25 September, 2020

Blog

Who Is More Neoliberal? Mahinda Or Ranil?

By Sarath de Alwis –

Sarath De Alwis

Former President and current member of parliament Mahinda Rajapaksa has undertaken his second great humanitarian rescue effort. This time, he has come forward at the invitation of Sirisena – the president to retrieve and restore the national economy which according to him was inexorably hurtling to disaster through the neoliberal economic policies of Ranil Wickremesinghe.

Bismarck famously said that a statesman “must wait until he hears the steps of God sounding through events, then leap up and grasp the hem of his garment”.

In this instance, it is doubtful that our great war winning hero has heard the steps of God and grasped the hem of his garment. It is more likely that he heard the gargles of a ‘Gamarala’ and grasped the ‘Gamarala’s proverbial ‘amuday’. 

Just as imperialist comprador detractors attempted to diminish the dazzle of his earlier epic endeavour as the product of a ‘war without witnesses’, the same lot accuse him of practicing democracy without 113 ‘demos’ or a legitimate mandate. 

 In short, our Great war winning redeemer is now accused of  hijacking our democracy – conduct that would  have been the first option of a Bin Laden or a Baghdadi .   

This essay is not about the current conundrum in parliament. 

It is about Ranil’s neoliberal flicker and Mahinda’s promised patriotic nationalist economic glitter. More specifically this essay attempts to contextualize the post Marxist mumbo jumbo of the two false prophets Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka and comrade Vasudeva Nanayakkara in the naked power grab under the fictitious notion of preventing a descent in to a neoliberal hell. 

The most immediate provocation for this missive is Dayan’s chicken livered cheek in identifying the Lipton circus pro-democracy protestors as representing the “puppet, parasitic comprador or intermediaries between imperialism and the nation.” 

The Neo Liberal label freely bandied about and the supposed comprador origins of the protestors against erosion of democratic space is a deliberate despicable distortion of Marxist class analysis by the two  circus clowns  or bozos – Dayan and Vasu in the ‘Rajapaksa Royalisation’ Circus aimed to seduce the progressive thinking class. 

There is no doubt that Ranil Wickremesinghe and his crony clique are ardent followers of what is known as the ‘Washington consensus’. But did they embark on a neo liberal economic agenda in the last three years? 

What did they do, that is radically different from what Mahinda and P.B. Jayasundera did since 2005? 

Why is the business community not so anxious about our dicey democracy? Why does Professor Rajiva Wijesingha appearing on Aljazeera claim quite sanguinely that the business community is elated that Mahinda is back in saddle? 

Why did the tycoons who appeared at a fireside chat at the Hilton complain of Ranil’s lack of direction and were consciously nostalgic of Mahinda’s Macho Economics that promised them a ‘Shangri-La’? 

Dayan and Vasudeva epitomize the adage that politics is the worship of jackals by jackasses. Both excel in mouthing Marxian superfluity to assume a fraudulent moral superiority dismissing opponents simply by labeling them as blind reactionaries or moral lepers. 

We must not forget the engineered prosperity and growth leaps under Mahinda Rajapaksa at the wheel driving the economy. 

Under his watch the comprador bourgeoisie formed the top layer of the bourgeois class. A tycoon who gathered his initial seed capital by running casinos served as a ministry secretary and did quite a good job at it.

Buccaneer stock market operators amassed massive wealth worshipping the god Mammon. A predatory class of the nouveau riche and parasitic upstarts moved in to mass communication and mind manipulation. 

Some of them were so successful nationally, they readjusted their periscopes to look globally. They ventured in to non-productive but profitable sectors – trade, banking and services.

Driven only by the logic of profit they moved their capital from one field to another. They excelled not on the productive but in the speculative.

The ‘’underground” economy of the war profiteers acquired colonial era Scottish agency houses. They have taken great ‘liberties’, cashing in to the urbanization boom. They have thrived on identifying and exploiting ”holes in the law”.  

That they found a willing proponent and booster in Malik Samarawickrama is another story for another day.   

We are in the second decade of the 21st Century. In the age of exponential advances in technology, it is obvious that there are major changes in the class structure, but not in the direction that half-baked or power pursuing fraudster post-Marxists of Dayan and Vasu types point to.

Invention of the Microchip did not reduce the relevance of Marxist class analysis. On the contrary it fortified the essence of Marxist class conflict. 

Technology has reinforced class differences and class exploitation and the nature and conditions of the exploited and exploiter classes have drastically   changed.

Just look around. There are more temporary wage workers today than was the case in 2005 when the great redeemer Mahinda Rajapaksa took over the Presidency. 

Neoliberal or not Mahinda Rajapaksa as the all Powerful Executive President cum Finance Minister designed and drove a ‘Bandit Economy’. While doing so, he  set up a ‘Satellite Political Elite’ in parallel, to feed the bandit economy and also  feed on the ‘Bandit Economy’.  

Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka with deliberate dishonesty locates the comprador bourgeoisie at the Lipton Circus where thousands thronged to demand democratic governance. 

If Dayan or Vasudeva wish to know what real neoliberalism is I can tell them. Neo liberalism is unmediated ruling class state power. That is what Nivard Cabraal and Nalaka Godahewa wish to reinstall with Gotabaya’s Viyathmaga the coalition of professionals, entrepreneurs and academics. 

Let us do a retrospective assessment of the principal determinants of the economy and the regime behavior in the period 2005- 2015. 

It was classic neo liberal economics or untrammeled exploitative market economics directed by rigid centralised state control. It was unobtrusively but quite patently linked to the international banks to implement debt payments and to export sectors to earn foreign exchange. The central bank under Nivard Cabraal hired the public relations agencies in Washington. The social explosion in Rathupaswela was mercilessly suppressed in the interest of the Tycoon making surgical gloves for export. 

The economic regime and the political regime under Mahinda Rajapaksa were carefully compartmentalized. The ‘Samurdhi’ sop was left in the avaricious care of either S.B. Dissanayake or an equally voracious political beast. A repressive state had a vertical tie to the citizens who were in a real sense subjects kept in place with the efficient assistance of the saffron clerical mafia.   

 In the 21st Century the genius of Mahinda Rajapaksa took us to ‘nineteenth century methods of labour exploitation. It was Mahinda Rajapaksa who allowed the setting up of the ‘SAITM  private medical college. 

Imports of luxury goods for the urban middle class was surely and squarely based on the earnings remitted by “exported” labour of the poor.

If Dr. Dayan and comrade Vasudeva really wish to discover the nexus between Mahinda’s economics and neo liberal economics they should focus on the impoverishment of the interiors that made Rizana to seek employment in Bin Salman’s  murderous kingdom at the age of 14 years where her neck was severed purely because her burden was too heavy for her frail limbs.

It is Mahinda’s neo liberal economics that impoverished the already parched interiors uprooting the peasantry and plantation workers to crowd in to the cities and to overseas slave markets. 

In the decade of the Mahinda presidency approximately 2.3 million or more than ten percent of the population have sought employment beyond our shores. 

Remittances of the “exported labour” and borrowings from China financed neo-liberal infrastructure projects to promote the dependent economy and reign of apparel exports and tourist businesses that acquired exotic labels such as citrus and cinnamon.

It was indeed peppery neo liberal progress where super highways were forbidden for three wheelers. Only the supper classes were assured of speedy commuting. 

JR Jayewardene introduced free market economics in order to dismantle the welfare state. When Premadasa introduced ‘Jansaviya’ it was a temporary arrangement to sustain a social structure that was under the threat of genuine social discontent. Chandrika promised a free market with a human face. Human folly over took the human face.  

Mahinda won the war. Then he decided to build a port city, a port and an airport. Why? 

The idea of the three signature projects of Mahinda Rajapaksa is the unmistakable imperative of neoliberal globalization. It serves the essentially neo liberal purpose of globalization. The three projects are intended to integrate the global markets with elite exporters and medium and small compradores – the types who took part in the Hilton fireside chat- importers of electronic goods, tourist hoteliers tied to multinational hotels and resorts and other essentially service oriented enterprises relying on human resources retained to serve the new age of artificial intelligence and applications. 

In these new ventures, the chain of exploitation is more circuitous, but it still is located ultimately in the capital-labour relations. 

I am not passing judgement on these economic initiatives. I just want to persuade comrade Vasudeva and Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka to desist from their hum buggery in these troubled times when Mahinda Rajapaksa has difficulty in counting from a single digit to three digits making up 113. 

There is no doubt that there is a legitimate demand to recreate the “nation”, a “national market”, and a “national production process”  in the dying days of neoliberal economics. 

Joseph Stiglitz, Paul Krugman are Nobel laureates who have eloquently testified to what needs to be done to alleviate the discontent of neoliberal globalization. 

Our problems are not peculiar to us alone. The world is discovering alternatives to neo liberal economics that went in to orbit after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The new czar in Russia has discovered crony oligarchic economics. Our envoy in Moscow is mesmerized. Good luck to him. 

Marxist Economist Mary Mellor has produced a treatise on the impact of debt on democracy and the fallacies inherent in the demand for austerity to sustain the myth of paper money. 

Economist Marianna Mazzucato in her path breaking treatise ‘The Value of Everything’ has exposed the wicked cunning embedded in the demand for privatization of socially owned enterprises.

Comrade Vasudeva and Rhetorician Dayan cannot be trusted with a genuine Marxist class analysis because their purpose now is to reenact a ‘Brumaire coup’ like that in 1851 in France that restored the degenerate nephew of Napoleon to the French throne. 

What do we need today? Our age demands substantial, purposeful, powerful public investment and a regulatory state that guarantees livable social conditions. 

Class analysis needs to be adapted to the rule of unmediated capital in an unregulated labour market that is necessarily linked to the global market.  We cannot put the clock back. 

The reformist redistributive politics of  the SLFP of  T.B. Ilangaratne in the seventies  have been replaced by neoliberal policies after 1978. Those policies over four decades have concentrated income and power at the top. Meanwhile technological progress has left us behind. The Mahanayakes have smart phones but have no idea of what’s up with WhatsApp.  

Technology has exacerbated class differences, not abolished them. The microchip has not eliminated the working class. As sensible economists  with a social conscience have pointed out modern trends have “shifted the sites of activity and the mode of producing within the continuing process of exploitation.”  

There is a new class structure geared to the greed of the new technologies. It has spawned new and more controlling forms of exploitation.

Inevitable automation has contributed to an increased tempo in the work place. CCTV cameras increase worker surveillance and reduces the administrative staff. “Quality work circles” is the name of the game. Workers pressure workers. It increases self-exploitation without increases either in pay or power. 

Computers allow for agribusiness to control the costs and volume of pesticides to be sprayed by reducing the number of low paid seasonal workers who spray the pesticide in larger areas ,  breathing its poison.  

International networks have created a new breed of ‘merchandisers’ whose information networks are linked to air-conditioned sweat shops producing apparel, shoes and household goods. 

It is not Ranil’s liberal economics that has caused our current and present grief. 

Our liberties are under imminent threat. The Comprador class wants Mahinda to offer autocratic stability – the sine qua non for speculative investment in the bubble of the ‘feel good’ idea.

The noise on the streets is not to the liking of investors. I salute Mahinda Rajapaksa. He has got comrades Dayan and Vasu by their cojones.

 Said Karl Marx “Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please.”  

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 6
    1

    Mahinda is a trouble maker.
    M&s fooled him.

  • 10
    1

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uh9xSA2gOZQ

    See here even not RANIL but Ballige putha Rajakshe did the blunder.

    He Rajakashe without feasiblity studies went for MATTALA airport and Hambantota Harbour.

    Yet not single cent is earned neither by Hambanthota nor Mattala Airport.

    But peopel that live in rural areas, ,that are kept away from facts, believe, or made to believe, Rajakshe is the god to bring GOLD springs to lanka.

    Ballige putha Rajakshe is the architect and the foolish leader to get caught by DEBTtrap deliberarately made by Chinese.

  • 12
    0

    As we could easily see it right in the picture above, DJ is the modern toilet of Rajakshe family.

    He would even bend 240 degrees to be good books of Rajakshe.

    If DJ s father was still alive, he would raise the question, if DJ is his own son. I now believe, it is fair to use the term, ballige putha to this bugger DJ each time refering his name.

    But all these DJ has been preaching, by refeing Maxistic literiture. This man DJ does not seem to know what he has been doing. Both Sirisena and DJ are two examples for headless chicken behaviours.

  • 4
    0

    Thanks for the new definition of neo-liberalism,”Neo liberalism is unmediated ruling class state power”
    Lovely!
    This definition clearly falsify the theory of Dayan that claims that Mahinda and Ranil are at two opposite ends of an neo-liberal continuum

    if at all they are at the same end!

    • 2
      0

      Sri-Krish

      “Thanks for the new definition of neo-liberalism,”Neo liberalism is unmediated ruling class state power”

      This is a simplistic definition for simpletons who tend to rally around sloganeering wrapped in their national or party flag. Every writer, typists, commendator … try their best to describe neo-liberalism according to their own perception, it’s like the parable of the blind men describing an elephant.

      Its time writers concentrated their analysis on parochial nationalism bordering fascism, ownership of the island, how best to democratise the polity, how to create and increase aggregate national wealth and redistribute part of it equitably among its people, how to hold state, its several institutions, government …. responsible for violating citizens’ rights and , war crimes committed by all sides sin 1971, ……………..

      Ho do you recover looted wealth from politicians and their cronies?

      • 0
        0

        Well said, well said.The challenge is how do we convey this gem of a few lines to the gloomy rural mass.

  • 6
    0

    Sarath de Alwis has given us lots of hints to answer the question ~ “Who Is More Neoliberal? Mahinda Or Ranil?”
    Some of us do not know who, what or where this ‘Neoliberal’ is.
    .
    Recent ‘happenings’ clearly indicates a displacer and a displaced.
    .
    We have two bad teams competing for power. We must answer “Who is the mostest ominous?”

  • 10
    0

    Thanks for your cogent analysis Sarath. Regardless of your qualifications, you are perhaps the country’s best public intellectual. I hope your writings reach the Sinhala speaking constituency. What is not sufficiently emphasized is that all the vanity projects such as the cricket stadium, airport, and the Hambantota Port are named after this crook by him and it was he who put us into the debt trap of expensive white elephants.

    Certainly, a more disgusting and amoral individual such as RW, who cynically used poor Thajudeen’s murder, to come to power and then suppressed the completed police report, is hard to find in the country’s political history. It is a tribute to you and many others that despite this odious individual, we can, holding our noses, still oppose illegitimate constitution breaching conduct.

  • 9
    5

    Don’t even try to compare the two. Mahinda is a rogue and thug. Ranil is a decent and civilised man

  • 12
    0

    MR aka Jarra puksha is a Neo Criminal. That is why the loot from the financial plunder remains not in Sri Lanka but in offshore accounts scattered all around the word. There is not a capitalistic criminal such as MR that loves globalization of crime and the franchisor of Mara’s family a notorious brand as a “Family & State MAFIA”. The fictional character of Vito Corleone in Godfather by no means is a match for this political criminal and his family. Mario Puzo would not have dreamed such an elaborate thief who have wiped out all traces of their financial crimes and now have an opportunity to wipe whatever that is left on paper with the CID and FCID. Matter of fact, it was from these off shore accounts in Seychelles did President Sirisena get paid recently in US Dollars by the Mahinda camp for this treason through hedge fund managers. This is the president was on an official tour to the Seychelles to seal the deal in-person. All this was brewing ahead of that trip when Dudley Sirisena met the money launderers and the Carlton plotters before hand.

  • 7
    0

    As somebody puts it, our current selection is to find the better end of doggies poop. We are arguing about this day in day out. Realize that our days may be numbered. Some rascal like Samuel Doe in Sri Lanka is seriously tempted copy the act that happened in Liberia. God Save Sri Lanka.

  • 0
    2

    “Who Is More Neoliberal? Mahinda Or Ranil?”

    whom would you prefer as your father, mahinda or ranil?

  • 0
    0

    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our Comment policy.For more detail see our Comment policy https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/comments-policy-2

  • 9
    0

    “Our envoy in Moscow is mesmerized.”

    Ah! …….. ever the child in wonderland …….. walking around starry-eyed wonderment! :))

  • 1
    2

    “Former President and current member of parliament Mahinda Rajapaksa”! You are in denial DE Alwis?
    =
    He is the PM appointed by HIs Excellency the President of Sri Lanka.
    =
    Not surprising for a man who is stupid enough to defend the Henry VIII cult his ancestors got enrolled in through greed and stupidity.

  • 1
    1

    you can dismiss the stuff dayan writes
    he wants to keep his job at all costs so he is finding excuses
    he does not want to end up
    like his father in penury

  • 3
    0

    MR and Ranil are the two sides of the same coin. Some may be interested in painting the former ‘anti-imperialist’ for whatever reasons. The man behind MR, Gothabaya Rajapakse is an American dual citizen, if I am not mistaken.

  • 5
    1

    Sarath De Alwis

    No doubt you claim to be an intelect but let me pick some holes in your analysis.

    You say
    In short, our Great war winning redeemer is now accused of hijacking our democracy – conduct that would have been the first option of a Bin Laden or a Baghdad.

    To talk about Neoliberalism in the current context is meaningless. and you are wrong in your analysis and let me enlighten you.

    Bin Laden never grew up in a Democratic Environment so he couldnt have hijacked Democracy . But what he did hijack was five 777 Jumbo Jets and crashed them into Imperial Towers against the Satan. against whom he had a grievance . So the comparison is wrong.
    But why the War winning CRIMINAL hijacked Democracy ( you are correct in that ) was to appease China from whom he has taken massive backhanders and frankly he is Anti Indian but also to rescue himself from War Crime Charges. Who can blame him . He is a Thutta Gemunu. Crammed inside a tiny Island Sea to the South Indians to the North.

    But RW is the Redeemer in this case from the perilous state the Country is in. None of you seem to have grasped this but if you do have a word with MS & MR as the danger facing the country is
    NEAR COLONIALISM by India and not NEOLIBERALISM.
    You get too close to China under MR and threaten her survival you will be colonised.

    Never forget

    Sri Lankas SOVEREIGNTY is Limited to Indias SECURITY.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 7 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.