The Opposition At The Crossroads

By Dayan Jayatilleka -August 2, 2014

Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka

Here’s the scenario for one year from now:  one, possibly two more members of the ruling family will almost certainly be in Cabinet while a bloodless Night of the Long Knives would have seen off the SLFP barons suspected of allegiance to the deposed queen. I ain’t got no dog in this fight, but I would like the political situation to have far greater balance and wouldn’t like the System to be even more top-heavy than it is. Simply put, I wouldn’t like Sri Lanka to function ridiculously like a medieval kingdom in the 21^st century. Now if you think appearing as a kingdom or transitioning from a republic to a kingdom is a good thing provided roads get built and real estate gets gentrified, then you won’t have a problem. If however, you think it’s a bad thing, as the Opposition and dissident civil society seem to, then you really should stop playing silly buggers, as the Opposition seems to be doing currently.

The regime’s performance at the parliamentary election will depend, above all else, on its performance at the preceding presidential election– which is why the margin of victory/defeat is crucial and why the opposition is being strategically suicidal.  Nobody outside of Colombo and Kandy, and not many in those two towns, give a damn about the executive presidency and its abolition. What they do care about is that they are finding it difficult to make ends meet. They care that the peace dividend hasn’t reached them in the sense of material improvement in their lives. This discontent can be (graphically) linked by an intelligent opposition, to the phenomena of family rule and the chokepoints of resource allocation, as the UNP did in 1977.

In focusing on the abolition of the executive presidency, the Opposition is moving in entirely the wrong direction: away from palpable mass concerns to those whims of a faction of the urban political class; from the socio-economic– the physical quality of life– to the purely political; from the concrete to the abstract.

Elections aren’t won by candidates who promise to abolish institutions. They are won by a positive appeal. They are won by candidates who credibly promise a better tomorrow and level a credible critique about the present. Hence the success of the Clinton (actually James Carville) campaign strategy: “It’s the Economy, Stupid”.  Hence the triumph of Obama’s rallying cry, “Yes, We Can”.  Hence the victory of Ranasinghe Premadasa in 1988.                                                         Read More