3 December, 2022

Blog

The Queen, Two Countries, Two Peoples  

By Ravi perera

Ravi Perera

“Success requires no apologies; failure permits no alibis”

For nearly a week the world sat enthralled before their television sets as the funeral formalities for Queen Elizabeth II progressed, a sombre spectacle of a nation mourning the passing of a cherished monarch. Here was something straight out of legend, a display of surpassing grandeur, all the more magnificent in the prevailing commonness of our republican era, with ethos egalitarian. A farewell as splendorous now belongs to history, we will not see such again. 

Great Britain is an extraordinary story, how a smallish island in the North Atlantic came to play so crucial a role in the world’s affairs confounds historians to this day.  British settlements in the far corners of the world, United States, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, like her, have gone on to become rich and powerful nations. So dominant has its culture become, English is the preferred language of business across the globe, principles of law mainly developed in that country, have come to be the measure of justice in many a country. The sight of our smartly dressed nurses briskly assisting the sick, bring to mind the name of Florence Nightingale the English lady with the lamp. When we notice a young scout helping a blind man to cross the road, we think of Baden-Powell, the founder of the movement. There was an Englishman, Charles Darwin, proving that we humans did not appear on earth in one powerful flash, but evolved gradually, based on a process of natural selection. In our own times was the theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking, considered one of the greatest minds ever, giving us “A Brief History of Time”, and then on the origin and the fate of the universe in “Theory of Everything”, the very scope of his endeavours is awe inspiring. 

Having come to accept the mediocrity of our politics, we will find it difficult to believe that Great Britain once had a Prime Minister who not only led that nation in a cataclysmic World War, but also devoted himself to writing, winning the Nobel Prize for literature. In England it pays to be a man of letters, his lavish lifestyle was supported mainly with earnings from books and newspaper articles. Winston Churchill: politician, writer, orator, soldier, sportsman, painter, bricklayer and landscaper, is considered the greatest Englishman of the 20th Century.

Accompanying the Royal cortege were the cavalry marching at a slow gait. Their trot has not always been slow, British cavalry has galloped across all continents, braved arid deserts, crossed fast flowing rivers and climbed forbidding mountain ranges to assert British power. It was not only primitive tribesmen they fought, at various times, British arms have clashed with the strongest of armies, Germans, French, Russians and so on, regularly besting them. If they were good soldiers, they were superlative sailors, for more than a Century the British Navy ruled the waves.

When the venturesome Europeans began arriving in the soon to be colonies around the 15 Century, then found societies already in decay, a rigidly stratified social order ruled by ignorant despots; no match, either in military prowess or economic capabilities, to the explorers. In fact, the natives were stupefied by the big ships, guns, uniforms and even the tireless manner in which the strangers drove their undertakings. Almost at the first encounter, the battlements gave way; the native feudal lords, recognising the pending doom, either ran away or made deals with the foreigners.

Empire building is not for the faint-hearted, the task demands fire, blood, pain and toil. However, relative to other empires such as the Romans or the Mongols, violence was only occasional, there is a general acceptance that the British rule by and large, provided stability in the acquired lands, with new social and economic opportunities for the people. Nascent capitalism opened fresh avenues for hitherto peripheral segments, the beneficiaries experiencing a huge social climb. As ‘nobodies became somebodies’, a new gentry were emerging. Eventually, when the colonized nations began agitating for greater independence, the cry came primarily from former students who had studied in British universities.  They were not only introduced to novel ideas like parliaments, legal systems and new professions, the stint in England gave them a prestige and acceptance in their native countries, propelling them to leadership in the independence movements. 

Although the British acted in the name of their sovereign, the fact is that from about the 17 Century British royals have been titular monarchs, reigning but not ruling. While preserving with respectful affection the institution of the monarchy as a symbol of their nation, the British have kept pace with modernity, creating a society second to none in terms of social advancement as well as an extremely effective economy. Unlike most countries, Britain does not have a codified constitution. Instead, an amalgam of common law, conventions, statutes, works of authority and royal prerogative making up their constitution.

To appreciate the political skills of the British, we have to only contrast them with the dystopian society we have created after seventy years of unbroken ballyhoo. In this period, Sri Lanka has had two constitutions (with frequent amendments), several country-wide initiatives, numerous mega   projects, many so called reforms; of course, all launched at auspicious times, with the customary festivity and big talk. Today the country is bankrupt.

In a controversial criminal case, when we need an untainted police investigation, what is immediately suggested is Scotland Yard. We may not produce a Napoleon, however one of our cadets passing out from Sandhurst is near enough for us. It may be difficult to find the perfect man, but we have our graduates from Oxford! 

Colonial hang ups or not, we cannot deny that in recent times many a Sri Lankan has found refuge in Great Britain to escape from persecution or worse, by his own State. Many more thousands have found their economic heaven there. Now we don’t have the right of appeal to a British Court. If such a right existed, one wonders the outcome of many high profile cases. Prickly of criticism, when called upon to balance between its good name and the right to comment/criticize, our courts tend to emphasis the former. Entrusted with the exercise of the people’s judicial power, courts of law are public institutions, run with public money. The right of expression is the bedrock of democracy; the critic may be intemperate or ignorant, in their response however, public institutions must be enlightened, objective and just. Respect is to be earned, not commanded.

Standing before the ceremonial catafalque holding the Queen’s coffin, the Sri Lankan President Ranil Wickramesinghe would have pondered the commonalties between our two nations. We are both island nations. On the British coat of arms is a lion and a unicorn. The lion is our symbol too. Thereafter, the commonalities become hazy, uncertain. Do the British read books? Reading is so much a part of that culture, it invites no comment. Both countries declare themselves to be democracies, there surely is a wide gap between form and substance.

Great Britain’s head of State is a hereditary monarch, while according to the Sri Lankan constitution our head of State should be elected by the people. Being an experienced politician, Wickramasinghe would have recognized the deep affection the British have for their departed queen.  To live in the hearts and minds of the people, is the true mandate. In our country, a mandate is a much abused concept, a licence obtained with questionable methods and then claimed in perpetuity.

We who are floundering in our man-made wretchedness salute the departed queen, a monarch who reigned with acceptance, dignity and decorum.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 3
    4

    RP,
    Praising the British and their Queen is NOT going to help us ACHIEVE Political, social and economic progress. Ceylon as we were known at Independence would have been a THRIVING country had the British given a FEDERAL form of Governments to the TWO ethnic groups–Singhalese and Tamils[Canadian model]. I do feel there is no need for Monarchs in 21st Century especially when they can not guide the Prime Ministers. In fact under the Queen’s rule of 7 decades the Tamils have been made citizens of SL without their basic rights… especially lack of Justice.
    W Churchil is no great Leader as far as the commonwealth countries are concerned. He made millions of Indians to die of starvation.RP needs to listen to Sashi Tharoor’s speeches especially the one given at the Oxford union.

    • 4
      1

      Well said Naman

      Although I live in UK, like many working class people, I am not a monarchist & resent the fact that despite the personal wealth of the Royals (Charles apparently inherited £34b from the queen), they don’t pay a penny in tax, yet, live off the tax payer. According to records now released under the RTI act, it has been revealed that Churchill was not a Military strategist, his campaign in the East was a disaster, shit scared of Stalin & spent most of the time in a bunker in a drunken stupor. His speeches were written & aired over the radio as a morale booster for the public. He allowed Stalin to annexe parts of Poland & in return, gave parts of Germany to Poland. Who gave him the right to change borders? The British, in their short-sighted wisdom, divided India & created Pakistan, also Israel, & the repercussions continue today. Tharoor’s speech at Oxford was brilliant & everybody should hear that before sucking up to the British Empire.

  • 4
    3

    Is not something wrong with the ten ‘democracies’ of Europe that are unable to be rid of the relics of a feudal era?

    • 6
      2

      I find it hilarious that these old Sri Lankans are criticizing and offering advise to countries of Europe while creeping into them as economic immigrants !

      Do they want these successful countries to become like Sri Lanka or India ? Yes the British love their royalty , that is a successful country.

      Raj UK and Naman are not the final word on anything. They are only giving a highly prejudiced view. Naman is calling for a Federal government in small SL. Maybe that Idi Amin like Prabakaran should rule that with the gun.
      I saw Ranil W . also address the Oxford Union just like Tharoor. Are they gods? I don’t think any Muslim will agree with Tharoor on the Kashmir issue and Pakistan policy.

      All these things Raj and Naman talk about are very controversial with many different opinions. People from a failed country and failed people must know their limitations.

      • 2
        3

        deepthi silva,
        You are in deep trouble.
        * creeping into them as economic immigrants !
        – Not all expatriates are economic refugees.
        – Do you call the Sinhalese the same way.
        * Raj UK and Naman are not the final word on anything.
        – Are you the ‘final word’ on everything.
        * … is calling for a Federal government in small SL.
        – Your understanding of Federation is pathetic. The size of a country does not determine the effectiveness of any form of governance.
        * … Idi Amin like Prabakaran … .
        – That tells that you neither know Idi Amin nor Prabhakaran.
        * … people must know their limitations.
        – Here, you are correct. Know your own limitation.

      • 1
        0

        ds
        “Raj UK and Naman are not the final word on anything.”
        Nor are you and I, or or that matter any other.
        *
        Neither claims such status, and that is why we comment on everything.

      • 1
        1

        deepthi silva

        A friend told me that my comment had been a source of hilarity, which made me revisit Ravi’s article. So, let me make it simple to keep the record straight.
        Firstly, I am not a refugee, economic or otherwise. I had the good fortune to be educated in UK in the 80s & thereafter, was offered employment in UK. Just like many who are employed abroad, I am in UK because I have a better life style than I would have in SL. Secondly, not all Brits love the Royalty & judging by some of the antics of current Royals, like Andrew, I wouldn’t call it a success story either. I don’t believe in heredity rulers in the 21st century but that is my opinion. As a British citizen, I pay my taxes (40%) & I have the opportunity to elect the politicians to govern the country every 5 years, which is OK by me. Thirdly, Britain had no right to decide on the borders of a country, well meaning or not. How would you feel if the Brits divided SL for the Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims before giving independence? Tharoor was only making the real facts known because history is written by the victors & glorified for our indulgence, not necessarily the truth.

  • 4
    0

    The British have a Monarch as ‘Symbol of their Power’ and REIGNS over the states of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and its territories (Great Britain)! SL mostly decry that as undemocratic and power concentrated in the Monarch by descent!!
    In contrast, Sri Lanka a Republic as pronounced, to have a head of State (HoS) and Head of Government (HoG) have individuals elected to hold the Sovereignty of the People of SL in TRUST and Govern and Guide SL state?!! Result in elected trustees claiming to be RULERS, not governing in TRUST, envision with hereditary rulers to Boot!!

    • 3
      0

      Mahila, people have different opinions, especially of monarchy / Royalty.( politically ,there is no need for one but if countries want to maintain tradition, it’s their call) Whereas our political heads in so called Democrazy, act more powerful than a Monarch, where public pay for their lavish extravagant living and are above the law. (to be precise , they are the LAW , remember one family, one law, one country ). They cam make any Monarch blushed. Our Monarch can getaway from corruption, political murders and crime. Our people find solace in blaming the colonial rule, using it as their “punching bag” , and may happily continue this exercise , for another 75 years. They blame colonial rule for their own failures, mistakes, blunders and what not. Right where I live, there is currently a trend to change names (nothing else), creating an impression among public, “we are not just free but better than Monarchy”. In fact, it’s a planned political strategy to expand vote bank. ( race, religion, cast – – – )

      • 0
        0

        When monkey get hold of garland, does it matter who wore it before of after ??

  • 2
    0

    Seldom do I envy the art of narration of a writer; Here, I do.
    Ravi Perera can be proud of the quality of his presentation. Well done.
    .
    “Your life is proof that our lives share ups and downs with the same rigour, irrespective of our stations in life”. – Nathan.
    (This is straight from a Book of condolences for Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.)

  • 1
    0

    Success requires no apologies; failure permits no alibis”

    Ranil on his trip protecting Rajapashas failure no alibis
    Don’t spend time creating alibis to explain your shortcomings and failures. Instead, work on your weaknesses, turn them into strengths, and then conquer any obstacle that appears in your way.
    Failure news what happens in a country travels faster to the world.

    Aggravating the country and restricting tourism another wrong decision that was taken for imposing high security zones. today the correction done to revoke this stem.

  • 3
    0

    The British monarch behaves like a President and our Presidents behave like monarchs.

    • 0
      2

      Paul,
      The monarch doe not have a fraction of the power of the President of India– which itself is not a lot.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 5 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.