Unity of the Ruling Political Class and the

National Government

by Dr. Siri Gamage - on 02/26/2015

Photo by Ishara S.KODIKARA/AFP/Getty Images via The Baltimore Sun
The talks of establishing a national government, among other things, highlight the
underlying unity of the ruling class in Sri Lanka. Irrespective of party differences and
occasional incidents of politico arrests and then release on bail, the ruling class in Sri
Lanka has commonalities in terms of family connections, school friendships, local
loyalties and the very political culture that gives sustenance to this class. By very
nature, it is elitist and upper middle class. There are several sub stratums in this class.
Firstly, there is a Westernised, English speaking, urbane, professionally equipped and
well connected both inside and outside the country stratum. Secondly, there is a
nationalistically oriented, national dress wearing, Sinhala or Tamil speaking (while
English being the second language) stratum having deep rural and/or peri urban roots.
Members of this ruling class are rich, possesses trappings of modern life such as palace
like houses, posh vehicles (often chauffeur driven), income sources other than the
parliamentary salary and followers in a political and personal sense. Family history in
terms of political engagement by ancestors is a critical factor in deciding their present
status in one of the two main parties. However, during elections, members of this
ruling class divide into two camps and put on a great show before the public to show

why should voters believe them rather than those in the opposing side. Often,
members of the same family contest elections from opposing parties in order to
maximise their advantage. Most members of this class also frequent Colombo
diplomatic party circle as invited dignitaries.
During the Rajapakse era, the nationalistic, Sinhala speaking stratum gained the upper
hand. After January 8 elections, the President represents the same stratum. However,
key members of the government come from the Westernised, English speaking,
urbane, jacket and trouser-wearing stratum. Yet the concept of forming a national
government with the UNP and SLFP minus Rajapakse family perhaps shows the
integral and organic nature of this ruling class. In other words, there are
commonalities among members of this class more than the differences between party
lines-even though political rhetoric is used to show otherwise.
This ruling political class cannot survive and prosper without collaboration from the
local capitalist class (mainly upper middle class and some elites) and the global capital
represented by multinational corporations and global agencies like the World Bank,
IMF. In fact, since colonisation, for all intents and purposes, Sri Lanka has become a
satellite state of global capitalism. Nonetheless, the ruling class has defined the
political agenda and discourses governing the rule in different periods mostly in noneconomic terms, e.g. Nationalism, anti imperialism, anti colonialism, anti terrorism.
The political rivalries among members of the ruling class, in particular its dominant
leadership layer, has also been a factor when defining the key issues and challenges
before the nation and the given political rhetoric. No matter which established party
comes into power, this economic logic of capitalism and the role of global capital in the
countrys affairs have remained intact. Since multiple centres of global capital emerged
in recent decades characterised by China etc., the previous government aligned with
such alternative centres of capitalism for pragmatic reasons rather than with the
established super power or its Western European counterparts. But the present
government seems to adopt an open door policy in the matter of dealing and
collaborating with multiple centres of global capitalism claiming non-alignment.
There are consequences of such collaboration of the ruling political class and the
capitalist class in the country with the global capital for the broader population, their
livelihood, well being and welfare plus the environment. Firstly, more and more
members of the middle class are being fallen into the working class due to price
increases, rationalisation of government and private sector agencies in the name of
efficiency gains etc. Secondly, the status of the upper class is enhanced further and
further. Thirdly, more and more people in lower classes are being compelled to go
beyond their cultural comfort zones and seek an income via non-traditional
occupations, e.g. as domestic workers in Middle East, as lower grade hospitality

workers, free trade zone workers. Fourthly, the scope for developing an indigenous
development model that is not dependent on global capital and its agencies is being
narrowed at every opportunity.
The problem with the TNA is that it defines critical issues facing people from middle to
lower classes in ethnic terms alone. Any economic or social issues facing the people in
the northern and eastern provinces are seen as those requiring solutions from the
ruling elite and the upper class that control levers of power. Rather than developing an
economic critique, TNA continues to define issues and potential solutions in ethnic
terms. In turn, this helps the ruling class to define key national issues as ethnically
based terrorism or separatism rather than economic inequalities created by the
operations of global capitalism hand in glove with the local ruling class and capitalist
class.
In this context, politics and political culture has become transactional, meaning that
various classes and their key stakeholder representatives collaborate with the ruling
political class in return for a share of power and privilege or economic and social
returns by way of positions in government controlled entities including the diplomatic
service. This has led to large-scale corruption, violations of basic human rights of the
masses, and heavy-handed control of peoples lives, property and opportunity. The war
years allowed for this to continue by providing a single rationale for governance. In the
new era of good governance, anti corruption, media freedom and rule of law, the
economic project continues with some modifications but I am not sure whether it will
yield enough dividends for the economically oppressed classes in a tangible way?
Certainly, the upper class and upper middle class will find ways to market products
and services from the global north and some countries in the global south to the local
population in order to find more and more income for their companies, e.g. marketing
higher education. A selected few from the lower middle class will also benefit from
such ventures in the long run. Exodus of professionally and academically qualified
people to developed countries is a contemporary phenomenon where better rewards
and a peaceful living space provide an attraction, e.g. doctors.
What about the ruled classes and their political representation? These include the
lower middle class, which includes people like schoolteachers, nurses, clerks, and
hospitality industry workers. In short, sanga, veda, guru, govi, kamkaru categories. The
latter includes people who engage in physical labor for a wage or income. Both these
classes can include the self-employed, e.g. Beedi producers, brick workers, three wheel
drivers, road and construction workers, itinerant workers, construction workers,
cleaners and some fishing folk. By and large these classes constitute the majority of the
voting public in Sri Lanka.
Though the urban-based members of these classes are organised into trade unions,

those in the rural areas are disorganised and thus open to indoctrination by politicians
from the elitist and upper middle classes (the political class). As a matter of fact,
mostly the upper middle class professional politicians in the parliament represent
these classes. It is not by choice but due to the prevailing political culture, party
system- in particular the biased process involving the nomination for electoral
organiser roles- and the need for large sums of money and other resources to contest a
seat. Thus one can see the appearance of various characters claiming to represent the
interests of lower classes in the parliament. But when their pedigree is examined, it
shows that they are professional politicians whose ancestors have made a fortune by
engaging in politics. The two main parties provide legitimacy for such folk not only to
contest electorates but also to remain in parliament and do party politics.
The self-employed entrepreneurs with capital and employed work force belong in the
upper middle class or even the elite stratum depending on the scale of their enterprises
and operations.
Those who live in poverty, not an insignificant number, draw the attention of
politicians of all kinds during parliamentary debates, political campaigns, and policy
talk. It is axiomatic for those in the ruling class to empathise with the plight of these
people and come up with various proposals to alleviate poverty. It assumes more
significance because of the moral dimension involved when treating a highly
disadvantaged section of the population. Most governments, once in power devise
programs to help those in poverty also. However, as a social stratum, these poor people
are highly dependent on those with money, power and status. They look for any
material benefits that they can garner from the ruling class and are highly susceptible
to politically motivated nationalistic rhetoric.
Into this mix comes a party like the JVP. It claims to represent the interests of lower
classes both in the city and villages. It claims to understand them better, empathise
with their predicaments better too. It is not a party motivated by mega deals or
collaboration with global agencies such as the World Bank to obtain development
loans in order to run the national economy. It has no need to empathise with
multinational corporations or their local agents. Its development ideals are based on a
paradigm of national development-though it still has to identify indigenous elements
of its economic policies better. JVP also has a grassroots appeal while the leadership of
the party seems to be highly articulate and consistent in terms of the political messages
transmitted to the voting public. It shows a different kind of political culture compared
to the two main parties, UNP and SLFP.
Thus in the years to come there is a high likelihood for the two main parties to form a
national or unity government and the JVP to become the real opposition in the

parliament. This can sharpen the class divide in Sri Lankan society and to streamline
the political culture in terms of clearly identifiable and distinguishable norms, values
and practices. One geared to the preservation of ruling class privileges and the other
oriented to address the needs of lower classes and those in poverty. This will certainly
trigger a competition between the ruling class and those parties representing the lower
classes in order to maximise the votes to be attracted. What form and shape this
competition will take can most likely be witnessed at the next parliamentary election.
The point to remember however is that irrespective of the party or parties in power,
the underlying economic agenda will be a capitalist one aligned with key global centres
of power, multinational corporations and their agencies. Unless a party like the JVP
comes up with a truly indigenous development model with sustainability as its key
basis, Sri Lankans can expect more of the same with a different label in the coming
years.
Posted by Thavam