(by Malinda Seneviratne)

It is easy, perhaps too easy, to dismiss the Ceylon National Congress as a grouping of elitists, brought together by a shared, elitist power-need. Looking back, almost 90 years after it was formed and 69 years after its ultimate demise, it is easy to pick holes in the politics of the Ceylon National Congress. On the other hand people and decisions should ideally be judged against the realities of that time and no other. In the very least, it should be acknowledged that history is a great teacher and it is up to the student of history to disentangle from event and personality the lessons applicable to the present, to site example to alert the contemporary actor to possible pitfalls and glean elements that can feed the formulation of superior political strategy.


It is in that sense, primarily, that the history of the Ceylon National Congress should be perused. There is a secondary reason and one which should not be dismissed on account of its historically subordinate nature: the formation of a Sri Lanka National Congress (SLNC) that looks to the original articulation for inspiration in terms of its key defining characteristics: commitment to political culture that references ethics, emphasizes values, champions intellect and celebrates the spirit of democracy. Let's first comment on this secondary element.


The Sri Lanka National Congress is Milinda Moragoda’s latest initiative. It births in a political, social and economic context that is understandably quite foreign to that in which the CNC was born. The CNC was essentially the coalescence in December 1919 of the many associations and societies that had been formed in the closing years of the 19th Century and the first decade of the 20th by local men of property and the professional classes in order to address memorials, petitions and prayers to the rulers of the island. The CNC agitated for reform, constitutional and otherwise. It was the voice that was most articulate in challenging the colonial order and the structures of governance it had imposed on the people of the island then called Ceylon.


The SLNC, in contrast, does not describe itself as an agitational front at odds with the regime. It rather focuses on championing certain values and practices which, if adopted, would make for more responsible and representative government while moving the political culture away from its current fascination with greed, revenge, aversion to transparency and accountability and its singular privileging of politician over citizen.


The SLNC, if one were to go by what could be called its primary statement of intent, seeks to advocate and advance ethical and social values that would take the nation forward to reach its full potentials:


* A nation in which the benevolent teachings of the Buddha permeate and influence all activity, and with the influence of the other great religions, help establish a caring society, in which law will secure justice for all.


* A nation where political parties reject violence, slander and aggression and learn to work together for the betterment of the people.


* A nation of peoples of different cultural traditions, each free to practice and develop those traditions, thereby enriching and strengthening the nation as a whole, and where women, no less than men, are enabled to make their full contribution and reach their full potential.


* A market-oriented economy through which our resourceful peoples may once more ensure steady economic growth, while making provision for assisting those who, for one reason or another, are not able to succeed in their endeavours.


* A confident nation, open to the world, encouraging investment and seeking to broaden the range of its trading partners.


* A nation that derives strength from its age-old traditions as well as its inherent capacity to adapt and to innovate while taking what is of value from the world at large.


This wish-list is non-confrontational both in terms of substance and caveat, for it clearly states, ‘there is ample space within the UPFA (United People’s Freedom Alliance) led by President Mahinda Rajapaksa to accommodate this vision’. Perhaps it was the realities of the 21st Century that persuaded Milinda Moragoda and the SLNC to throw in policy directions pertaining to economic issue, but the principal thrust of its manifesto resides in the realm of operational ethics in modern day politics. In any event, the SLNC makes no bones about the fundamental terms of its vision being derived by that of the CNC. To reiterate, it’s not the nuts and bolts issues that the SLNC is concerned with, but the underlying approach, which it claims coincides with that of the CNC.


Even a cursory glance at the heavily annotated ‘Documents of the Ceylon National Congress and Nationalist Politics in Ceylon, 1920-1950’, edited by Michael Roberts, shows what enormous chasms exist between the CNC and the political groups that are called 'parties’ today.


The painstaking collection and detailed commentary clearly indicates that for intellectual rigor, repartee in discussion, wit, commitment to doing the hard day-to-day homework pertaining to political action, research and meticulous note-taking, no party or political group today can hold a candle to the CNC.


The SLNC calls for and champions consensual politics; room for which it believes exist in the very least because the President has encouraged Milinda Moragoda and others who crossed over from the Opposition to maintain and develop their own identities. The ‘consensuality’ of the actors in the CNC (many of who were not just articulate and informed but belonged to groups and ideological positions right across the political spectrum) was, on the other hand, underlined by intellectual honesty for the most part and a staunch commitment to ethical practices in politics.


The debates, the submissions, their criticism and the relevant substantiation to back argument are in stark contrast to the bickering, one-upmanship, under-cutting and a manifest aversion to even the most rudimentary kind of idea-exchange that one finds in abundance today.


It was natural back in 1919 for the first coming-together of forces to be elite-made and elite-driven, although the CNC saw itself as the ‘progressive’ thrust and rightly so considering that other groups such as the Unionist Association vehemently opposed the proposed introduction of universal suffrage. Perhaps they didn’t have a choice or didn’t know better even if they ought to have. The SLNC, on the other hand, consciously seeks a more broad-based and inclusive frame of operation and political commerce, according to its policy document.


It is not a bad move, although one might wonder how far such an initiative can go given the current political climate. The end of the war certainly called for a new chapter, a new way of doing things and generated much hope regarding a different political culture, free of the back-stabbing, vilifying, character-assassinating that has defined politics in recent times.


Back in 1919 and for several decades after that, there was space for men and women of intellectual stature and integrity. Not only is such space minimal today but such men and women are a rarity or shun politics altogether out of disgust.