THE ONLY WAY FOR THE PA - I
The PA is nothing but an alliance between the SLFP and some other smaller political parties. Nobody can deny the fact that the SLFP is the major component of the PA and by virtue of being the dominant component of the PA, the policies of the alliance should have been determined more or less by those of the SLFP. The SLFP was formed in the early fifties as the party committed to give the rightful place for the Sinhala language and the Sinhala culture, while looking after the interests of the other communities. It has to be remembered that even today there are non Sinhala members in the SLFP. The Sinhala language, Sinhala culture, Sinhala history had not only been neglected for nearly one hundred and fifty years under the British but Sinhalathva had been denied its significant position in the country. During the Dutch period a governor had commissioned a Tamil poet to create a history of the Tamils in the country and the poet true to his poetic imagination had come out with Yalpanam Vaipava Malai attributing a history of thousand years to the Tamils in Sri Lanka. The seeds of Tamil racism had been sowed by the Dutch with these "histories" and with the codification of the Thesavalamai Law in 1707, a law of the Muslims in the Malabar coast, in order to create permanent settlements in the North from those who were brought for the tobacco cultivation from the Malabar coast. The British took over from the Dutch and they created and baptised Tamil racism in 1833, when they appointed one unofficial member each to represent the Sinhalas and the Tamils, effectively the Tamil Vellalas, in the newly established legislative assembly. By this act the British denied the rightful place for the Sinhalathva in the country. A history of more than two thousand years of the Sinhalas was equated with a history of the Tamils in Jaffna that effectively began in the Dutch period. There is no continuity between the people of the Arya Chakravarthi Kingdom established in the thirteenth century and the Malabar people who were brought by the Dutch for the tobacco cultivation, though there are some descendants of the inhabitants of the Arya Chakravarthi kingdom among the present Jaffna Tamils. The Tamils in Jaffna were referred to by the British initially as Malabars indicating their origin. The unique culture created and developed in the country by the Sinhalas for more than two Thousand years was equated with the culture of the Tamils that was brought from India with the tobacco cultivators. A language developed in this country that is not found anywhere else and used for more than two thousand years was equated with a language that was not much different from Tamil used in India. As a contributor to the "Divaina", under the name "Gandhara Vesi", had pointed out if the Tamils had lived in this country for more than a few centuries they would have evolved their own language, at least a dialect of Tamil with significant differences. The British by the same act had equated more than 75% of the Sinhalas with about 7% of Jaffna Tamils.
1833 was the beginning of Tamil racism. What we have witnessed since then has been a denial of the significance of the Sinhala people, the Sinhala language, the Sinhala history and the Sinhala culture, by Tamil racism with the connivance of the British who created it. It is not different from, say for example, denying the rightful place for the English, their language, their culture and their history in England. If the Asians and the others who were brought to England by the English or who went to England on their own and their descendants ask the English to change their national anthem, the Union Jack, and make Urdu, Hindi and other languages official languages how would the English react? Would they appoint equal numbers of English speaking and Hindi, Urdu and other languages speaking members to the house of commons not to mention the house of lords? Mr. Charles Windsor may wear a pottu when he visits the Hindu temple in Wembley, London but would he have his coronation as the king of England wearing a pottu in the Wembley temple? The English would take all steps to preserve the significance of English culture, English language and English history, in effect Englishthva, (the English who have acquired a fondness for Tikka Masala lately, would be happy with the term Englishthva, following Hinduthva) not only in England but in the whole of the United Kingdom. They would have some official forms printed in Hindi and Urdu in certain government ventures such as the NHS but they would not dream of singing God save the Queen in Urdu and Hindi or adding a Thrishula and star and crescent to the Union Jack that comprises of three crosses.
The British not only denied the rightful place for the Sinhalthva but imposed English language and English culture on the lives of the people. The Sinhalas unlike the Tamils had fought against this since 1815. The freedom struggles of Keppitipola and the Uva Wellassa people in 1817-18, the freedom struggles of Veera Puran Appu (unfortunately the so-called descendants of Veera Puran Appu have decided to serve the British master) and Gongalegoda Banda, the Jathika Vyaparaya of Anagarika Dharmapala and the rest are testimony to the Sinhala uprisings. As Dr. Gunadasa Amarasekera has pointed out 1956 was nothing but a rekindling of the Jathika Vyaparaya of the Anagarika Dharmapala. The MEP consisted of the SLFP formed by Mr. Bandaranaike, the VLSSP of Mr. Philip Gunawardane, the Bhasha Peramuna and had other leaders such as Mr. R. G. Senanayake and Mr. I. M. R. A. Iriyagolla who had fought for the Sinhala cause. It was backed by Sinhala leaders of the calibre of Mr. L. H. Meththanada and Mr. N. Q. Dias and had the support of the Maha Sangha. The Sinhala people expected that the MEP government formed in 1956 would recognise the significance of the Sinhalthva and give the rightful place to the Sinhala language, Sinhala culture and Sinhala history. However it was not to be so. Tamil racism that had been created and baptised by the British obstructed from the day one and the Tamil racist demands that had existed at least since 1917 when the Vellala Tamil racist leaders demanded a separate member to represent the Tamils in the western province in the legislative assembly, were brought up with new demands added, against the new government. The so-called injustices to the Tamils were formulated in order to deny the rightful place to the Sinhala nation, the Sinhala language, the Sinhala culture and the Sinhala history. As an example consider the official language act. What was wrong in making the Sinhala language the only official language of the country? How could Tamils become second class citizens simply because Tamil was not an official language. If that argument holds then Tamils are second class citizens today in all countries other than Sri Lanka. In no other country, not even in India, UK, Canada, Australia, where a substantial Tamil community lives, Tamil has been made an official language. Sri Lanka cannot be compared to Switzerland or Singapore with no history and the example of those countries having more than one official language does not hold good in a country with more than two thousand years history during which period Sinhala had been the official language. Even the United States of America with a few centuries of history has made English the official language? Do the Spanish speaking people in the USA, become second class citizens because Spanish is not an official language? The Tamil racists in Sri Lanka and of course the Marxists who do not understand anything, (what can you understand with an inconsistent system like Marxism?) objected to the Sinhala only act only to deny the rightful place being given to the Sinhala language. The other so-called injustices to the Tamils were also formulated in order to deny the rightful place for the Sinhala culture, Sinhala language and the Sinhala history. The Tamil racists and the so-called intellectuals in the NGO's did everything possible to create a Mahavansa phobia and rewrite the Sinhala history according to the whims and fancies of Tamil racism. The Tamil racists who created a bogus history of Tamils in the tradition of the Yalpanam Vaipava Malai despite the fact that the Tamils had no permanent settlements in Sri Lanka before the twelfth century were only interested discrediting the Mahavansa. However their attempts have been a failure as Mahavansa in general is consistent with the historical and archaeological facts.
The Tamil racists had no grievances. They had only an aspiration from the very beginning. Their aspiration was to deny the rightful place for the Sinhala nation, Sinhala language, Sinhala culture and Sinhala history. This aspiration has taken different forms over the years. In the beginning it was a case of restricting the number of Sinhala members in the legislative assembly. The Tamil racists were successful in this regard as they had the support of the British governors. Then the Tamil racist leaders of the Vellala caste objected to universal franchise as they knew it would reduce their influence in the state council. An eminent historian, who lives in England, refers to this phenomenon as the Vellala syndrome. The Vellala leaders who enjoyed all the privileges in Jaffna exploiting the other castes and who were looked after well by the British did not want to give up their privileges and positions they held either in the north or in the professions, administrations and the legislature. In order to retain their privileges they created the myths of Tamil grievances and of the Tamil nation, the Tamil homeland and a Tamil history of more than three thousand years in Sri Lanka. They brought up generations of Tamil youth under these mythical concepts, who have now taken up arms against the state to establish a separate state in the so-called Tamil homeland in the northern and eastern provinces demarcated by the British only in 1889! The Tamil aspiration of denying the rightful place for the Sinhala nation, Sinhala history, Sinhala language and Sinhala culture took up the form of a separate state in the north and the east for the Tamils, thus denying those two provinces to the Sinhala people, with the establishment of the Ilankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (The Tamil State Party or the so-called Federal Party) by the Christian leader S. J. V. Chelvanayakam. Since then the Christian element has been dominant in Tamil racism and the Tamil racists have continued to get support from some of the Sinhala Christian and Catholic Bishops and laymen who also did not want to lose their privileges and positions held under colonialism. 1956 not only rallied the Sinhala nationalist forces but the anti Sinhala forces as well. Today the Pope himself has publicly spoken in favour of the NGO position of so-called peace talks with the LTTE led by the war criminal Prabhakaran. The western Christian countries who back peace talks with a war criminal in Sri Lanka have taken steps to produce Mr. Milosevic before the Hague commission. The double talk of the western Christian establishment has been exposed. The west is only interested in imposing the Judaic Christian civilisation on the others and in this regard the Popes and the kings (the presidents and prime ministers have been on the same side since the fifteenth century).
The anti Sinhala forces in general opposed the SLFP governments. In 1962 when the assisted and private schools were taken over by the government it was the Christian and Catholic officers in the armed forces and the police who decided to topple the government through a coup. The first NGO's financed by the western Christian countries were established soon after and the Sri Lankan politics have taken a different turn since then. The children of 1956 were turned away from the parents by a variety of Marxism assisted with books published in Sinhala by a prominent NGO, and the Sinhala nationalist forces were weakened with the creation of a JVP. The youth who should have joined the SLFP and strengthened the nationalist forces within it now began to see it as their chief enemy. The JVP with its Marxist theories, have continuously failed, to work out a coherent policy with respect to the SLFP.
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>