Photo courtesy of newswire
The NPP government came to power with an ambitious aim of changing the existing system that was broken and did not serve the interests of many, especially the under privileged sections of the population. It came to power not only for changing the system that served the interests of a self-made privileged class but also the political and administrative culture that served it. The main driving force behind NPP movement consists of the subaltern (under privileged) strata of society and its desire for creating a different or reformed system so that it wills for a greater distribution of benefits deserved by citizens at large. In this article I examine the challenges of enunciating a system change along with a cultural change (way of thinking and acting) to achieve this desired goal.
Roots of the system of privilege
This goes back to the pre-colonial and colonial periods of the country’s history. During the pre-colonial period, those who were associated with the royal palace and provincial administration had access to power and enjoyed various privileges that the average person could not access. Although Buddhism stipulated an egalitarian society, as a country organised around the caste system which basically defined the occupational hierarchy and practice, the system of privilege was defined by the will of monarch and his closest officials in the royal palace including the rituals and traditions associated with this practice. The monarch had overall authority in allocating land, titles, roles in the administration and various privileges to the officials. Ethnicity also played a key role in such acts. Administration of justice was also concentrated in the hands of the monarch. Overall it was a centralised system of governance and administration though subservient officials. The citizens had avenues of making deputations to the monarch and provincial administrators. At the provincial level, they could make such deputations to the local administrator Disawa in charge of a Disavani. It is believed that the pre-colonial system was a tributary system that gave rise to a patronage system based on absolute loyalty to the royals. Although various criteria existed, royal patronage was necessary to obtain roles in the governance system. Absolute loyalty to the monarch was essential to secure and maintain various roles, privileges, legitimacy and recognition. A high degree of master-servant relationship existed in the broader society mediated by the principles, practices and expectations of Buddhism. e.g. ahimsa, compassion, altruism.
During the colonial period, in particular the British period, the situation changed. The system of governance imported from British empire was super imposed on the native system and the latter was superseded by the former. Principles, values, norms and perspectives peculiar to British administration dominated. The native layer of administrators and professionals assisted in the task of administration of the country as a colony. The place occupied by Buddhism also changed for the worse. Colonial culture and English education influenced education and learning, language and culture. As colonial subjects, Sri Lankans started to collaborate with the colonial masters, co-exist and advance themselves economically, socially and culturally. The search for status and privilege as well as identity approved by colonial masters became a sought after trend and imitative attitudes and practices assumed a feature of society. Social class divisions emerged and us and them attitude took root. Those who were close to the power distinguished themselves from the rest of society by deed and word. A competitive way of living starts to take root. Control was a key part of this paradigm of existence.
With the country gaining independence in 1948 there was a transfer of power to the Ceylonese elites who were educated in Britain along with several native educated leaders. Very little change took place in the system of governance until 1956 when the Bandaranaike government came to power. Changes to the status of language use in administration was a key change instituted with the objections from Tamil community. S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike drew a layer of native leaders to the government but his government was short lived. The country was governed according to the Westminster system but in 1972 the constitution was changed to make the country a republic. A local head of government with a new constitution came into being. The UNP and SLFP governments continued until 1977 when the J.R. Jayewardene government came to power with a large majority. The constitutional change to transform the government with an executive president and new constitution an authoritarian style government came to the scene. The hallmark was the liberalisation of economy compared to the previous coalition government of Sirima Bandaranaike that had adopted an import substitution policy placing many in society under immense stress due to the shortage of essential items.
The system introduced by President Jayewardene turned Sri Lanka into a neo liberal state that allowed a free hand for the private sector and market competition, Imports flooded the country. Power was used to rule the country with an iron fist. Governments since independence cultivated a patronage system focused on party, family, business and friendship circles. Those who were educated through the non-elitist schools and universities especially in the arts and humanities had to struggle to find employment. Two rebellions in 1971 and 1989-90 highlighted the zenith of such frustrations among the educated young people subjected to marginalisation and oppression by the existing system.
Although there were several changes of government since the 70s, the situation did not improve. The market was manipulated by various cartels close to the power. A system not based on meritocracy to a high degree and intended to milk the system for the benefit of a few cannot survive in the long run. In such a system, it is inevitable that the system itself erodes and corrodes. Those who run the system need to be well aware of its weaknesses and have an ability to intervene at the right time to correct the system. This did not happen. Instead, a deep state developed underneath a superficially democratic state. The executive arm exercised disproportionate power compared to the legislature.
While the closely knit ruling political class-maintained power and privilege using the system as the vehicle the rest of the nation, families, communities and institutions were excluded from the governance system creating a distance and got fractured. The commercial system running parallel to the governance system exploited the latter as consumers. A severe competition among individuals and groups to advance their personal worth characterised the system. Values that held the society together as a tolerant and beneficial entity evaporated and replaced with a new set of values centred around individualism, self-promotion and competition. The economy of the country faced severe problems both in its inner core, internal dependence on the power group and external dependence. The import led economy destroyed the local initiative, production and any desire for standing on one’s own feet. Finally, the governance and economic system collapsed in 2022 leading to the aragalaya. The ruler had to leave the country under duress and a new ruler assumed office through constitutional process and a SLPP majority in the parliament. It was only a stop gap measure to maintain the self-serving system until the presidential and parliamentary elections to be held later in 2024.
Several salient features of the authoritarian-nepotistic system, although legitimised via periodic elections, created during this period were as follows:
- Ability of the ruling political class including elites, their families, friends and locals as well as the wealthy businessmen and women to access power, wealth and privilege in a disproportionate manner.
- Inability of those outside this circle of rulers and their close associates to access even the basic needs in an orderly manner due to the corrupt activities of government officials and delays in executing applications for relief.
- Undermining of the rule of law through politicisation of government institutions and processes especially the security agencies.
- Expanding divide between the haves and others economically, socially and emotionally.
- Increasing borrowings locally and internationally and dependence on external agencies for balancing budgets.
- imports of essential and non-essential goods, downgrading of local production and manufacturing.
- Accumulation of wealth and privilege through formal and informal methods by the ruling elites and those core to them at national and local levels. Tolerance and facilitation of such activities by the national leadership.
- Deterioration of traditional values, norms and etiquette beyond recognition. Competition rather than collaboration as the operating idiom.
- Lack of trust among various ethnic communities and emergence of conflicts. Lack of trust in the political, administrative and judicial system.
- Collapse of the economy in 2022 leading to aragalaya and the imposition of restrictions for freedom of expression and protest by the interim president between 2023-2024.
- Triumph of NPP in the presidential and parliamentary elections in late 2024.
The NPP that was elected by a large majority of rural and urban people without power and privilege and the frustrated middle class quickly established itself by filling key roles in the government and appointing whom it liked to key positions in the administration. It was a powerful political force organised around a vision to change the system and associated policies. It did not work only with an ideology or a sense of what kind of society it wanted to create but it had well thought out strategies to secure that society and system change. Primary among them was the idea to create an egalitarian system that served the many rather than the few. Secondly, to clean the existing system of many vices including corruption, waste and lack of patriotism while punishing those who presumably embezzled the public resources. Thirdly, the need to create a different political culture for governance and a wider culture including more desirable values, norms, attitudes and practices that can lift the country from its current corrupt state to a more appealing one for the citizens and visitors was emphasised. Clean Sri Lanka campaign is an example.
Changing the hitherto existing decadent system to one that is recognised as a model society internally and externally is not an easy task. It is not a condition of society and its organisational outlook that can be achieved without dedicated actors who aspire for change and a clear strategy within the government and outside. A critical part of such strategy should be a communication strategy. However, the NPP provided enough signals and leads for the people to understand that something different is about to happen to address the country’s core problems that had enveloped the political system, culture and even the whole social fabric leading to decadence, hopelessness, disappointment and helplessness. The out migration of many thousands of professionals and youths was mentioned as an indicator of this situation.
System change, challenges and the consciousness for a new nation
System change requires systematic effort on the part of current leadership both in government and administration at all levels. The authorities need to address the necessary changes from micro settings following the national leads and ideology set by the president, cabinet and the inner core of NPP. Encouraging the middle management and lower levels of public administration to adopt new government policies, approach and attitude to human services and implementing programs can be a challenge without clear directions and a strategy in each ministry. Assistance from experienced professionals in change management may be required here.
The majority of those who are acting in responsible positions or roles tend to follow the rules set by their superiors rather than take initiative for change outside the prescribed role positions. This is especially so in a hierarchical system. Those in the middle levels and below look for direction from those in commanding positions. This is especially so as our governance and administration system spread among a multitude of institutions and corporations still follow colonial era rules, norms and practices. Thus, to create change the message of change needs to be clearly articulated and communicated within the system to those who have to make the change a reality. I would recommend even establishing management of change units in various levels of the governing and administrative hierarchies. For example, the police force or the civilian administration extending to provincial and district levels. Such units not only should be articulating and communicating the change in the system required to the middle and lower levels of hierarchies but also devise ways and means of seeking collaboration to implement the change.
Creating a consciousness and awareness leading to the planting of attitudes favourable for system change cannot be achieved simply by statements or addresses by the political leadership. Qualified professionals need to be identified and deployed to educate those who need to change and implement change agenda at different levels. Another strategy that can be used is to activate the NPP network across the country for the same task but if the government opts to do so there can be a valid criticism from the opposition on grounds of politicisation of the change process. It is far better to at least in the interim to devise ways and means of changing the governance and administrative system in an organised way as described above to achieve the desired results.
Consumerism, globalism and culture change
Is it possible to achieve the desired change in the political and common culture in society in a short period of time? What are the obstacles and challenges?
The NPP is driving the necessary changes in political culture with a coordinated effort. It appears that there is a political will to enact such change in the core leadership group. Actions of MPs, ministers, and governors seem to be informed by the need to be relevant, conscious of the need for change and be close to the people and aware of their aspirations. However, the collective opposition that lost power in the last two elections is still there even though many either did not contest the elections or lost their positions in the parliament. The oppositional forces that prefers the old system of patronage and privilege will not put down their weapons and leave. Instead as the time goes they will get together and devise ways and means to secure lost power and privilege. This can appear in many forms. Firstly, at the discourse level using the media and social media. Secondly, through organisational means. Thirdly, through their close associates in the administration system including in the police, security forces, corporations and other key establishments. Fourthly, through communications with diplomats and foreign governments plus INGOs. Finally, through the significant actors in the private or commercial sector. The NPP led government will have to identify the sources of such activity and respond in a timely manner efficiently but within the democratic governance framework. It cannot adopt the strategies used by other authoritarian states elsewhere including democratically elected ones. The NPP government has to devise a home grown method to achieve the result it wants for creating a system change.
One challenge it will face is the fact that most Sri Lankans have been acculturated to modernist and consumerist attitudes and a life style over the decades since late 1970s. They value imported and materially inclined individualistic ideas (e.g. liberalism), attitudes, knowledge, qualifications, products and services to local ones that emphasise spiritualism, collectivism or altruism. This is a legacy that is firmly inculcated by the existing education system (formal and informal) as well. Like others in the region and globally, we live in an aspirational society where most hold desires and values for advancing their economic and social status or at least hold such aspirations about their children. If they see structural obstacles to do so within the society many tend to access avenues for such advancement elsewhere in the region or the world. Such desires and attitudes are nurtured by the media and international agencies operating within the society as well. Often the messages communicated by the new government can go counter to the messages from such agencies.
A clear example is the discourse about how to reform the education and higher education system. Many argue that we need to produce graduates suitable for the market needs. It is common knowledge that graduates should be able to link up with economically significant industries and businesses as well as service centres run by the government. However, those who argue about the market needs do not emphasise the other side of the coin. Meaning that we need to produce future citizens who are conscious about their patriotic responsibilities and obligations, who will not uproot culturally while advancing themselves economically and who will be conscious about helping the most disadvantaged segments of society. In other words, school education and higher education students of the future will need to have a social justice and egalitarian set of values and norms as well as practical ways to put them into practice. Text book lessons and exams relating to a set of subjects alone will not be enough. Work experience while learning and voluntarism are essential to inculcate a realistic understanding of the existing system and individual contribution to make the society better. In countries like Australia, voluntarism is a core part of the social fabric and day to day culture. It has been woven into every aspect of society even when global capitalism and commercially oriented messages have flooded the mainstream media. At the grass roots level, citizens are finding ways and means of creatively facing the onslaught coming from corporate sector players interested in making more profits for shareholders and governments that are influenced by powerful lobby groups.
The coming year will be a test for the new government to show the public that it can fulfil the promises made and enact the change it wants especially by promoting collectivism, altruism, pride in united national identity, service to the people as a main mantra that governs policies and practices, representation with a different slant and ethos, accessibility, simplicity, desire for changing attitudes and practices to be distinct and more. The NPP will look for further gains in the Local Government and Provincial elections to be held next year while opposition parties and coalitions will compete with a renewed sense of urgency and priority. There is a likelihood that a coalition or parties can emerge that resemble the NPP agenda as well. We cannot expect the same type of party divisions that existed in this year’s elections to continue because those in opposition parties and coalitions know that voters rejected their agenda and platforms already. To some extent, the coalition led by former President Ranil Wickremesinghe attempted to mimic the NPP platform by saying that he salvaged the country from the abyss and restored normalcy by negotiating with external players like the IMF. It didn’t work this year but different political slogans and tactics can emerge at the forthcoming elections. Nonetheless, the desire for a system change and culture change advocated by NPP government can become more visible in 2025 and beyond as the government will attempt to implement policies and strategies according to the NPP ideology that has been formulated with decades of political and human experience living with an authoritarian-nepotistic system as described earlier.
The dominant globalist consumerist paradigm of thought and action promoted by the commercial media, free trade, international education and governments influenced by multilateral and bi lateral agencies with dominant powers is heavily slanted to benefit the West and a few countries of the global south that are economically advanced (many follow the Western paradigm). It encourages little to discover and promote local alternatives in ideas, knowledge, thinking, innovations, products and services. The new government wants to link with this global system and benefit from it also; it doesn’t want to simply follow or imitate it. It perhaps wants to be free from external dependence and select suitable aspects of the global system critically and leave out not so suitable aspects. For example, when promoting tourism, where will be the boundary? If some aspects of tourism are harmful to the local culture, idiom and practice, will it take steps to remove such aspects? Mere embrace of tourists of all sorts merely because the country needs dollars is risky strategy. The same applies to imported products and services also. I recently saw a video about tourists around Sigiriya. Some shops and accommodation for tourists have come up opposite Sigiriya. The spokesperson was saying that they need facilities for nightlife there to attract more. Does this include night life? Will the government develop alternative employment programmes for female domestic workers who go to West Asia? How different will be the education and higher education system under the NPP government? What will be the guiding values, principles and framework? In the health sector, what reforms will be introduced? There is a high degree of exploitation of patients by the medical profession. Will the government take measures to eliminate such exploitation? How will the government use private-Public partnership model for infrastructure development? What measures will be taken to rectify the attitudes and behaviour of police officials when implementing laws? Is the government contemplating public sector reforms? In what form? How will the public servant be different in coming year compared to the ones we had before? Are there any training programmes stipulated to change the attitudes and behaviour of them? In every field of activity there are many such questions to be asked and addressed.
Preparing sector-specific plans and well considered strategies for their implementation will require considerable thought and reflection by those in the new government in the new year.