By Siri Gamage –

Dr. Siri Gamage

It is not so often that we can witness radical change in societies. After several decades and even centuries, there is a tendency for societies to correct themselves and re-set the directions. One could even say this is a natural process but such change comes as a result of collective human endeavour. The origin of JVP in the mid 60s as a resistance movement and its journey over 70s, 80s, 90s and after until it was able to secure power as NPP in 2024 provides an example.

During the early 70s, as an undergraduate student at the University of Peradeniya I was able to observe and experience the JVP propaganda speeches by late Rohana Wijeweera, Gamanayake etc.. They explained what was wrong with the capitalist system, government that adopted pro capitalist policies, and the brutal treatment by the police and security forces meted out to JVP activists. They explained the imperialist agenda of big Western powers, mainly USA and Britain, as well as the threat from Indian expansionism. Ideological difference between capitalism, Fascism, communism and socialism was explained. The need for citizens of former colonies like ours to correctly understand the history, current global system of exploitation and resource extraction as well as the contours of our struggle against oppressive forces were emphasised. Education itself had a role in such a struggle for equality, non-discrimination and justice. Many of us who did not join the JVP were sympathetic to the messages coming from the leaders and our contemporaries in the university, especially arts faculty who were activists.

One point they emphasised was about the need for revolutionary action led by a political party to face the oppressive steps implemented by the governments including arrest, detention and torture. The leaders also highlighted the fact that for a revolution to succeed ideology alone is not enough. Suitable material conditions have to be there. By this they meant that the people’s suffering due to oppressive policies of governments. They stated that when the oppression by governments expand, there is a time when the activists have to take up arms against such governments. They were reading from revolutionary movements elsewhere in the world e.g. Soviet Russia, China. Speeches and writings by Mao, Lenin, Marx, Che Guerra, Castro.

There were discussions about the inability to plant revolutions from one place or country to another. The wisdom was to adapt revolutionary ideology to suit the conditions of a given country. Debates existed as to whether it is the workers or peasants who should lead? There were also discussions about the role of students in such a movement.

After the violent phase of the struggle by JVP in the 70s and 80s, the party turned to be a parliamentary party in the 90s. Its journey through the parliamentary process produced mixed results. At one time, it supported the then government’s policy agenda. In the last decade or so, it was critical of the government’s agenda as well as practices. During the economic down turn in 2022 and after JVP criticisms about government actions and practices became broader. After aragalaya experience, it re-organised itself into National People Power (NPP), a broad-based grouping of activists, intellectuals, party leaders, professionals, retired tri forces personnel, trade unionists and other organisations rooted in various sectors of the society and economy.  Collectively, the NPP executive Committee which drew members from all walks of life designed a plan to take their messages to the grass roots level and many sectors in the society by person and through the social media. This was extended to the Sri Lankan diaspora in many countries as well. Looking at the results of two national elections, it appears that their ideology in modified form to suit the current material conditions was right this time. It embodied a powerful critique against the existing system -economic, political and cultural – and the way forward to get out of the problematic situation where the country has been dragged into by the past leaders. The people voted their feet to empower the NPP including the JVP because they were grossly unhappy about the way county was governed on the one hand and lost trust in the leaders who were changing pillows from election to election.

All in all, from the JVP perspective it took about 60 years to realise its dream for changing the system. Throughout this period, it stuck to its principles and practices irrespective of ups and downs in its struggle for justice and efforts to correct the system within the parliament and outside. Leaders did not take previous defeats as defeats. They took the lessons from such defeats to re-build the party along with other like-minded comrades or brothers and sisters. Discipline among the leaders and cadres was also exemplary. NPP became an indigenous resistance movement against the established political parties, leaders and alliances that deceived the voters to secure power and appropriated public wealth for personal enjoyment. It campaigned against nepotism, corruption, waste and leading the country to an abyss not only economically but culturally also.

Historians and sociologists will write the history of JVP and NPP in the years to come. They will also discuss how unique the JVP-NPP experiment is when compared to similar movements across the world, in particular global south.

However, one key question remains. It is how far can a resistance movement or alliance become a governing agency in a short period of time? Do they have enough tools and ideas to address main issues faced by the county and society? For this, ideology and determination alone are not enough even though it is an essential component. They are derived from a relevant collective consciousness to be the servants of people – not masters. For a correct ideology and consciousness, the leaders and activists need to possess a correct reading of the past, present and the desired future. The problem remains the fact that though the political leadership changed after the elections, the leaders have to work with the existing administrative and security system in place. If here was a problem in the political culture, there is even a bigger problem with the administration or the public service. Members of this service have been accustomed to working in a certain way under different political masters for many decades. They also learned how to act beyond what is prescribed in the acts and legislations to cater to the desires of political masters who claimed to represent the government. Often the public servants were caught between what is right and wrong according to the prescriptions on one hand and the public needs on the other. Their actions could be challenged by the public legally as well.

Changing the system requires changing the attitudes, ideologies and orientations of public servants at national and provincial levels. In essence the governance machinery needs to be placed on a different footing. Instead of a service where the officials place the need of higher authorities above the needs of the public, the current government emphasises the need to place the public needs first. This requires a considerable organisational and cultural change that may not be achieved in a short period of time. Leading by example is important but such change cannot be achieved with that alone. A well informed and articulated education and training program is necessary.

Another key problem facing the new government is the extent of resources to be generated in the country and the government’s share that can be re-distributed to various sectors through the budget process. Unlike in the pas when the government relied on foreign loans and grants, the current government does not have the same luxury.

Creating a national identity and consciousness as well as patriotism is another arena of activity that needs to be carefully planned and execute. Moving forward as a unified society rather than a divided one requires avenues of cultivating a common identity and national culture. Symbolic aspects are also important.

When the resistance actors become actors in the government, transition from the former to the latter also takes time and it can become a daunting task. The way of operating to achieve the desired results is prescribed in the constitution, acts and legislation. There are various parameters and protocols that the ruling members have to follow. Limitations and opportunities have to be considered before any action is recommended and approved. Eyes of the world are focused on the manner this new government makes the transition.

Priorities of the new government can be substantially different from those of the previous governments simply because of the roots of party, alliance and leadership. Historical experiences of the JVP and to some extent NPP have taught lessons that could be useful in making decisions to change the system. Before changing to a totally different system, leadership has to steady the ship in the short term. Ideology has to be informed by capitalism, socialism, pragmatism, egalitarianism and a range of religious and philosophical ideas, values and principles. More importantly, practical solutions have to be provided to practical problems faced by society. e.g. rice and coconuts, power and fuel bills.

2025 will be the year when we will be able to make judgements about the performance of new government one day or another. During the first few months we may see teething problems. The trust that people placed on the NPP leaders may not last long if the new government is unable to address key problems faced by the people while creating the necessary psychological, organisational and cultural change that was promised to move forward as a nation with a renewed sense of optimism.