving back the wealth taken over from the people over two decades; opened the foreign trade to a great extent; and solicited the participation of the people in the economic activities. We know that the process was hindered by crony capitalism but just because of that we cannot under estimate the economic transformation stirred by the then government. Also it was not centered on welfare of the people as Sajith Premadasa contemplates. It was centered on the participation of the people to build the economy of the country. Previously we had a government centered economy. It was true that the people  were benefited by the economic activities  but the aim was to develop the economy of the country.

Janasaviya of R Premadasa was not just a distribution of funds. It was a scheme which provided certain cash benefits to poor people and at the same time it saved certain amount of cash in the name of the recipients so that at the end of the period they can start a small business with that money for their livelihood. It was converted to a mere distribution of funds by Chandrika Kumaratunga and S.B. Dissanayake. Also his project of garment factories was not just providing benefits to the people but getting their participation for the development of the  economy of the country.

Sajith Premadasa (Sajith) did not mention any thing about his political opponent Ranil Wickremesinghe (Ranil). In previous occasions when the question was asked why SJB and UNP were not united Sajith answered that the stance of Ranil was liberal and right wing and his stance was neither right nor left but in the center with people centric view. Hence getting united was difficult. Sajith in this speech mentioned that the previous UNP leaders specially Gamini Dissanayake were against the crony capitalism. Hence Ranil should be the crony capitalist and neo liberalist.

Is Ranil such a person? We know that he managed with special reference to few of his friends. Sajith carries on the activities of the party in the same way. The allegation faced by Ranil in respect of crony capitalists was the bond scam. We do not approve that. The relevant damage to the Central Bank was withheld from that company. Apart from that there are no allegations against him.

Is Ranil a neo liberalist? What is neo liberalism? The main ingredients of neo liberalism are deregulation, privatization, fiscal austerity and  free trade. Deregulation means removing or reducing government rules that restrict business activities to allow for greater competition. Ranil improved regulation by introduction of various Acts. Although he talked big, he did not privatize any entity. If he was a neo liberal he could have privatized Sri Lankan Air Lines and privatize the ownership of the two state banks to a certain extent. IMF agreement provided certain assistance in this direction. Fiscal austerity is to reduce government expenses and reduce the taxes as well. Ranil increased the taxes while reducing the expenses but provided Aswesuma benefits to the poor people. The present government is spearheading the process of reduction of tariffs and promote free trade with restructuring of the Electricity Board. Hence Ranil is not a neo liberalist.

If we further dig into neo liberalism it is globalization  and focus on maximizing the shareholder wealth of the companies without focusing on the growth and employment generation with suppressing of the trade unions. This process provides a bias towards capital rather than labor. Ranil did not touch this area.

Therefore, there is no point of going towards the centre against Ranil. In order to develop the country one should be at the right of Ranil. JR who was praised by Sajith was at the right of Ranil. If he got another chance Ranil would have gone towards right. The present President also moves towards right since the solution which is generation of wealth is in the right and not in the center or left. I agree that the wealth generated should move down.

What is the people centric view or populism presented by Sajith?

Populism is an access root to present an ideology to the people. Therefore it operates with different ideologies such as racism, communalism, socialism and social justice. According to the traditional classification former two are rightist and the latter two are leftist. Therefore there are two different populisms leftist and rightist.

Ernesto Laclau, a theoretician of leftist populism says that populism is a liberation movement and the marginal sectors of the society could challenge the authoritative establishments through populism. According to his ultimate objective of populism is socialism. Paul Taggart says that although the term populism is widely used the meaning was understood less. Margaret Canovan gives the reason for that. International populists did not defined the term and the users have given wide rage of meanings to the term.

Bandaranaike and JR were populists since it helped to get votes. Bandaranaike’s strategy was to make Sinhala the official language and JR wanted to have a just (Dharmishta) society. Anura Kumara Dissanayake wanted to end the 76 year curse. Still there are some learned people who chant this manthra.  What is the objective of Sajith’s populism?  There is no objective and no narrative. It is just populism. Why can’t he understand this?

I do not care whether Sajith’s SJB or Ranil’s UNP get doomed. The need of the hour is to carry on the capitalist reforms of the country. Those are; privatization of the SOEs or close down them or carry on them  by a PPP or manage them by totally independent directors;  reduce the import licensing; reduce tariffs and promote free trade; and promote exports with establishing FTAs. The present President does these things very slowly, but he does not reverse the things done previously. It’s a big thing. If the next leader is going to be Sajith the economy will get stagnated during his term. Therefore he should be change or else he should be replaced.