JATHIKA VYAPARAYA AND THE POLITICS OF JVP
We have to leave Mr. Chilcott this week in order to discuss the politics of the JVP with respect to the Jathika Vyaparaya. The Jathika Vyaparaya is the name given to the movement that is not affiliated to any political party but is concerned with the sovereignty and independence of the country and the nation. It is not necessary to hide the fact that as far as the Jathika Vyaparaya is concerned there is a nation that had already being established during the days of king Pandukabhaya and there is no necessity to form a brand new nation from scratch following the definitions, concepts and theories of the westerners.
The JVP unlike the other Marxist parties in Sri Lanka, which had a Trotskyite origin (even the Stalinist Communist Party in Sri Lanka had a Trotskyite origin) sprang from a Maoist background and had nationalistic feelings that could be associated with the Jathika Vyaparaya from the very beginning. However, it did not give up its brand of Marxism and like many Maoist movements in Asia was based in the villages rather than in the towns where the workers, though not the industrial proletariat, could be found. Thus from the very beginning JVP oscillated between a kind of nationalism and a variety of Marxism.
The independence struggles of the colonies were either based on western liberalism or on western Marxism as the colonies had not worked out their own concepts and theories on independence as such after the initial stages of colonialism. At the beginning, before western ideas were introduced the people and the leaders had no problem in deciding on the course of independence struggle but later on even the so called independence struggles were guided by western ideas, implying that these movements that were engaged in "independence struggles" were not that independent. Even the Gandhian movement in India was not free from this weakness and the movement of Pol Pot suffered from an absence of a modern non western theory of independence. Thus they were driven into barbaric politics that could be associated only with some barbaric politics of medieval and not so medieval Europe, in the final analysis. Independence means independence from western theory and knowledge that is not objective as claimed by the westerners, as well and there is a long way to go for the Asian, African and South American countries.
In Sri Lanka the Jathika Vyaparaya has a history going back at least to the days of king Pandukabhaya again when Pandula became the teacher of the young prince. After the introduction of Buddhism the Bhikkus perfected the system where the members of the Jathika Vyaparaya, mainly the Bhikkus themselves advised the king without being members of the raja sabhas and the inner chambers. Thus in Sri Lanka there were no Brahmins in the raja sabhas as in India nor house of Lords where the priests took part in direct politics as in the case of England and its colonies later collectively called Britain and United Kingdom. Jathika Vyaparaya in Sri Lanka has been engaged in indirect politics throughout history, without the activists in it becoming directly involved in politics.
In 1817-18, when the British massacred almost all the leaders of the freedom struggle (it has to be emphasised that only the Sinhalas had fought for freedom and that the British true to their democracy and preservation of human rights massacred not only the leaders but all the males over the age of twelve in Uva Wellasa area reducing the population of the country by ten percent.) and made the other leaders spineless servants of the British empire by "rewarding" them with land and other privileges, the Sinhalas were made leaderless in politics. It was the Jathika Vyaparaya that organised the freedom struggle in 1848, popularly known as Matale Satana, after appointing Gongalegoda Banda and Puran Appu as the political leaders. It was the Jathika Vyaparaya that continuously fought against the British imperialists in the nineteenth century and in the twentieth century and when some western sociologists and historians not necessarily with white skin claim that there had been no freedom struggle by the Sinhalas they only misrepresent "facts". The pancha maha vada in the nineteenth century, the struggle of Anagarika Dharmapala and the so called Buddhist revival are examples for the freedom struggle of the Sinhalas carried out by the Jathika Vyaparaya in the absence of political leaders.
Even the Sinhala language issue, with which many non national "intellectuals" of both white and brown skin find fault, was a freedom struggle against the might of the British and no wonder that the High Commissioner for Britain is interested in reversing the process with the aid of the "intellectuals" that the British have trained. As we have said on many occasions the Sinhala nationalism is led by the Jathika Vyaparaya followed by the politicians, whereas among the Tamils and the Muslims it is the other way around. The Sinhala masses are ahead of the politicians as the Jathika Vyaparaya has a history going back to more than two thousand years.
It has to be mentioned that when Mr. S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike formed the SLFP in 1951 he had the idea of a liberal party and not that of a national party. It was the Jathika Vyaparaya that in a sense demanded Mr. Bandaranaike to give the political leadership, and he could be considered as the leader that the Jathika Vyaparaya chose after Gongalegoda Banda and Puran Appu. The SLFP was to become a national party instead of a liberal party of the British mode and the party became a major force in the country only after it adopted the Sinhala language policy. The party won only a few seats at the general elections held in 1952, and it gained momentum only after the Minneriya bye election it won handsomely after becoming a national party.
In 1992 the non national forces tried to make the SLFP a liberal party again by making the widow of Mr. Vijaya Kumaratunga the leader of the party after importing her from the land of the imperialists. She was able to reverse the process for some time with the assistance of people such as Mr. Mangala Samaraweera who has now become a political refugee. However, the Jathika Vyaparaya is stronger than what many people think and she was not able to deliver the goods that the non national forces expected from her. During the time of Ms. Kumaratunga the UNP tried to use the Jathika Vyaparaya but the latter did not want to become the cat paw of anybody else, especially of a political party.
However during this time the predecessors of the Jathika Hela Urumaya leaders, who had worked for Mr. Mangala Samaraweera at the 1994 general elections, attempted to politicise the Jathika Vyaparaya without understanding the basic tenets of the Vyaparaya. The JVP that had been oscillating between nationalistic politics and Marxist politics, following these predecessors of the JHU, became nationalistic again and they themselves attempted to politicise the Jathika Vyaparaya. In 2002 as a result of non national politics followed by Ms. Kumaratunga the SLFP had become weak and the UNP came to power with the help of the non national forces. By 2004 it was obvious that with the treacherous "peace accord" signed by Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe and other activities the UNP government had to go in the name of the country. Ms. Kumaratunga for her survival was forced to form a "parivasa" or probationary government with the JVP, though she most probably did not like the policies that she had to follow.
The Jathika Vyaparaya was able to find a suitable leader in Mahinda Rajapakse and with the support of the JHU and the JVP he became the President of the country in 2005. Both these parties had tried to politicise Jathika Vyaparaya, the former even sending Bhikkus to the Parliament though not for the first time, the non national LSSP taking the "credit" for that, and had to evolve a policy towards Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse. The JHU adopted the policy of working closely with the SLFP, but the JVP began to oscillate towards the Marxist policies again, as they found it difficult to outdo Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse in nationalistic policies. Unlike the JHU, the JVP is very much interested in preserving its identity, and did not want to end up similar to the LSSP and CP after forming coalition governments with the SLFP.
However, the JVP could not ignore the Jathika Vyaparaya and thus they continued to be active in Deshahithaishee Jathika Vyaparaya and Nil Mahanel Mal movement. The JVP probably realises that they have no future without the SLFP and the Jathika Vyaparaya but they are scared that they would dissolve within the SLFP and lose their identity, which incidentally is not a problem for the leadership of the JHU. The JVP has no answer to this problem and the leadership can only think of gravitating towards Marxist policies. The politics of the JVP in the past few months clearly shows the unenviable position they are in. They voted against a budget that nearly doubled the expenditure on national security. However, they wanted to project a more national position than the government by presenting four conditions related to national security, though after the budget they emphasise their position on corruption and inflation. At the same time they did not announce their decision to vote against the budget until the last moment so that the UNP could not take advantage of it.
The last thing that the JVP wants is a UNP or Jathika Sabha government with or without Mr. Mangala Samaraweera. At the same time according to the JVP thinking it is the SLFP that has become an obstacle on their path to power. They would defeat the SLFP, given half a chance. If they could outdo Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse they would have done that by now provided the JVP would come to power. Though in the leadership of the SLFP, JHU and JVP there are children of fifty six, the JVP has no consistent policy vis a vis the SLFP. The JVP has made a blunder by voting against the budget. What they should have done was to vote for the budget and apply pressure on the SLFP to take more and more a nationalistic line. The JVP can still correct their action. However they should not try to deceive the people in the process.
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>