Now the question is, what about the
workers? Kinky theory
The
present state of Lanka, according to Wimal, is an emerging nationalist
state countered by imperialists in many subtle ways. Revolutionaries
must defend the consolidation of this growing nationalist state against
all kinds of enemies supported by imperialists.
He
justifies, that at the same time, their task is to internally seek
corrections to the ills of the incipient national state. Hence while
supporting Mahinda they criticise corruption and other misdeeds of the
political leadership.
Of course, according to Wimal these drawbacks of the government are not very serious. Certainly these are secondary compared to the massive task of building the national state!
Now the
JVP of Amarasinghe accepts most of this kinky theory. In fact this was
created by Amarasinghe and the JVP leadership. But the pressure from
the rank and file, especially those who are based in workplaces, made
JVP rethink some of the axioms of this national state theory.
They see
that the so called nationalist state is really, even according to their
vision, a reactionary bourgeois state working closely with
multinational corporations and other Western powers.
In fact
the war is financed and supported by Americans, Indians, Europeans and
other global powers. But as a party based mostly on Sinhala petty
bourgeoisie they cannot revise their poisonous conclusion that the LTTE
is an agent of global capital.
On that
basis they cannot oppose the ‘sacred’ war policy of the government.
Hence the contradictory policy of on the one hand, supporting by voting
for war expenditure and emergency regulations, and on the other hand
opposing in the streets the rising prices and military excesses in the
South.
Global capitalism
Is the
regime of Mahinda, which is following an economic policy tied to the
agenda of global capitalism while carrying out an extreme repressive
policy towards Tamil speaking people, a progressive entity?
Is it
better than a possible Wickremesinghe regime, which will follow the
same economic policy tied to global capitalism, while pursuing a policy
to unite the country on the basis of negotiations, maybe as a federal
state?
I believe
the answers, of both Somawansa and Weerawansa, would be ‘yes’ to both
questions. Unfortunately both parties do not recognise that the war
mongering policy by its own dynamics has created the danger of a
barbaric repressive regime in Lanka.
Anybody
following the same military policy most likely would have got caught to
the same military tide. So it is not what Wickremesinghe stood for
yesterday, or what a lovely friend Mahinda was a few years back, that
matters.
It is the reality of the dynamics of military policy that need to be countered. Whatever the beauty of the theory of a nationalist state, what we have got is not a people’s nationalist state but just the opposite - an anti-people, foreign dominated state.
We must have a strategy to go forward from here.