Comments on: Re-visiting the Rajapaksa Hegemonic Project

By: Indika

Indika — Sun, 11 May 2014 02:33:00 +0000

The best ever analysis of Sri Lankan politics, I have read so far. I am an ordinary citizen with little interest and knowledge on politics. But this article persuaded me what really is happening in Sri Lankan political arena. I understand this article is not aimed at ordinary people like me, but I would like to ask how about translating this article in to sinhala and let the majority of my country men know what should they do in next elections.
Thanks for article well written sir.

By: Fitzpatrick

Fitzpatrick — Fri, 09 May 2014 15:30:00 +0000

In reply to Dr Dayan Jayatilleka.

As a former ambassador are you willing accepting your own culpability in propagating and straightening this hegemonic project?
The UNHCR resolution fundamentally is to deal with this hegemonic project and yet you continue to oppose this.
The Nazi empire was built by more than Hitler, it had its many minions working at various levels.

By: James Chance

James Chance — Fri, 09 May 2014 13:22:00 +0000

In reply to Kalana Senaratne.

I think Dayapala’s point is the latter – that the national popular approach that addresses minority issues and respects democratic and human rights was not in fact possible within the terms of the RHP. All too accurate an analysis. But thank you, Dayapala, for your help in thinking through the limitations of the current opposition and the need for them to develop a much smarter and deeper counter-hegemonic project. Let’s hope we don’t have to wait too long for them to start the necessary work.

By: Dev

Dev — Fri, 09 May 2014 11:55:00 +0000

In reply to Dr Dayan Jayatilleka. Are you not an avid supporter of Mahinda, the head/body/soul of this hegemonic project?

By: Kalana Senaratne

Kalana Senaratne — Fri, 09 May 2014 08:51:00 +0000

Mr. Thiranagama, an excellent essay. My only concern relates to the section titled: ‘Failure of National Popular’. I read that section as indicating, perhaps reluctantly, that May 2009 was an opportunity – an opportunity to take the ‘national popular’ turn (via greater reform, implementing the 13th Amendment, playing the balancing act, etc.) – that the President or the government missed. But the RHP, by definition, is precisely that which makes such a turn impossible. For the RHP did not arise suddenly in May 2009; rather, it is a project that is an extension of an ideology which is central to mainstream Sri Lankan politics (and the first part of the essay makes this quite clear, I believe). Therefore, was the intention of that section to point out that the President missed the opportunity to take the ‘national popular’ turn, or to suggest far more critically (and usefully) that that was never possible in the first place, given the ideology underlying the RHP?

Thanks.

By: Dr Dayan Jayatilleka

Dr Dayan Jayatilleka — Fri, 09 May 2014 03:09:00 +0000

Very lucid. This analysis must be regarded as an indispensable read by all literate and serious political elements in the country and especially in the Oppositional space. It maps the political reality and indicates the need for a (Gramscian) counter hegemonic project against reactionary nationalism; a counter-hegemonic project which is not simplistically ‘rejectionist’ but which is “national-popular”.