Yet another Provincial Council election is underway, the streets are littered with election propaganda and I think its time to ask ourselves: what purpose do these councils serve?
They were brought about by the 13th amendment to the constitution in 1987 as part of the Indian imposed peace agreement. The idea was to devolve power to the provinces as a permanent solution to the war.
It has patently failed to achieve it prime objective, so is there any purpose in continuing with this futile exercise? Why it failed is a question that can be looked at separately, perhaps there was no real devolution, perhaps that was not the solution needed, maybe there were other reasons, but failed it has, which means we must return to the question: why persist with the exercise?
What does the Provincial Council DO? I'm not very sure to be honest. Will someone please enlighten me? To the best of my knowledge they perform some of the functions previously carried out by the Municipal Councils. Have services improved to the population in the provinces? Certainly not.
What purpose does the PC serve? Its a money making machine for the politicians. I had a friend who had a friend who was contesting for a certain PC. He had told my friend that the target for a PC Chairman was to earn Rs.30m over a five year period. This was earned by granting building permits, water and electricity connections and other types of permits and supplemented by commissions from any other projects undertaken.
This discussion took place a couple of years ago so by now the target has probably increased. Its not a bad life for a small time politician and its time we stop paying for someone else's lifestyle, in return for zero benefits.
The Indian imposed peace of 1987 is viewed with abhorrence by the present regime, lets capitalise on this and get that blasted 13th amendment repealed.
Friday, April 17, 2009
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Money, money money.
Was stopped late last night at a checkpoint in Colombo. I was returning from a short trip out of Colombo, the policeman on duty seemed to be looking for inebriated new year revelers, at least judging buy the way he was trying to sniff my breath. He asked me my name, where I was from and what I did for a living.
Then he dropped a hint, asking if I had anything to offer them for the new year. I said no, wondering where this was leading. I was bit flummoxed when he then asked me "the bonna support ekak thenda puluwan tha?" meaning, could you give me some money to have a cup of tea. I gave him a hundred rupees and he asked me if I was giving it freely and I replied that I was and he smiled and waved me on.
I have been joking to friends saying that the number of checks for dunk driving seem to be inversely related to the state of the economy. The worse it gets, the more check are conducted, with the implication that the policemen need a few more bribes to tide them over the high cost of living.
The fellows at the checkpoint must have had a poor haul that night to have to descend to begging.
I was chatting to a friend a couple of days before. This guy lectures to O level students at a tutory on a part-time basis. This is a really cheap place that charges students a thousand rupees a month and hold large group classes. The school used to have an roll of 6000 students, it is now down to 4000. I asked him why enrollment was down, he said it was a combination of economics and the security situation.
Some parents, it seems, can no longer afford to spend a thousand rupees a month on education. Although it sounds very little to me, it must represent something quite large to some people, especially since education is highly esteemed in local society and is probably the amongst the last things to be cut from family budgets.
The school also used to have students from the outskirts of Colombo; Negombo, Wattala and surrounding areas who would come to Colombo on Friday or Saturday morning, stay with friends, relatives or in a boarding house for the weekend, attend classes and return on Sunday or Monday. Many of these students were Muslims or Tamils and with the increased number of raids on lodging houses and the need to register temporary visitors it appears to have become too much hassle to come to Colombo anymore.
These two little examples underline the importance of the value of money. The vast majority of people live on a fixed monthly salary or a fixed daily wage. Salaries are generally revised once year or if they are lucky twice a year. If the value of money drops and the basket of goods that a given amount of money can buy shrinks, the result is an increase in poverty. The decline in the value of money is called inflation. The concept seems abstract and unworldly but the impact is real and affects everybody. Failure to manage inflation amount amounts to theft by the government.
Nobody understood this better than the prophet of Bloomsbury. To quote his remarks on the subject:
Then he dropped a hint, asking if I had anything to offer them for the new year. I said no, wondering where this was leading. I was bit flummoxed when he then asked me "the bonna support ekak thenda puluwan tha?" meaning, could you give me some money to have a cup of tea. I gave him a hundred rupees and he asked me if I was giving it freely and I replied that I was and he smiled and waved me on.
I have been joking to friends saying that the number of checks for dunk driving seem to be inversely related to the state of the economy. The worse it gets, the more check are conducted, with the implication that the policemen need a few more bribes to tide them over the high cost of living.
The fellows at the checkpoint must have had a poor haul that night to have to descend to begging.
I was chatting to a friend a couple of days before. This guy lectures to O level students at a tutory on a part-time basis. This is a really cheap place that charges students a thousand rupees a month and hold large group classes. The school used to have an roll of 6000 students, it is now down to 4000. I asked him why enrollment was down, he said it was a combination of economics and the security situation.
Some parents, it seems, can no longer afford to spend a thousand rupees a month on education. Although it sounds very little to me, it must represent something quite large to some people, especially since education is highly esteemed in local society and is probably the amongst the last things to be cut from family budgets.
The school also used to have students from the outskirts of Colombo; Negombo, Wattala and surrounding areas who would come to Colombo on Friday or Saturday morning, stay with friends, relatives or in a boarding house for the weekend, attend classes and return on Sunday or Monday. Many of these students were Muslims or Tamils and with the increased number of raids on lodging houses and the need to register temporary visitors it appears to have become too much hassle to come to Colombo anymore.
These two little examples underline the importance of the value of money. The vast majority of people live on a fixed monthly salary or a fixed daily wage. Salaries are generally revised once year or if they are lucky twice a year. If the value of money drops and the basket of goods that a given amount of money can buy shrinks, the result is an increase in poverty. The decline in the value of money is called inflation. The concept seems abstract and unworldly but the impact is real and affects everybody. Failure to manage inflation amount amounts to theft by the government.
Nobody understood this better than the prophet of Bloomsbury. To quote his remarks on the subject:
“Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the Capitalist System was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security, but at confidence in the equity of the existing distribution of wealth. Those to whom the system brings windfalls, beyond their deserts and even beyond their expectations or desires, become ‘profiteers,’ who are the object of the hatred of the bourgeoisie, whom the inflationism has impoverished, not less than of the proletariat. As the inflation proceeds and the real value of the currency fluctuates wildly from month to month, all permanent relations between debtors and creditors, which form the ultimate foundation of capitalism, become so utterly disordered as to be almost meaningless; and the process of wealth-getting degenerates into a gamble and a lottery.”
Lenin was certainly right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.”
J.M. Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace (p. 235-6)
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Ask Lucy
The local newspapers are quite dreary. The local blogosphere is also rather dry these days, so what does a frustrated fellow do to enliven a bad day at the office? Look to one of the few quality newspapers still around.
Ok this is not really news but the advice given by Lucy is superb.
In love with a senior at work
My bonus is being paid for by taxpayers, do I give it back?
*Sigh*
How long do we have to wait before the local blogosphere returns to quality debate?
Ok this is not really news but the advice given by Lucy is superb.
In love with a senior at work
My bonus is being paid for by taxpayers, do I give it back?
*Sigh*
How long do we have to wait before the local blogosphere returns to quality debate?
Friday, March 20, 2009
Música de España
Stumbled across some nice music, quite by accident.
There is a Spanish band called Los Manolos that plays some nice music including cover versions of some well known songs. Unlike other cover bands they do not simply play the music straight but instead infuse it with all the rhythms of Spain and the result is quite exhilerating.
Amigos para siempre is rather bad song by Andrew Lloyd Webber but in the hands of Los Manolos it is elevated to this.
Maybe its just the rhythms that are getting to me but when they turn their hands to the Beatles classic All My Loving it just blows me away. It is also rather amusing to hear the song sung with a Spanish accent.
This is something else by the same group, rather different in spirit but still nice.
Since I was on the subject of Spanish music, Volare is another classic by the Gypsy Kings. Have heard the song before but never listened to it properly before or knew who sang it. Seeing it being performed is an eye-opener.
There is a Spanish band called Los Manolos that plays some nice music including cover versions of some well known songs. Unlike other cover bands they do not simply play the music straight but instead infuse it with all the rhythms of Spain and the result is quite exhilerating.
Amigos para siempre is rather bad song by Andrew Lloyd Webber but in the hands of Los Manolos it is elevated to this.
Maybe its just the rhythms that are getting to me but when they turn their hands to the Beatles classic All My Loving it just blows me away. It is also rather amusing to hear the song sung with a Spanish accent.
This is something else by the same group, rather different in spirit but still nice.
Since I was on the subject of Spanish music, Volare is another classic by the Gypsy Kings. Have heard the song before but never listened to it properly before or knew who sang it. Seeing it being performed is an eye-opener.
Israel's democratic credentials
I tend to disagree with many of the positions taken by Israel. I also tend to sympathise with the plight of the Palestinian's: their cause if just and they suffer from a lot of repression, some of which is quite brutal.
For all its fault's however, it must be admitted that Israel is a functioning democracy. Alternative voices are heard and there is process that works. If further proof were needed, this should suffice.
Contrast that, with for example this.
For all its fault's however, it must be admitted that Israel is a functioning democracy. Alternative voices are heard and there is process that works. If further proof were needed, this should suffice.
Contrast that, with for example this.
Monday, March 16, 2009
The purpose of advertising
There has been some debate on the subject of the Sri Lankan advertising industry. I am not involved in this industry nor do I have a background in sales or marketing but there is a question that I would like answered.
What is the purpose of advertising?
To me, the answer is straightforward: to improve sales and ultimately profits.
Business exists for only one purpose: to make a profit. People talk of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and a business, like everybody in society needs to comply with certain standards but fundamentally a business does not exist to perform CSR. It exists to make a profit.
There is a different debate, mostly concerning bahavioural psychology, as to whether businesses actually strive to provide the best return to shareholders, but for this discussion I think it can be ignored.
Working on this principle, the role of advertising, as in every other aspect of business is to improve profits. Advertising is primarily concerned with sales (I admit that there are other reasons for advertising too) but its main purpose would be to increase sales.
This brings me to a second question: if the purpose of advertising is to improve profits, then should advertisements be judged purely on this basis?
Stated in another form, does it matter how nice is looks or how well it is put together as long it does its job? Extending this further, does it matter whether an advertisement or even a whole campaign copies something done somewhere else? Is it necessary that an advertisement be original and display a certain artistic qualities?
After all the whole business of management education is based on attempting to derive successful principles from the practices of the past. Why do we read case studies? So that we may draw on examples that may be useful in similar situations in the future and apply them where possible. If a particular advertisement or campaign is successful in one market then is there any harm in copying it or adapting it in another market? To me, as long as it works, it does not matter where it comes from or how ugly it is.
Advertisements are only a means to an end, a mere tool to be used. It is true that there are elements of ingenuity that are involved in the process of developing advertisements but I tend to think that people get rather too carried away by these things.
An advertisement is not art. The fact that it seems to be regarded as such in Sri Lanka is a reflection of the debased state of society.
An advertisement may draw on certain elements and use the mediums that are found in true art but no one should regard something as intrinsically base as an advertisement as art.
There will be instances when the maker of posters or a commercial on film or television displays great skill in the use of the medium and we may justly admire such skill and be grateful that our senses have not been assaulted but it is not art.
What is the purpose of advertising?
To me, the answer is straightforward: to improve sales and ultimately profits.
Business exists for only one purpose: to make a profit. People talk of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and a business, like everybody in society needs to comply with certain standards but fundamentally a business does not exist to perform CSR. It exists to make a profit.
There is a different debate, mostly concerning bahavioural psychology, as to whether businesses actually strive to provide the best return to shareholders, but for this discussion I think it can be ignored.
Working on this principle, the role of advertising, as in every other aspect of business is to improve profits. Advertising is primarily concerned with sales (I admit that there are other reasons for advertising too) but its main purpose would be to increase sales.
This brings me to a second question: if the purpose of advertising is to improve profits, then should advertisements be judged purely on this basis?
Stated in another form, does it matter how nice is looks or how well it is put together as long it does its job? Extending this further, does it matter whether an advertisement or even a whole campaign copies something done somewhere else? Is it necessary that an advertisement be original and display a certain artistic qualities?
After all the whole business of management education is based on attempting to derive successful principles from the practices of the past. Why do we read case studies? So that we may draw on examples that may be useful in similar situations in the future and apply them where possible. If a particular advertisement or campaign is successful in one market then is there any harm in copying it or adapting it in another market? To me, as long as it works, it does not matter where it comes from or how ugly it is.
Advertisements are only a means to an end, a mere tool to be used. It is true that there are elements of ingenuity that are involved in the process of developing advertisements but I tend to think that people get rather too carried away by these things.
An advertisement is not art. The fact that it seems to be regarded as such in Sri Lanka is a reflection of the debased state of society.
An advertisement may draw on certain elements and use the mediums that are found in true art but no one should regard something as intrinsically base as an advertisement as art.
There will be instances when the maker of posters or a commercial on film or television displays great skill in the use of the medium and we may justly admire such skill and be grateful that our senses have not been assaulted but it is not art.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Kicked out of HSBC
It finally happened, the straw that broke the camel's back. I went back to my old bank, NDB. HSBC, the World's Lousiest Bank finally drove me out.
It took a while. I put up with their indifference, impersonal automated service, lousy rates, sky high charges and god knows what else for a fair while. I'm a patient man and a lazy one. Its a nuisance to maintain multiple accounts and because NDB does not have a credit card I am forced to retain that but HSBC is not going to make any money out of me anymore. Well maybe just a little, but no longer will they enjoy my deposits, which is what they want.
I found HSBC's internet banking convenient and my credit cards were linked up to auto settle so I had minimum interaction with them. The little I did have however resulted in poor and increasingly worse service.
My relationship with HSBC goes back to 1994, when I first got a credit card. Service was terrible but I stayed. Then in the late 1990's I encountered a wonderful manager at the Bambalapitya branch, thanks to her service, over time I transferred everything to HSBC. After she left things began to go downhill again, a little at a time. She left me various contacts, through whom I was able to get some things done and I would also ring her occasionally to get extra help, but there is a limit to which one can bother staff who are now in different departments. I am also reluctant to use the corporate muscle that comes with my position to keep ringing the senior people to get things done on my personal account. When I'm really stuck I will, but for routine, simple things, I can hardly bother them can I?
The last straw was when I tried to ring them yesterday. I tried several times and no one would even pick up the phone and on the one or two occasions that they did the call was on left on hold and then cut.
This morning I rang my old account manager at NDB. She saw me right away, almost an hour before the bank even opened (they let me in through the staff entrance) and I made my deposit and was back in my office within fifteen minutes. Now THAT is what call service. They also paid a much better rate than that other blasted place.
It took a while. I put up with their indifference, impersonal automated service, lousy rates, sky high charges and god knows what else for a fair while. I'm a patient man and a lazy one. Its a nuisance to maintain multiple accounts and because NDB does not have a credit card I am forced to retain that but HSBC is not going to make any money out of me anymore. Well maybe just a little, but no longer will they enjoy my deposits, which is what they want.
I found HSBC's internet banking convenient and my credit cards were linked up to auto settle so I had minimum interaction with them. The little I did have however resulted in poor and increasingly worse service.
My relationship with HSBC goes back to 1994, when I first got a credit card. Service was terrible but I stayed. Then in the late 1990's I encountered a wonderful manager at the Bambalapitya branch, thanks to her service, over time I transferred everything to HSBC. After she left things began to go downhill again, a little at a time. She left me various contacts, through whom I was able to get some things done and I would also ring her occasionally to get extra help, but there is a limit to which one can bother staff who are now in different departments. I am also reluctant to use the corporate muscle that comes with my position to keep ringing the senior people to get things done on my personal account. When I'm really stuck I will, but for routine, simple things, I can hardly bother them can I?
The last straw was when I tried to ring them yesterday. I tried several times and no one would even pick up the phone and on the one or two occasions that they did the call was on left on hold and then cut.
This morning I rang my old account manager at NDB. She saw me right away, almost an hour before the bank even opened (they let me in through the staff entrance) and I made my deposit and was back in my office within fifteen minutes. Now THAT is what call service. They also paid a much better rate than that other blasted place.
Sunday, March 08, 2009
It was the babblers' nest - Conrad Felsinger
I just finished skimming Juliet Coombe and Daisy Perry’s ‘Around the Fort in 80 Lives’. I saw this book while wandering around Galle during the literary festival. I was tempted to buy it but (luckily as it turns out) I did not. I discovered later that a friend owned it and borrowed it from him.
I was rather disappointed by the book; although it starts off with a good theme and has the potential to become interesting it seemed rather shallow and naive. A coffee table book with insufficient pictures and too much text; rather unsatisfying on the whole.
My mind was then taken back to an altogether different story of Galle, EFC Ludowyk's charming autumnal reflections on growing up in Galle. Deeply felt and beautifully written it is a lovely memoir of a way of life that no longer exists.
This is turn brought me to the other beautiful memoir, from an even earlier era which is the title of this post. I'm not sure how many people have read this splendid work, but if you can get your hands on a copy (I would suggest you try raiding the second hand book shops on D.R.Wijewardene Mawatha, if the last copy on Amazon gets sold) it is something that I think is a must read for anyone interested in this land. It is a highly entertaining account of schoolboy life at the beginning of the twentieth century, when a catapult was a regular part of any boy's armoury and birds the usual victim. It is a book of schoolboy life; of outrageous pranks and elaborately organised trips made in bullock carts. A vivid portrait of life in another era.
I get rather sentimental reading stuff like this and perhaps not just because I am a sentimental fool. I feel very alienated by the politics in Sri Lanka today, but deep down, I think I still retain a love for this land.
I was rather disappointed by the book; although it starts off with a good theme and has the potential to become interesting it seemed rather shallow and naive. A coffee table book with insufficient pictures and too much text; rather unsatisfying on the whole.
My mind was then taken back to an altogether different story of Galle, EFC Ludowyk's charming autumnal reflections on growing up in Galle. Deeply felt and beautifully written it is a lovely memoir of a way of life that no longer exists.
This is turn brought me to the other beautiful memoir, from an even earlier era which is the title of this post. I'm not sure how many people have read this splendid work, but if you can get your hands on a copy (I would suggest you try raiding the second hand book shops on D.R.Wijewardene Mawatha, if the last copy on Amazon gets sold) it is something that I think is a must read for anyone interested in this land. It is a highly entertaining account of schoolboy life at the beginning of the twentieth century, when a catapult was a regular part of any boy's armoury and birds the usual victim. It is a book of schoolboy life; of outrageous pranks and elaborately organised trips made in bullock carts. A vivid portrait of life in another era.
I get rather sentimental reading stuff like this and perhaps not just because I am a sentimental fool. I feel very alienated by the politics in Sri Lanka today, but deep down, I think I still retain a love for this land.
Saturday, March 07, 2009
Holding seats in a theatre
Got back from the performance of the Verdi Requiem a while back, the most uncomfortable concert I have ever been to. Never realised that the cathedral could get so hot and it does not, unlike most churches have wide windows or doors. The crowd was also massive, perhaps because it was free, and since no tickets were being sold seats were in short supply.
I got in by about 6.20 and found a seat easily enough. Then a friend asked me to hold a couple of seats for him so I left my seat (it was being held by a neighbour) and occupied another a few rows behind. While waiting there an old woman with a couple of similarly aged friends walks up and exclaims "oh there are three seats here". I had omitted to put anything down on the seat so I said that I was keeping one seat for a friend so there were only two available, to which she retorted sharply "but they are not here are they?"
I was not about to get into an argument with an old woman over a seat so I gave in with no further comment.
The question is: is it right or fair to hold a seat for a friend in crowded theatre? There was a time when the British Council had a notice put up forbidding teh practice in their auditorium, but as a general practice is it fair?
I got in by about 6.20 and found a seat easily enough. Then a friend asked me to hold a couple of seats for him so I left my seat (it was being held by a neighbour) and occupied another a few rows behind. While waiting there an old woman with a couple of similarly aged friends walks up and exclaims "oh there are three seats here". I had omitted to put anything down on the seat so I said that I was keeping one seat for a friend so there were only two available, to which she retorted sharply "but they are not here are they?"
I was not about to get into an argument with an old woman over a seat so I gave in with no further comment.
The question is: is it right or fair to hold a seat for a friend in crowded theatre? There was a time when the British Council had a notice put up forbidding teh practice in their auditorium, but as a general practice is it fair?
Friday, March 06, 2009
A man of courage and conviction
Such men are hard to some by, particularly in the Third World, so it good to see the tale of John Githongo being published. I have always admired such men and this book should be required reading for anyone interested in politics in this country.
The book's title "Its our Turn to Eat" could apply equally well here.
Those interested in reading his report on Kenyan corruption can access it here.
The book's title "Its our Turn to Eat" could apply equally well here.
Those interested in reading his report on Kenyan corruption can access it here.
Hoppers with jam, anyone?
I have introduced some friends from overseas to the delights of a hopper. The only thing is, they seem to prefer to eat them with jam, strawberry jam in particular, rather than the usual curries.
Even an egg hopper is rejected in favour of the plain hopper with jam, although the sweet milk hopper is accepted willingly enough.
Does anyone else like this (to me at least) strange combination?
I remember eating hoppers with butter as a child but cannot remember ever liking them with jam.
There's no accounting for taste I suppose.
Even an egg hopper is rejected in favour of the plain hopper with jam, although the sweet milk hopper is accepted willingly enough.
Does anyone else like this (to me at least) strange combination?
I remember eating hoppers with butter as a child but cannot remember ever liking them with jam.
There's no accounting for taste I suppose.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
The End.
A friend sent me this rather witty text message. How will we describe the ending of the war? Gota-dammerung?
It is difficult to find intelligent commentary on the what is necessary post victory. Malinda Seneviratne tackles some of the thorny issues in an insightful essay on Dignity and Relatedness.
It is difficult to find intelligent commentary on the what is necessary post victory. Malinda Seneviratne tackles some of the thorny issues in an insightful essay on Dignity and Relatedness.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Time
Going through some fairly stressful times at work and the weekends have been pretty hectic too. Went off on five trips on successive weekends and that has left me with even more stress. I enjoyed myself thoroughly but the after effects were the problem.
I'm not sure how other people feel but I need space, I need time for myself. I need to read a little, I need to reflect, I need to think. I also like to take little naps in the afternoon and that seems to help my system as well.
When I don't get my dose of space I start feeling more and more frazzled.
I've sort of managed to salvage something from this Saturday, could not get much reading done but at least I slept for a while. Now plotting on how to extract the maximum from tomorrow, have a practice in the morning, gym in the afternoon....aargh its beginning to sound all too stressful again.......
I'm not sure how other people feel but I need space, I need time for myself. I need to read a little, I need to reflect, I need to think. I also like to take little naps in the afternoon and that seems to help my system as well.
When I don't get my dose of space I start feeling more and more frazzled.
I've sort of managed to salvage something from this Saturday, could not get much reading done but at least I slept for a while. Now plotting on how to extract the maximum from tomorrow, have a practice in the morning, gym in the afternoon....aargh its beginning to sound all too stressful again.......
Peter, Paul & Mary
Just stumbled on these guys, purely by accident. Nice sixties music. Just try:
Early In the Morning
If I had a Hammer
The Marvelous Toy
I had heard a couple of the songs before but never knew who sang them.
Early In the Morning
If I had a Hammer
The Marvelous Toy
I had heard a couple of the songs before but never knew who sang them.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
A Martian view
Just imagine that a friendly Martian landed on these shores. Imagine also that the Martian, finding himself on a populated land, decides to find out about the inhabitants through their own media, the Lonely Planet not quite reaching Mars.
He would quickly discover that the state media are the sole arbiters of the truth and, not wanting to be misled, concentrates entirely on them. He finds out that there is a war in progress and eagerly scans the press for details. Martian's being a warlike people are quite familiar with war, but this war baffles him.
It is the most beautiful war.
A war with no reversals.
A war with no casualties.
A war of territory but not of people
A war where no innocents die.
A war with no cost.
A war that would make the Martian equivalent of Charles Dodgson proud.
He would quickly discover that the state media are the sole arbiters of the truth and, not wanting to be misled, concentrates entirely on them. He finds out that there is a war in progress and eagerly scans the press for details. Martian's being a warlike people are quite familiar with war, but this war baffles him.
It is the most beautiful war.
A war with no reversals.
A war with no casualties.
A war of territory but not of people
A war where no innocents die.
A war with no cost.
A war that would make the Martian equivalent of Charles Dodgson proud.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Cannibalism
It was only to be expected. The Great White Hope of the stockbrokers and punters has turned out to have feet of clay. As predicted by yours truly after the release of the third quarter results (results to Sept '08), Dialog has made a loss for the full year 2008.
The reason?
With only a cursory glance at the results I'm guessing that there is one reason: the Dialog Blaster package. This has probably cannibalised the entire customer base. I have a pretty low regard for marketing staff and indeed for the intellect of people working within the corporate sector; most can't think straight but this takes the cake.
You launch a package that is designed to save perhaps a 100,000 customers switching from Dialog to Mobitel's Upahara, but inadvertently give a discount to 2.9m of your paying customers (I take Dialog's published subscriber numbers with a sack of salt, they say have 5m but the paying active base is probably closer to 3m I reckon).
The fun is only just beginning, because Upahara has also wrought havoc amongst the SLT base, although it may have brought some marginal benefit to Mobitel. Things are probably pretty bad there, which is why their results are late, the accountants will probably be working overtime to make the best of the bad news.
And as for the future, my personal bet on the Dialog share price is Rs.2, once the foreigners start to sell but there is no telling where a floor will emerge once that starts to happen. Keep a lookout for stockbrokers and their clients jumping out of top floor windows in the WTC.
The reason?
With only a cursory glance at the results I'm guessing that there is one reason: the Dialog Blaster package. This has probably cannibalised the entire customer base. I have a pretty low regard for marketing staff and indeed for the intellect of people working within the corporate sector; most can't think straight but this takes the cake.
You launch a package that is designed to save perhaps a 100,000 customers switching from Dialog to Mobitel's Upahara, but inadvertently give a discount to 2.9m of your paying customers (I take Dialog's published subscriber numbers with a sack of salt, they say have 5m but the paying active base is probably closer to 3m I reckon).
The fun is only just beginning, because Upahara has also wrought havoc amongst the SLT base, although it may have brought some marginal benefit to Mobitel. Things are probably pretty bad there, which is why their results are late, the accountants will probably be working overtime to make the best of the bad news.
And as for the future, my personal bet on the Dialog share price is Rs.2, once the foreigners start to sell but there is no telling where a floor will emerge once that starts to happen. Keep a lookout for stockbrokers and their clients jumping out of top floor windows in the WTC.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Gods
I just realised something.
In the mind of man, there is a little space reserved for a god. I have gone into the subject of my beliefs, or lack thereof, elsewhere but something made me realise, that deep down, in this ape known as homo sapiens there lies this little space.
It need not necessarily be occupied by the gods of organised religion, there may be other worldly things or abstract beliefs that sit in that space. These need not be restricted to one particular thing, depending on the person several things may occupy that space. Its purpose seems to be to sustain the soul and perhaps to give purpose to life.
Now that I have over the years dusted out and largely banished the gods from my mind it was a shock to discover that something else had taken their place. Indeed it is the shock of discovering something that should not be there that brought about this epiphany: a space exists and if not filled with gods, there will be others things that have crept into the space.
In my case it was the awkward discovery that the space for gods now appears to be occupied by a woman. Looking more closely I found that there were more than one, in fact a handful of them seemed to be sitting on the alter, so to speak.
An what lead to that discovery? One of the Goddesses, for that is what they are, almost fell off her perch.
It has dawned on me that I seem to have idolised various women who I have befriened over the years. The ones I respect seem to have been elevated to a position of absolute devotion and to whom offering of various types are made periodically. All these women are known as good friends in the real world, but in the frail human mind they have become Goddesses.
Friendships going back a decade or sometimes two must not be treated lightly but to find them in quite such an elevated stage was rather discomforting.
Man is a social animal and as I have said elsewhere relationships are very important so perhaps this is not as unusual as I first thought.
Either way, search within, for one may be surprised by what drives and sustains one.
In the mind of man, there is a little space reserved for a god. I have gone into the subject of my beliefs, or lack thereof, elsewhere but something made me realise, that deep down, in this ape known as homo sapiens there lies this little space.
It need not necessarily be occupied by the gods of organised religion, there may be other worldly things or abstract beliefs that sit in that space. These need not be restricted to one particular thing, depending on the person several things may occupy that space. Its purpose seems to be to sustain the soul and perhaps to give purpose to life.
Now that I have over the years dusted out and largely banished the gods from my mind it was a shock to discover that something else had taken their place. Indeed it is the shock of discovering something that should not be there that brought about this epiphany: a space exists and if not filled with gods, there will be others things that have crept into the space.
In my case it was the awkward discovery that the space for gods now appears to be occupied by a woman. Looking more closely I found that there were more than one, in fact a handful of them seemed to be sitting on the alter, so to speak.
An what lead to that discovery? One of the Goddesses, for that is what they are, almost fell off her perch.
It has dawned on me that I seem to have idolised various women who I have befriened over the years. The ones I respect seem to have been elevated to a position of absolute devotion and to whom offering of various types are made periodically. All these women are known as good friends in the real world, but in the frail human mind they have become Goddesses.
Friendships going back a decade or sometimes two must not be treated lightly but to find them in quite such an elevated stage was rather discomforting.
Man is a social animal and as I have said elsewhere relationships are very important so perhaps this is not as unusual as I first thought.
Either way, search within, for one may be surprised by what drives and sustains one.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Liberation
The Liberation Tigers finally succeeded in living upto their name when they unwittingly liberated many thousands of Innocent taxpayers from the tyranny of the dreaded Department of Inland Revenue.
A loud explosion was reportedly heard and a fire had broken out in the building. Helpful bystanders and jubilant citizens have reportedly gathered to form a bucket chain from the nearby petrol shed to add as much fuel as possible to the flames.
The petrol shed was reportedly issuing the fuel at a discount and citizens from all walks of life, both sexes and many different races were seen piling into the melee in a spirit of cameraderie not seen since the London Blitz...
A loud explosion was reportedly heard and a fire had broken out in the building. Helpful bystanders and jubilant citizens have reportedly gathered to form a bucket chain from the nearby petrol shed to add as much fuel as possible to the flames.
The petrol shed was reportedly issuing the fuel at a discount and citizens from all walks of life, both sexes and many different races were seen piling into the melee in a spirit of cameraderie not seen since the London Blitz...
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
The essence of a relationship
There are three factors on which a lasting relationship may be built.
1. Respect
2. Trust
3. Communication
Respect is necessary because people rarely change. Over time they do change, as they age, but such change takes a very long time and is never predictable. Some are more amenable to change, others less so and in certain fundamental ways people never change.
What is therefore necessary is acceptance. We must be prepared to accept them for what they are and acceptance without respect is impossible except in the short-term. People have good and bad qualities, likable and annoying traits, in order to suffer the worst aspects of our fellow human beings we need to be sustained by their better qualities.
Respect is key, lose respect and the relationship is over.
Trust is necessary because every relationship involves exchange. Where there is no trust one can only have a transaction, where each party is looking to ensure that they get at least as much as they give. A series of transactions do not make a relationship. A relationship involves giving unconditionally in the expectation that that this will someday be repaid in kind. In all sustaining relationships it is.
This is trust at a fundamental level. The petty matters like women who check their boyfriends email and men who dig into their girlfriends mobile phones and such distressing behaviour involves trust, but at a more mundane level. It matters in that to any reasonable person a lack of respect for personal privacy will bring about feelings of intense irritation and will doom a relationship well before any serious stresses are placed on it.
Communication is necessary because relationships will invariably have its problems. When faced with a problem the people involved need to talk it over and resolve the matter if the relationship is to prosper.
These principles are true of any relationship, be it personal or business.
Man is a social animal. It is through cooperation that individual tribes and eventually mankind as a whole triumphed over much more powerful beings in the animal kingdom and these are the elements of cooperation.
It does not surprise me that many marriages end in divorce, so much so that I am told that wedding photographers in Sri Lanka ask for full payment in advance, fearing that the marriage may end before the photographs are delivered.
A good many people that I know seem to be incredibly naive about the whole thing. I have met women who seem to view marriage as an extension of playing 'house'. Marriage is much much else besides and I'm fond of quoting Jared Diamond on this (and he quotes from Tolstoy): “Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”
Diamond explains that by that sentence, Tolstoy meant that, in order to be happy, a marriage must succeed in many different respects: sexual attraction, agreement about money, child discipline, religion, in-laws, and other vital issues. Failure in any one of those essential respects can doom a marriage even if it has all the other ingredients needed for happiness.
It is also about the sharing of personal space as anyone who has been on an extended holiday with a friend can testify. Sharing room with someone who is more messy or does things differently can be incredibly trying: wet sheets on the bed, sand on the floor, toothpaste squeezed the wrong way, to sleep with a fan or without one, with a mosquito net or without; seemingly mundane, unimportant things that have ruined friendships and I'm sure a marriage or two. Too small to talk over and agree upon, too difficult to ignore.
This is where background comes into play. There is term, for it but it escapes me now, I thought it was endrogyny, the seeking of similar traits. Presumably people with similar backgrounds will share similar values, tastes and expectations. There is an automatic, unconscious trait that supposedly draws people to others like themselves and which is where an arranged marriage can be of some use.
I think the English got it right with the presentation ceremony though, whereby suitable boys and girls are allowed to mingle at a series of parties, with mothers and aunts furiously taking note of potentials to be invited to the next party. As one of the elderly ladies at one of these parties is said to have remarked, it doesn't matter if your daughter runs off with someone, as long as she runs off with the right kind of fellow.
1. Respect
2. Trust
3. Communication
Respect is necessary because people rarely change. Over time they do change, as they age, but such change takes a very long time and is never predictable. Some are more amenable to change, others less so and in certain fundamental ways people never change.
What is therefore necessary is acceptance. We must be prepared to accept them for what they are and acceptance without respect is impossible except in the short-term. People have good and bad qualities, likable and annoying traits, in order to suffer the worst aspects of our fellow human beings we need to be sustained by their better qualities.
Respect is key, lose respect and the relationship is over.
Trust is necessary because every relationship involves exchange. Where there is no trust one can only have a transaction, where each party is looking to ensure that they get at least as much as they give. A series of transactions do not make a relationship. A relationship involves giving unconditionally in the expectation that that this will someday be repaid in kind. In all sustaining relationships it is.
This is trust at a fundamental level. The petty matters like women who check their boyfriends email and men who dig into their girlfriends mobile phones and such distressing behaviour involves trust, but at a more mundane level. It matters in that to any reasonable person a lack of respect for personal privacy will bring about feelings of intense irritation and will doom a relationship well before any serious stresses are placed on it.
Communication is necessary because relationships will invariably have its problems. When faced with a problem the people involved need to talk it over and resolve the matter if the relationship is to prosper.
These principles are true of any relationship, be it personal or business.
Man is a social animal. It is through cooperation that individual tribes and eventually mankind as a whole triumphed over much more powerful beings in the animal kingdom and these are the elements of cooperation.
It does not surprise me that many marriages end in divorce, so much so that I am told that wedding photographers in Sri Lanka ask for full payment in advance, fearing that the marriage may end before the photographs are delivered.
A good many people that I know seem to be incredibly naive about the whole thing. I have met women who seem to view marriage as an extension of playing 'house'. Marriage is much much else besides and I'm fond of quoting Jared Diamond on this (and he quotes from Tolstoy): “Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”
Diamond explains that by that sentence, Tolstoy meant that, in order to be happy, a marriage must succeed in many different respects: sexual attraction, agreement about money, child discipline, religion, in-laws, and other vital issues. Failure in any one of those essential respects can doom a marriage even if it has all the other ingredients needed for happiness.
It is also about the sharing of personal space as anyone who has been on an extended holiday with a friend can testify. Sharing room with someone who is more messy or does things differently can be incredibly trying: wet sheets on the bed, sand on the floor, toothpaste squeezed the wrong way, to sleep with a fan or without one, with a mosquito net or without; seemingly mundane, unimportant things that have ruined friendships and I'm sure a marriage or two. Too small to talk over and agree upon, too difficult to ignore.
This is where background comes into play. There is term, for it but it escapes me now, I thought it was endrogyny, the seeking of similar traits. Presumably people with similar backgrounds will share similar values, tastes and expectations. There is an automatic, unconscious trait that supposedly draws people to others like themselves and which is where an arranged marriage can be of some use.
I think the English got it right with the presentation ceremony though, whereby suitable boys and girls are allowed to mingle at a series of parties, with mothers and aunts furiously taking note of potentials to be invited to the next party. As one of the elderly ladies at one of these parties is said to have remarked, it doesn't matter if your daughter runs off with someone, as long as she runs off with the right kind of fellow.
Kalpitiya
Trying something that I have not done before, adding a few pictures. These were taken off my camera phone, turned out better than I expected. They are no great works of art, but by my clumsy standards, fairly good pictures.
Spend the last weekend there, the fifth holiday in as many weeks. I really need a break now:)
Monday, February 16, 2009
Migration
My cousin will be migrating to Australia. Not something very new, a lot of people are migrating so one more joining the bandwagon is hardly something to be remarked upon.
From the point of view of the family however it is more significant, there will be almost no one from the younger generation left. My family; Anglicised, Christianised and thoroughly debased in its outlook belongs to a section of the community that is fast disappearing.
The usual method by which such families disappear is by drinking. I've lost a fair share of my Uncle's to alcohol, on both sides of my family. While some of these uncles were married, many (not surprisingly) were not, thus cleaning up the future gene pool. Invariably the drunkards were also gamblers, so what they did not lose drinking they gambled away, thus leaving the families broke as well as neutered.
Now it seems that the few remaining sober members of the family are migrating. The trend started in the 1960's and has continued ever since. I have no immediate family left on my fathers side, and of the 15 first cousins on my mothers side I will be left with just one, after the latest one leaves. Well, perhaps not quite, one other is only 'temporarily' away, her husband has a job in India, but I have a feeling that this will eventually translate to another permanent migrant.
Once out, they never come back. Indeed the one cousin I have left is the only one who ever returned and one is never sure when he will decide to move on.
Perhaps this is how it was meant to be. The colonials left shortly after independence and now their agents, the Brown Sahibs (my maternal grandfather fancied himself as an English country gentleman, with his passion for shooting and fishing and his fascination with the Empire) have all but left, abandoning the land to the native populace.
From the point of view of the family however it is more significant, there will be almost no one from the younger generation left. My family; Anglicised, Christianised and thoroughly debased in its outlook belongs to a section of the community that is fast disappearing.
The usual method by which such families disappear is by drinking. I've lost a fair share of my Uncle's to alcohol, on both sides of my family. While some of these uncles were married, many (not surprisingly) were not, thus cleaning up the future gene pool. Invariably the drunkards were also gamblers, so what they did not lose drinking they gambled away, thus leaving the families broke as well as neutered.
Now it seems that the few remaining sober members of the family are migrating. The trend started in the 1960's and has continued ever since. I have no immediate family left on my fathers side, and of the 15 first cousins on my mothers side I will be left with just one, after the latest one leaves. Well, perhaps not quite, one other is only 'temporarily' away, her husband has a job in India, but I have a feeling that this will eventually translate to another permanent migrant.
Once out, they never come back. Indeed the one cousin I have left is the only one who ever returned and one is never sure when he will decide to move on.
Perhaps this is how it was meant to be. The colonials left shortly after independence and now their agents, the Brown Sahibs (my maternal grandfather fancied himself as an English country gentleman, with his passion for shooting and fishing and his fascination with the Empire) have all but left, abandoning the land to the native populace.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Anger
Was thinking about this and then I saw DC's post.
Was a little upset earlier this week with someone. Hurt, by what I thought as lack of trust. That lead to some resentment. After all the trouble I took, they still can't trust. Felt used.
Resolved to keep away for a while.
Resentment, hurt, anger, irritation, feeling that seem to merge one into the other, were running around my system. Was trying to pin the exact emotions down but it was difficult.
Turned to music, even blogged about music; it helped, but did not draw all the sting.
Never was someone who could remain angry for long, so emotions began to die down a bit after a day. I then decided, to look at the bigger picture. This was only a small matter in the much larger universe. In anycase how deep was this relationship? Why not just sit back, enjoy the company and figure out the issues later?
After all it may have been just a misunderstanding, they did'nt really mean anything
Once one gets on this mode of rationalising and explaining away the problem, the emotions disappear pretty fast. After a while one wonders why anger even arose in the first place.
I have found that if one thinks positively, does not dwell on the issue and above all do not try to investigate further to verify facts, things will ease.
If one tries to deal with the problem by thinking of the issue, to try to understand why, to investigate, to dig deeper the anger will grow and eventually consume oneself.
Anger brings distress, unhappiness. Let it go.
There is no point in seeking the truth, better to forget the problem, rationalise it away.
Sticking my head in the sand? Maybe. Not facing the truth? Possibly? Taken for a sucker ? Maybe.
But who cares? Happiness is more important than the truth and anger is the enemy of happiness. If nothing else this attitude probably makes me easier to get on with and maybe, just maybe, it will reduce my chances of spending the after life in hell....
Was a little upset earlier this week with someone. Hurt, by what I thought as lack of trust. That lead to some resentment. After all the trouble I took, they still can't trust. Felt used.
Resolved to keep away for a while.
Resentment, hurt, anger, irritation, feeling that seem to merge one into the other, were running around my system. Was trying to pin the exact emotions down but it was difficult.
Turned to music, even blogged about music; it helped, but did not draw all the sting.
Never was someone who could remain angry for long, so emotions began to die down a bit after a day. I then decided, to look at the bigger picture. This was only a small matter in the much larger universe. In anycase how deep was this relationship? Why not just sit back, enjoy the company and figure out the issues later?
After all it may have been just a misunderstanding, they did'nt really mean anything
Once one gets on this mode of rationalising and explaining away the problem, the emotions disappear pretty fast. After a while one wonders why anger even arose in the first place.
I have found that if one thinks positively, does not dwell on the issue and above all do not try to investigate further to verify facts, things will ease.
If one tries to deal with the problem by thinking of the issue, to try to understand why, to investigate, to dig deeper the anger will grow and eventually consume oneself.
Anger brings distress, unhappiness. Let it go.
There is no point in seeking the truth, better to forget the problem, rationalise it away.
Sticking my head in the sand? Maybe. Not facing the truth? Possibly? Taken for a sucker ? Maybe.
But who cares? Happiness is more important than the truth and anger is the enemy of happiness. If nothing else this attitude probably makes me easier to get on with and maybe, just maybe, it will reduce my chances of spending the after life in hell....
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
This post is about a strange addiction to classical or serious music. I was hooked on it through my uncle, who used to keep records playing in his house all the time. We used to hate it when we were children, but repeated, passive listening (we could not help but hear it when passing) over many years lead to a gradual understanding.
My uncle himself had stumbled upon it in a rather strange way, and that too as an adult. He visited a friend one day and heard something playing on the gramophone and liked it. He would then ask for that particular record to be played whenever he visited.
Once of the pieces that held him spellbound was the Leclair Sonata No. 3, played by David Oistrakh. I am listening to that same piece (played by Szerying) and I realise what must have captured my Uncle's imagination so long ago.
It has been quite a while since I listened to classical music, chiefly because I have limited access to it now and perhaps my new found wonder in what I previously thought was a fairly nice piece may have something to do with a period of absence.
I'm also listening, with growing amazement at the beauty of Szerying's tone. Never quite appreciated the skill of a violinist before, but this has been an eye opener.
Kreisler's Tempo di Menuetto (listen from 3.15 for this piece), which he also plays on the album that I copied which is also nice.
In fact I'm listening to music almost with new ears, yes indeed absence does make the heart grow fonder.
My uncle himself had stumbled upon it in a rather strange way, and that too as an adult. He visited a friend one day and heard something playing on the gramophone and liked it. He would then ask for that particular record to be played whenever he visited.
Once of the pieces that held him spellbound was the Leclair Sonata No. 3, played by David Oistrakh. I am listening to that same piece (played by Szerying) and I realise what must have captured my Uncle's imagination so long ago.
It has been quite a while since I listened to classical music, chiefly because I have limited access to it now and perhaps my new found wonder in what I previously thought was a fairly nice piece may have something to do with a period of absence.
I'm also listening, with growing amazement at the beauty of Szerying's tone. Never quite appreciated the skill of a violinist before, but this has been an eye opener.
Kreisler's Tempo di Menuetto (listen from 3.15 for this piece), which he also plays on the album that I copied which is also nice.
In fact I'm listening to music almost with new ears, yes indeed absence does make the heart grow fonder.
Friday, February 06, 2009
Wagnerian or Operatic Rock
This was the term used by a group of musicians who attempted bring in elements of opera, particularly Wagnerian opera into Rock music. They seemed to have been active in the 1980's but it apparently never had much commercial success. Rather a pity because one of the two songs released by Fire Inc. is a classic. Never heard of them? well listen to this.
The recording does not do it justice but that is the best available. Their other song is worth listening to as well.
Of course there were other musicians like Meatloaf and Queen who were influenced by opera, whether they fall into this school I do not know.
These are some of my favourites:
I'd do anything for love
Rock´N´Roll Dreams Come Through
ps. There is another oldie that is rather good, its not operatic rock but the song is good. Albert Hammond's The Free Electric Band
The recording does not do it justice but that is the best available. Their other song is worth listening to as well.
Of course there were other musicians like Meatloaf and Queen who were influenced by opera, whether they fall into this school I do not know.
These are some of my favourites:
I'd do anything for love
Rock´N´Roll Dreams Come Through
ps. There is another oldie that is rather good, its not operatic rock but the song is good. Albert Hammond's The Free Electric Band
Thursday, February 05, 2009
The demise of cricket, a game played by gentlemen
I have been offered free tickets for a cricket match by a couple of people and I refused, much to their surprise.
I do not follow cricket. In a country where everyone else does, that makes me bit of an oddity. There was a time when I did, sometimes quite passionately, but not anymore. There is something being played on the cricketing field but the game is dead.
Cricket is the quintessential English game. For better or worse it embodied the English class system with its emphasis on the amateur and good gamesmanship. There was a strict code of honour that governed conduct on the field and above all it was a game. Something to played with spirit but with no real emphasis on winning.
When professional players entered the game, the class system was enforced through separate entrances and, if I am not mistaken separate dressing rooms. To this day there are doors marked "Gentlemen" and "Players" at many an ancient cricketing arena.
The scorecard distinguished between the two by the way their names appeared. Amateurs (gentlemen) had their initials precede their surnames whereas with professionals their initials followed the surname. Thus, M.C.Cowdrey and P.B.H.May but Trueman F.S. and Statham J.B. This practice was discontinued in 1962 but not much else changed.
The English took their games with them and cricket took root in the colonies but retained the basic character of the English game. In Ceylon, as presumably everywhere else, school coaches started by emphasizing manners, before anything else was taught. The golden rules were, never show dissent, always obey the umpire, always walk, never claim a dead catch. Contrast that with what happens on the field now.
The game started to die with the introduction of money and the single biggest villain was Kerry Packer. Not unexpectedly he was brash outsider, an Australian businessmen.
He brought money into the game and with it, coloured clothing,day/night matches and much else. When he took his proposals to the MCC (Marylebone Cricket Club), the body which controlled cricket at the time, the MCC were aghast and he was rightly shown the door. Packer then had the cheek to go and form his own World Series Cricket, signing on the top players of the era; the Daily Mail headline of May 9, 1977 read: "The World's Top Cricketers Turn Pirate"
World Series Cricket lasted only until 1979 but the damage was done and many of the Packer innovations were included in the game. The arrival of first the neutral umpire and then the third umpire were more steps down the slippery slope.
The last nail in the coffin was the launch of the 20/20 IPL league in India earlier this year. Complete with players auctions and dancing girls the playing arena now resembles a circus than the cricket field of old.
What is taking place on the field is not the gentleman's game but professional sport, which is in essence a part of the entertainment industry. Fittingly this takes place in India, home of Bollywood and its extension, the IPL league.
The blurring of the line between field and screen went a step further when several Sri Lankan cricketers starred in a Bollywood film.
Cricket had a pretty good innings, but I think it has now died out almost everywhere. Well, maybe not everywhere. Followers of the old game can still catch glimpses of it at the Cricket Club Cafe where old matches are sometimes aired. One can see scrawny, weedy looking Indians, gangly West Indians and slightly pot-belied Englishmen toiling away under the sun, the shaking of hands when a wicket is taken and a pat on the back when a batsman reaches a century. It all seems so quaint and old fashioned now.
I do not follow cricket. In a country where everyone else does, that makes me bit of an oddity. There was a time when I did, sometimes quite passionately, but not anymore. There is something being played on the cricketing field but the game is dead.
Cricket is the quintessential English game. For better or worse it embodied the English class system with its emphasis on the amateur and good gamesmanship. There was a strict code of honour that governed conduct on the field and above all it was a game. Something to played with spirit but with no real emphasis on winning.
When professional players entered the game, the class system was enforced through separate entrances and, if I am not mistaken separate dressing rooms. To this day there are doors marked "Gentlemen" and "Players" at many an ancient cricketing arena.
The scorecard distinguished between the two by the way their names appeared. Amateurs (gentlemen) had their initials precede their surnames whereas with professionals their initials followed the surname. Thus, M.C.Cowdrey and P.B.H.May but Trueman F.S. and Statham J.B. This practice was discontinued in 1962 but not much else changed.
The English took their games with them and cricket took root in the colonies but retained the basic character of the English game. In Ceylon, as presumably everywhere else, school coaches started by emphasizing manners, before anything else was taught. The golden rules were, never show dissent, always obey the umpire, always walk, never claim a dead catch. Contrast that with what happens on the field now.
The game started to die with the introduction of money and the single biggest villain was Kerry Packer. Not unexpectedly he was brash outsider, an Australian businessmen.
He brought money into the game and with it, coloured clothing,day/night matches and much else. When he took his proposals to the MCC (Marylebone Cricket Club), the body which controlled cricket at the time, the MCC were aghast and he was rightly shown the door. Packer then had the cheek to go and form his own World Series Cricket, signing on the top players of the era; the Daily Mail headline of May 9, 1977 read: "The World's Top Cricketers Turn Pirate"
World Series Cricket lasted only until 1979 but the damage was done and many of the Packer innovations were included in the game. The arrival of first the neutral umpire and then the third umpire were more steps down the slippery slope.
The last nail in the coffin was the launch of the 20/20 IPL league in India earlier this year. Complete with players auctions and dancing girls the playing arena now resembles a circus than the cricket field of old.
What is taking place on the field is not the gentleman's game but professional sport, which is in essence a part of the entertainment industry. Fittingly this takes place in India, home of Bollywood and its extension, the IPL league.
The blurring of the line between field and screen went a step further when several Sri Lankan cricketers starred in a Bollywood film.
Cricket had a pretty good innings, but I think it has now died out almost everywhere. Well, maybe not everywhere. Followers of the old game can still catch glimpses of it at the Cricket Club Cafe where old matches are sometimes aired. One can see scrawny, weedy looking Indians, gangly West Indians and slightly pot-belied Englishmen toiling away under the sun, the shaking of hands when a wicket is taken and a pat on the back when a batsman reaches a century. It all seems so quaint and old fashioned now.
Wisdom of a Trishaw driver
Had to ride in to work in a trishaw since my Dream Machine has been sent in for a bit of a makeover.
As we turned out of our lane the driver we ran into a long line of traffic and the driver exclaimed (in English) "Oh My God". Now I have heard a lot of things from trishaw drivers but never that particular phrase, which was amusing because its seemed so incongruous.
Later on in the drive, whilst dodging more jams he remarked (in Sinhala) on catching sight of the latest election posters: "Yuddhaya hondata Vikunanawa Ne", meaning the war is being well sold. Again not something that I expected to hear.
As we turned out of our lane the driver we ran into a long line of traffic and the driver exclaimed (in English) "Oh My God". Now I have heard a lot of things from trishaw drivers but never that particular phrase, which was amusing because its seemed so incongruous.
Later on in the drive, whilst dodging more jams he remarked (in Sinhala) on catching sight of the latest election posters: "Yuddhaya hondata Vikunanawa Ne", meaning the war is being well sold. Again not something that I expected to hear.
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
What if Tamils were given an opportunity?
An opportunity to change their name. Quietly and painlessly to another name of their choice, be it a burgher name, a Muslim name or a Sinhalese name.
Imagine that this would be done with seamless efficiency and all documents, birth, marriage, licenses, ID cards and passports would be quickly issued in the new name. Imagine also that this would enable the Tamils to reclassify themselves as Sinhalese, Burgher or any other race of their choice.
How many would take this up?
I'm just curious to know and this is a serious question, please leave a comment with your views, thanks.
Imagine that this would be done with seamless efficiency and all documents, birth, marriage, licenses, ID cards and passports would be quickly issued in the new name. Imagine also that this would enable the Tamils to reclassify themselves as Sinhalese, Burgher or any other race of their choice.
How many would take this up?
I'm just curious to know and this is a serious question, please leave a comment with your views, thanks.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Problems in Russia
The Russian solution to the Chechen problem seems to have left a long shadow over the country. Read this for a perspective on the post war developments.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
On courtesy
After my tongue-in-cheek suggestion for a CFA amongst the Kottu bloggers, I wondered if perhaps I should draft an agreement and put it up for signature. That however lead me to ponder on the root of the problem, courtesy.
Pissu Perera has blogged on the goodwill that common courtesy can generate, while some other, less fortunate bloggers have been a bit pit out by the lack of it.
According tho this "the essence of good manners is consideration for other people, a concern for the comfort and convenience of others. This, though, implies a diminution of the importance of self. This is the principal reason good manners are important; not only do we all benefit from other people's good manners, our lives are enhanced by the necessary reduction in self-importance that our consideration for other people inevitably entails. To observe bad manners in someone is, unfailingly, to see the very essence of them. The same is true of good manners."
So perhaps instead of formal CFA or even a code of ethics what is needed is a return to old fashioned courtesy. We may disagree with people, that is what debate and democracy are about, but let us not be disagreeable when going about it.
Pissu Perera has blogged on the goodwill that common courtesy can generate, while some other, less fortunate bloggers have been a bit pit out by the lack of it.
According tho this "the essence of good manners is consideration for other people, a concern for the comfort and convenience of others. This, though, implies a diminution of the importance of self. This is the principal reason good manners are important; not only do we all benefit from other people's good manners, our lives are enhanced by the necessary reduction in self-importance that our consideration for other people inevitably entails. To observe bad manners in someone is, unfailingly, to see the very essence of them. The same is true of good manners."
So perhaps instead of formal CFA or even a code of ethics what is needed is a return to old fashioned courtesy. We may disagree with people, that is what debate and democracy are about, but let us not be disagreeable when going about it.
Polarisation II
I have blogged about this before, but I think another post is due, only because the problem seems to be growing.
Nothing illustrates this better than the local Blogosphere. Look at some of the older posts from 2005. Is it even possible to imagine Indi and Sittingnut having an intelligent conversation?
Well, in 2005 it seemed possible. Just look at these posts and the comments below:
Why I support Ranil
United Lanka, United Party
LTTE Disenfranchises Tamils
I miss the old days, I really do.
Nothing illustrates this better than the local Blogosphere. Look at some of the older posts from 2005. Is it even possible to imagine Indi and Sittingnut having an intelligent conversation?
Well, in 2005 it seemed possible. Just look at these posts and the comments below:
Why I support Ranil
United Lanka, United Party
LTTE Disenfranchises Tamils
I miss the old days, I really do.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Obama's inauguration
Some people seem to have been quite excited by this and even spent some time watching it on television. The appeal was a bit of a mystery to me, until my mother spoke to me about it this morning.
It was very impressive she said. Just like a coronation.
Was that what it really was, or at least the closest thing possible in a republic?
Either way I thought it rather funny.
It was very impressive she said. Just like a coronation.
Was that what it really was, or at least the closest thing possible in a republic?
Either way I thought it rather funny.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Dead men writing editorials
I have been getting into a bit of an argument with a couple of friends. They seem to think that the editorial in the Sunday Leader was brilliant and prophetic.
I, ever the skeptic, beg to differ.
To me, the editorial seems to be written well after the event, which means Lasantha Wickramatunga could not possibly have written it.
The passages that look inconsistent are:
"For this I - and my family - have now paid the price that I have long known I will one day have to pay. I am - and have always been - ready for that. I have done nothing to prevent this outcome: no security, no precautions. I want my murderer to know that I am not a coward like he is, hiding behind human shields while condemning thousands of innocents to death. What am I among so many? It has long been written that my life would be taken, and by whom. All that remains to be written is when."
I am of course, open to correction - will someone in the know clarify the position? If indeed he wrote it, it would be truly prophetic and a fitting tribute to the man, otherwise it looks like a piece creative writing, a piece of theatre, something that defined that newspaper.
I, ever the skeptic, beg to differ.
To me, the editorial seems to be written well after the event, which means Lasantha Wickramatunga could not possibly have written it.
The passages that look inconsistent are:
"For this I - and my family - have now paid the price that I have long known I will one day have to pay. I am - and have always been - ready for that. I have done nothing to prevent this outcome: no security, no precautions. I want my murderer to know that I am not a coward like he is, hiding behind human shields while condemning thousands of innocents to death. What am I among so many? It has long been written that my life would be taken, and by whom. All that remains to be written is when."
I am of course, open to correction - will someone in the know clarify the position? If indeed he wrote it, it would be truly prophetic and a fitting tribute to the man, otherwise it looks like a piece creative writing, a piece of theatre, something that defined that newspaper.
Sunday, January 04, 2009
Odds and ends
I have been gathering my scattered thoughts and catching up with a little bit of reading over the holidays.
I had begun to regard global warming as a problem - but one that will make its effects felt in the very long term, maybe 30 to 50 years at least. What I did not realise was the extent of the impact of global warming on the sea. This article made me sit up and take notice.
Did you know that a meltwater lake on the Greenland ice sheet covering six square kilometres drained away in 24 hours in 2006? That sound pretty dangerous to me.
The most serious impact, the higher levels of carbon dioxide affect the salinity of the seas surface making life difficult, if not impossible, for marine organisms with calcium-carbonate shells or skeletons. This means that larger fish, which feed on these smaller organisms may in turn cease to exist in a fairly short period, which means no seafood for you and me.
There is a lot more, so read and heed.
Moving onto something else, got a new phone which has a music player installed. Have copied some playlists onto it so hopefully will have something to soothe my nerves in the office. I have not listened to much music over the last three years or so, chiefly because I had no access to it, except on the computer and that too at home because the office ones don't have speakers.
This brings me to the lesser known works of popular composers, Bruch for instance. He has written a rather nice piano trio (op.5) which is (as it so happens) coupled with equally rare and quite delightful trio music by Widor (he of the Organ Symphonies) and Hiller. This is the recording that I pinched, recommended to anyone looking for unfamiliar music in that genre.
Continuing on the subject of Bruch's other works (he is known mainly for the G Minor violin concerto and the Scotch Fantasy), the second and third violin concerti are well worth a hearing, I've heard this recording, which is good.
The real gem in Bruch's oeuvre is the double piano concerto. It is even more immediately attractive than the first violin concerto but is unfortunately a real rarity. It had a strange history, the original score did not come to light until quite recently, which is one reason why it remains largely unknown.
There is a recording by the Labèque sisters, which is not supposed to be very good (I never cared much for their playing anyway) and there are some other unknowns also listed on Amazon. The world premier recording by Martin Berkofsky & David Hagen with the Berlin Symphony Orchestra conducted by Lutz Herbig is the one I've heard and it is quite outstanding (just found it on Amazon look here). It was on recorded in the 1980's on the Turnabout label (the former Vox Turnabout) which I think is now defunct. It was remastered on CD in the 1990's, in a terrible transfer that robbed the sound of its bloom, the CD version sounds thin and narrow, like an old mono recording. If you can find the original recording somewhere, give it a go, otherwise try one of the others. There was a lousy recording on Youtube so leave that well alone.
There is also a fairly nice concerto for Clarinet and Viola by Bruch as well and some interesting prices for basset Horn and Clarinet by Mendelssohn. Have a look here.
As I said before, I have also been trying to catch up on some reading and about 300 ages into the book, Nehru has at last started to say something of interest in his autobiography. It is not that the man cannot write, he has an elegant turn of phrase, but it is that he very little to say. For the most part of the first 300 pages he comes across as idealistic and out of touch. This is a lot better than Gandhi, who looks to me like an out and out nutcase - sleeping naked with teenage girls must count for rather odd behaviour especially by a supposed living saint.
The only reason I got the book (I did not buy it but I did hint to someone that I was interested in it and I received it as a present) was because Lee Kuan Yew mentioned in his autobiography that Nehru was the man they looked to for ideas and intellectual leadership. This was not apparent in the first half of the book and I would have been very disappointed had I actually paid money for it, but it seems to have picked up a bit now. Need to look around for some of his later writing. I was an ardent fan of Lee Kuan Yew, ever since I read his well written Story of Singapore. I noticed when glancing through some of the chapters in volume 2 (From the Third World to the First) that my views on the press differ from his more markedly now. Perhaps it is the experience of living under tight censorship that makes me appreciate the need for a freer press but I think I need to revisit that book again.
In the meantime just started the Undercover Economist by Tim Harford which (halfway through the first chapter) looks very exciting. This shall be my bedtime reading for a while, shall return to the re-reading of Sophie's World when I finish (that, to my small mind is a rather profound book), need to take it in little bits to digest it properly.
Anyway, having fun playing around with odd ideas, mental masturbation if you like, good night out there, whatever you are.
I had begun to regard global warming as a problem - but one that will make its effects felt in the very long term, maybe 30 to 50 years at least. What I did not realise was the extent of the impact of global warming on the sea. This article made me sit up and take notice.
Did you know that a meltwater lake on the Greenland ice sheet covering six square kilometres drained away in 24 hours in 2006? That sound pretty dangerous to me.
The most serious impact, the higher levels of carbon dioxide affect the salinity of the seas surface making life difficult, if not impossible, for marine organisms with calcium-carbonate shells or skeletons. This means that larger fish, which feed on these smaller organisms may in turn cease to exist in a fairly short period, which means no seafood for you and me.
There is a lot more, so read and heed.
Moving onto something else, got a new phone which has a music player installed. Have copied some playlists onto it so hopefully will have something to soothe my nerves in the office. I have not listened to much music over the last three years or so, chiefly because I had no access to it, except on the computer and that too at home because the office ones don't have speakers.
This brings me to the lesser known works of popular composers, Bruch for instance. He has written a rather nice piano trio (op.5) which is (as it so happens) coupled with equally rare and quite delightful trio music by Widor (he of the Organ Symphonies) and Hiller. This is the recording that I pinched, recommended to anyone looking for unfamiliar music in that genre.
Continuing on the subject of Bruch's other works (he is known mainly for the G Minor violin concerto and the Scotch Fantasy), the second and third violin concerti are well worth a hearing, I've heard this recording, which is good.
The real gem in Bruch's oeuvre is the double piano concerto. It is even more immediately attractive than the first violin concerto but is unfortunately a real rarity. It had a strange history, the original score did not come to light until quite recently, which is one reason why it remains largely unknown.
There is a recording by the Labèque sisters, which is not supposed to be very good (I never cared much for their playing anyway) and there are some other unknowns also listed on Amazon. The world premier recording by Martin Berkofsky & David Hagen with the Berlin Symphony Orchestra conducted by Lutz Herbig is the one I've heard and it is quite outstanding (just found it on Amazon look here). It was on recorded in the 1980's on the Turnabout label (the former Vox Turnabout) which I think is now defunct. It was remastered on CD in the 1990's, in a terrible transfer that robbed the sound of its bloom, the CD version sounds thin and narrow, like an old mono recording. If you can find the original recording somewhere, give it a go, otherwise try one of the others. There was a lousy recording on Youtube so leave that well alone.
There is also a fairly nice concerto for Clarinet and Viola by Bruch as well and some interesting prices for basset Horn and Clarinet by Mendelssohn. Have a look here.
As I said before, I have also been trying to catch up on some reading and about 300 ages into the book, Nehru has at last started to say something of interest in his autobiography. It is not that the man cannot write, he has an elegant turn of phrase, but it is that he very little to say. For the most part of the first 300 pages he comes across as idealistic and out of touch. This is a lot better than Gandhi, who looks to me like an out and out nutcase - sleeping naked with teenage girls must count for rather odd behaviour especially by a supposed living saint.
The only reason I got the book (I did not buy it but I did hint to someone that I was interested in it and I received it as a present) was because Lee Kuan Yew mentioned in his autobiography that Nehru was the man they looked to for ideas and intellectual leadership. This was not apparent in the first half of the book and I would have been very disappointed had I actually paid money for it, but it seems to have picked up a bit now. Need to look around for some of his later writing. I was an ardent fan of Lee Kuan Yew, ever since I read his well written Story of Singapore. I noticed when glancing through some of the chapters in volume 2 (From the Third World to the First) that my views on the press differ from his more markedly now. Perhaps it is the experience of living under tight censorship that makes me appreciate the need for a freer press but I think I need to revisit that book again.
In the meantime just started the Undercover Economist by Tim Harford which (halfway through the first chapter) looks very exciting. This shall be my bedtime reading for a while, shall return to the re-reading of Sophie's World when I finish (that, to my small mind is a rather profound book), need to take it in little bits to digest it properly.
Anyway, having fun playing around with odd ideas, mental masturbation if you like, good night out there, whatever you are.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
'Stimulative' economics
Screaming headlines in both the Daily News and The Island proclaim a number of price cuts in fuel and other items. The Daily News describes this as a "stimulative economic package to the consumers to ensure best performance in the commercial, agriculture, industrial and service sectors."
When dealing with a downturn, one would expect the Government to admit to that fact when announcing a package but the announcement only talks of "best performance" and "new year bonanza". Perhaps talk of a downturn would be a bit embarrassing since the statistics point in the opposite direction.
Most of the relief measures involved reduced prices of fuel plus a soft loan to tea factories. Any relief will be welcome by beleaguered consumers and industrialists but the unanswered question is the means by which this will be funded.
A Government that runs a budget surplus and/or has low levels of debt will have no trouble financing a stimulus but thanks to the profligacy of this regime there is no room to fund anything. Some small cuts have been announced in the expenditure of ministers but whether this will suffice is a question.
In addition to this problem the country is facing a potential banking crisis and if a bailout of the financial sector becomes necessary there is going to be an additional burden on the public purse.
A slowing economy means lower tax collection as sales and profits slump. There will also be fewer imports and therefore less collection in the form of customs duties and associated levies.
Historically, budgets have overestimated revenues and underestimated expenditure; the last budget saw a big increase in expenditure, so going by past form we should be heading for a mammoth deficit. Expect the printing presses to roll.
When dealing with a downturn, one would expect the Government to admit to that fact when announcing a package but the announcement only talks of "best performance" and "new year bonanza". Perhaps talk of a downturn would be a bit embarrassing since the statistics point in the opposite direction.
Most of the relief measures involved reduced prices of fuel plus a soft loan to tea factories. Any relief will be welcome by beleaguered consumers and industrialists but the unanswered question is the means by which this will be funded.
A Government that runs a budget surplus and/or has low levels of debt will have no trouble financing a stimulus but thanks to the profligacy of this regime there is no room to fund anything. Some small cuts have been announced in the expenditure of ministers but whether this will suffice is a question.
In addition to this problem the country is facing a potential banking crisis and if a bailout of the financial sector becomes necessary there is going to be an additional burden on the public purse.
A slowing economy means lower tax collection as sales and profits slump. There will also be fewer imports and therefore less collection in the form of customs duties and associated levies.
Historically, budgets have overestimated revenues and underestimated expenditure; the last budget saw a big increase in expenditure, so going by past form we should be heading for a mammoth deficit. Expect the printing presses to roll.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
As the Arabs see the Jews
Eloquent advocates of the Palestinian point of view are few and far between. King Abdullah of Jordan wrote a fine essay on this topic that I think deserves wider circulation. The article originally appeared in the United States six months before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
"As the Arabs see the Jews"
His Majesty King Abdullah,
The American Magazine
November, 1947
I am especially delighted to address an American audience, for the tragic problem of Palestine will never be solved without American understanding, American sympathy, American support.
So many billions of words have been written about Palestine—perhaps more than on any other subject in history—that I hesitate to add to them. Yet I am compelled to do so, for I am reluctantly convinced that the world in general, and America in particular, knows almost nothing of the true case for the Arabs.
We Arabs follow, perhaps far more than you think, the press of America. We are frankly disturbed to find that for every word printed on the Arab side, a thousand are printed on the Zionist side.
There are many reasons for this. You have many millions of Jewish citizens interested in this question. They are highly vocal and wise in the ways of publicity. There are few Arab citizens in America, and we are as yet unskilled in the technique of modern propaganda.
The results have been alarming for us. In your press we see a horrible caricature and are told it is our true portrait. In all justice, we cannot let this pass by default.
Our case is quite simple: For nearly 2,000 years Palestine has been almost 100 per cent Arab. It is still preponderantly Arab today, in spite of enormous Jewish immigration. But if this immigration continues we shall soon be outnumbered—a minority in our home.
Palestine is a small and very poor country, about the size of your state of Vermont. Its Arab population is only about 1,200,000. Already we have had forced on us, against our will, some 600,000 Zionist Jews. We are threatened with many hundreds of thousands more.
Our position is so simple and natural that we are amazed it should even be questioned. It is exactly the same position you in America take in regard to the unhappy European Jews. You are sorry for them, but you do not want them in your country.
We do not want them in ours, either. Not because they are Jews, but because they are foreigners. We would not want hundreds of thousands of foreigners in our country, be they Englishmen or Norwegians or Brazilians or whatever.
Think for a moment: In the last 25 years we have had one third of our entire population forced upon us. In America that would be the equivalent of 45,000,000 complete strangers admitted to your country, over your violent protest, since 1921. How would you have reacted to that?
Because of our perfectly natural dislike of being overwhelmed in our own homeland, we are called blind nationalists and heartless anti-Semites. This charge would be ludicrous were it not so dangerous.
No people on earth have been less "anti-Semitic" than the Arabs. The persecution of the Jews has been confined almost entirely to the Christian nations of the West. Jews, themselves, will admit that never since the Great Dispersion did Jews develop so freely and reach such importance as in Spain when it was an Arab possession. With very minor exceptions, Jews have lived for many centuries in the Middle East, in complete peace and friendliness with their Arab neighbours.
Damascus, Baghdad, Beirut and other Arab centres have always contained large and prosperous Jewish colonies. Until the Zionist invasion of Palestine began, these Jews received the most generous treatment—far, far better than in Christian Europe. Now, unhappily, for the first time in history, these Jews are beginning to feel the effects of Arab resistance to the Zionist assault. Most of them are as anxious as Arabs to stop it. Most of these Jews who have found happy homes among us resent, as we do, the coming of these strangers.
I was puzzled for a long time about the odd belief which apparently persists in America that Palestine has somehow "always been a Jewish land." Recently an American I talked to cleared up this mystery. He pointed out that the only things most Americans know about Palestine are what they read in the Bible. It was a Jewish land in those days, they reason, and they assume it has always remained so.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is absurd to reach so far back into the mists of history to argue about who should have Palestine today, and I apologise for it. Yet the Jews do this, and I must reply to their "historic claim." I wonder if the world has ever seen a stranger sight than a group of people seriously pretending to claim a land because their ancestors lived there some 2,000 years ago!
If you suggest that I am biased, I invite you to read any sound history of the period and verify the facts.
Such fragmentary records as we have indicate that the Jews were wandering nomads from Iraq who moved to southern Turkey, came south to Palestine, stayed there a short time, and then passed to Egypt, where they remained about 400 years. About 1300 BC (according to your calendar) they left Egypt and gradually conquered most—but not all—of the inhabitants of Palestine.
It is significant that the Philistines—not the Jews—gave their name to the country: "Palestine" is merely the Greek form of "Philistia."
Only once, during the empire of David and Solomon, did the Jews ever control nearly—but not all—the land which is today Palestine. This empire lasted only 70 years, ending in 926 BC. Only 250 years later the Kingdom of Judah had shrunk to a small province around Jerusalem, barely a quarter of modern Palestine.
In 63 BC the Jews were conquered by Roman Pompey, and never again had even the vestige of independence. The Roman Emperor Hadrian finally wiped them out about 135 AD. He utterly destroyed Jerusalem, rebuilt under another name, and for hundreds of years no Jew was permitted to enter it. A handful of Jews remained in Palestine but the vast majority were killed or scattered to other countries, in the Diaspora, or the Great Dispersion. From that time Palestine ceased to be a Jewish country, in any conceivable sense.
This was 1,815 years ago, and yet the Jews solemnly pretend they still own Palestine! If such fantasy were allowed, how the map of the world would dance about!
Italians might claim England, which the Romans held so long. England might claim France, "homeland" of the conquering Normans. And the French Normans might claim Norway, where their ancestors originated. And incidentally, we Arabs might claim Spain, which we held for 700 years.
Many Mexicans might claim Spain, "homeland" of their forefathers. They might even claim Texas, which was Mexican until 100 years ago. And suppose the American Indians claimed the "homeland" of which they were the sole, native, and ancient occupants until only some 450 years ago!
I am not being facetious. All these claims are just as valid—or just as fantastic—as the Jewish "historic connection" with Palestine. Most are more valid.
In any event, the great Moslem expansion about 650 AD finally settled things. It dominated Palestine completely. From that day on, Palestine was solidly Arabic in population, language, and religion. When British armies entered the country during the last war, they found 500,000 Arabs and only 65,000 Jews.
If solid, uninterrupted Arab occupation for nearly 1,300 years does not make a country "Arab", what does?
The Jews say, and rightly, that Palestine is the home of their religion. It is likewise the birthplace of Christianity, but would any Christian nation claim it on that account? In passing, let me say that the Christian Arabs—and there are many hundreds of thousands of them in the Arab World—are in absolute agreement with all other Arabs in opposing the Zionist invasion of Palestine.
May I also point out that Jerusalem is, after Mecca and Medina, the holiest place in Islam. In fact, in the early days of our religion, Moslems prayed toward Jerusalem instead of Mecca.
The Jewish "religious claim" to Palestine is as absurd as the "historic claim." The Holy Places, sacred to three great religions, must be open to all, the monopoly of none. Let us not confuse religion and politics.
We are told that we are inhumane and heartless because do not accept with open arms the perhaps 200,000 Jews in Europe who suffered so frightfully under Nazi cruelty, and who even now—almost three years after war’s end—still languish in cold, depressing camps.
Let me underline several facts. The unimaginable persecution of the Jews was not done by the Arabs: it was done by a Christian nation in the West. The war which ruined Europe and made it almost impossible for these Jews to rehabilitate themselves was fought by the Christian nations of the West. The rich and empty portions of the earth belong, not to the Arabs, but to the Christian nations of the West.
And yet, to ease their consciences, these Christian nations of the West are asking Palestine—a poor and tiny Moslem country of the East—to accept the entire burden. "We have hurt these people terribly," cries the West to the East. "Won’t you please take care of them for us?"
We find neither logic nor justice in this. Are we therefore "cruel and heartless nationalists"?
We are a generous people: we are proud that "Arab hospitality" is a phrase famous throughout the world. We are a humane people: no one was shocked more than we by the Hitlerite terror. No one pities the present plight of the desperate European Jews more than we.
But we say that Palestine has already sheltered 600,000 refugees. We believe that is enough to expect of us—even too much. We believe it is now the turn of the rest of the world to accept some of them.
I will be entirely frank with you. There is one thing the Arab world simply cannot understand. Of all the nations of the earth, America is most insistent that something be done for these suffering Jews of Europe. This feeling does credit to the humanity for which America is famous, and to that glorious inscription on your Statue of Liberty.
And yet this same America—the richest, greatest, most powerful nation the world has ever known—refuses to accept more than a token handful of these same Jews herself!
I hope you will not think I am being bitter about this. I have tried hard to understand that mysterious paradox, and I confess I cannot. Nor can any other Arab.
Perhaps you have been informed that "the Jews in Europe want to go to no other place except Palestine."
This myth is one of the greatest propaganda triumphs of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, the organisation which promotes with fanatic zeal the emigration to Palestine. It is a subtle half-truth, thus doubly dangerous.
The astounding truth is that nobody on earth really knows where these unfortunate Jews really want to go!
You would think that in so grave a problem, the American, British, and other authorities responsible for the European Jews would have made a very careful survey, probably by vote, to find out where each Jew actually wants to go. Amazingly enough this has never been done! The Jewish Agency has prevented it.
Some time ago the American Military Governor in Germany was asked at a press conference how he was so certain that all Jews there wanted to go to Palestine. His answer was simple: "My Jewish advisors tell me so." He admitted no poll had ever been made. Preparations were indeed begun for one, but the Jewish Agency stepped in to stop it.
The truth is that the Jews in German camps are now subjected to a Zionist pressure campaign which learned much from the Nazi terror. It is dangerous for a Jew to say that he would rather go to some other country, not Palestine. Such dissenters have been severely beaten, and worse.
Not long ago, in Palestine, nearly 1,000 Austrian Jews informed the international refugee organisation that they would like to go back to Austria, and plans were made to repatriate them.
The Jewish Agency heard of this, and exerted enough political pressure to stop it. It would be bad propaganda for Zionism if Jews began leaving Palestine. The nearly 1,000 Austrian are still there, against their will.
The fact is that most of the European Jews are Western in culture and outlook, entirely urban in experience and habits. They cannot really have their hearts set on becoming pioneers in the barren, arid, cramped land which is Palestine.
One thing, however, is undoubtedly true. As matters stand now, most refugee Jews in Europe would, indeed, vote for Palestine, simply because they know no other country will have them.
If you or I were given a choice between a near-prison camp for the rest of our lives—or Palestine—we would both choose Palestine, too.
But open up any other alternative to them—give them any other choice, and see what happens!
No poll, however, will be worth anything unless the nations of the earth are willing to open their doors—just a little—to the Jews. In other words, if in such a poll a Jew says he wants to go to Sweden, Sweden must be willing to accept him. If he votes for America, you must let him come in.
Any other kind of poll would be a farce. For the desperate Jew, this is no idle testing of opinion: this is a grave matter of life or death. Unless he is absolutely sure that his vote means something, he will always vote for Palestine, so as not to risk his bird in the hand for one in the bush.
In any event, Palestine can accept no more. The 65,000 Jews in Palestine in 1918 have jumped to 600,000 today. We Arabs have increased, too, but not by immigration. The Jews were then a mere 11 per cent of our population. Today they are one third of it.
The rate of increase has been terrifying. In a few more years—unless stopped now—it will overwhelm us, and we shall be an important minority in our own home.
Surely the rest of the wide world is rich enough and generous enough to find a place for 200,000 Jews—about one third the number that tiny, poor Palestine has already sheltered. For the rest of the world, it is hardly a drop in the bucket. For us it means national suicide.
We are sometimes told that since the Jews came to Palestine, the Arab standard of living has improved. This is a most complicated question. But let us even assume, for the argument, that it is true. We would rather be a bit poorer, and masters of our own home. Is this unnatural?
The sorry story of the so-called "Balfour Declaration," which started Zionist immigration into Palestine, is too complicated to repeat here in detail. It is grounded in broken promises to the Arabs—promises made in cold print which admit no denying.
We utterly deny its validity. We utterly deny the right of Great Britain to give away Arab land for a "national home" for an entirely foreign people.
Even the League of Nations sanction does not alter this. At the time, not a single Arab state was a member of the League. We were not allowed to say a word in our own defense.
I must point out, again in friendly frankness, that America was nearly as responsible as Britain for this Balfour Declaration. President Wilson approved it before it was issued, and the American Congress adopted it word for word in a joint resolution on 30th June, 1922.
In the 1920s, Arabs were annoyed and insulted by Zionist immigration, but not alarmed by it. It was steady, but fairly small, as even the Zionist founders thought it would remain. Indeed for some years, more Jews left Palestine than entered it—in 1927 almost twice as many.
But two new factors, entirely unforeseen by Britain or the League or America or the most fervent Zionist, arose in the early thirties to raise the immigration to undreamed heights. One was the World Depression; the second the rise of Hitler.
In 1932, the year before Hitler came to power, only 9,500 Jews came to Palestine. We did not welcome them, but we were not afraid that, at that rate, our solid Arab majority would ever be in danger.
But the next year—the year of Hitler—it jumped to 30,000! In 1934 it was 42,000! In 1935 it reached 61,000!
It was no longer the orderly arrival of idealist Zionists. Rather, all Europe was pouring its frightened Jews upon us. Then, at last, we, too, became frightened. We knew that unless this enormous influx stopped, we were, as Arabs, doomed in our Palestine homeland. And we have not changed our minds.
I have the impression that many Americans believe the trouble in Palestine is very remote from them, that America had little to do with it, and that your only interest now is that of a humane bystander.
I believe that you do not realise how directly you are, as a nation, responsible in general for the whole Zionist move and specifically for the present terrorism. I call this to your attention because I am certain that if you realise your responsibility you will act fairly to admit it and assume it.
Quite aside from official American support for the "National Home" of the Balfour Declaration, the Zionist settlements in Palestine would have been almost impossible, on anything like the current scale, without American money. This was contributed by American Jewry in an idealistic effort to help their fellows.
The motive was worthy: the result were disastrous. The contributions were by private individuals, but they were almost entirely Americans, and, as a nation, only America can answer for it.
The present catastrophe may be laid almost entirely at your door. Your government, almost alone in the world, is insisting on the immediate admission of 100,000 more Jews into Palestine—to be followed by countless additional ones. This will have the most frightful consequences in bloody chaos beyond anything ever hinted at in Palestine before.
It is your press and political leadership, almost alone in the world, who press this demand. It is almost entirely American money which hires or buys the "refugee ships" that steam illegally toward Palestine: American money which pays their crews. The illegal immigration from Europe is arranged by the Jewish Agency, supported almost entirely by American funds. It is American dollars which support the terrorists, which buy the bullets and pistols that kill British soldiers—your allies—and Arab citizens—your friends.
We in the Arab world were stunned to hear that you permit open advertisements in newspapers asking for money to finance these terrorists, to arm them openly and deliberately for murder. We could not believe this could really happen in the modern world. Now we must believe it: we have seen the advertisements with our own eyes.
I point out these things because nothing less than complete frankness will be of use. The crisis is too stark for mere polite vagueness which means nothing.
I have the most complete confidence in the fair-mindedness and generosity of the American public. We Arabs ask no favours. We ask only that you know the full truth, not half of it. We ask only that when you judge the Palestine question, you put yourselves in our place.
What would your answer be if some outside agency told you that you must accept in America many millions of utter strangers in your midst—enough to dominate your country—merely because they insisted on going to America, and because their forefathers had once lived there some 2,000 years ago?
Our answer is the same.
And what would be your action if, in spite of your refusal, this outside agency began forcing them on you?
Ours will be the same.
I copied the article from here.
"As the Arabs see the Jews"
His Majesty King Abdullah,
The American Magazine
November, 1947
I am especially delighted to address an American audience, for the tragic problem of Palestine will never be solved without American understanding, American sympathy, American support.
So many billions of words have been written about Palestine—perhaps more than on any other subject in history—that I hesitate to add to them. Yet I am compelled to do so, for I am reluctantly convinced that the world in general, and America in particular, knows almost nothing of the true case for the Arabs.
We Arabs follow, perhaps far more than you think, the press of America. We are frankly disturbed to find that for every word printed on the Arab side, a thousand are printed on the Zionist side.
There are many reasons for this. You have many millions of Jewish citizens interested in this question. They are highly vocal and wise in the ways of publicity. There are few Arab citizens in America, and we are as yet unskilled in the technique of modern propaganda.
The results have been alarming for us. In your press we see a horrible caricature and are told it is our true portrait. In all justice, we cannot let this pass by default.
Our case is quite simple: For nearly 2,000 years Palestine has been almost 100 per cent Arab. It is still preponderantly Arab today, in spite of enormous Jewish immigration. But if this immigration continues we shall soon be outnumbered—a minority in our home.
Palestine is a small and very poor country, about the size of your state of Vermont. Its Arab population is only about 1,200,000. Already we have had forced on us, against our will, some 600,000 Zionist Jews. We are threatened with many hundreds of thousands more.
Our position is so simple and natural that we are amazed it should even be questioned. It is exactly the same position you in America take in regard to the unhappy European Jews. You are sorry for them, but you do not want them in your country.
We do not want them in ours, either. Not because they are Jews, but because they are foreigners. We would not want hundreds of thousands of foreigners in our country, be they Englishmen or Norwegians or Brazilians or whatever.
Think for a moment: In the last 25 years we have had one third of our entire population forced upon us. In America that would be the equivalent of 45,000,000 complete strangers admitted to your country, over your violent protest, since 1921. How would you have reacted to that?
Because of our perfectly natural dislike of being overwhelmed in our own homeland, we are called blind nationalists and heartless anti-Semites. This charge would be ludicrous were it not so dangerous.
No people on earth have been less "anti-Semitic" than the Arabs. The persecution of the Jews has been confined almost entirely to the Christian nations of the West. Jews, themselves, will admit that never since the Great Dispersion did Jews develop so freely and reach such importance as in Spain when it was an Arab possession. With very minor exceptions, Jews have lived for many centuries in the Middle East, in complete peace and friendliness with their Arab neighbours.
Damascus, Baghdad, Beirut and other Arab centres have always contained large and prosperous Jewish colonies. Until the Zionist invasion of Palestine began, these Jews received the most generous treatment—far, far better than in Christian Europe. Now, unhappily, for the first time in history, these Jews are beginning to feel the effects of Arab resistance to the Zionist assault. Most of them are as anxious as Arabs to stop it. Most of these Jews who have found happy homes among us resent, as we do, the coming of these strangers.
I was puzzled for a long time about the odd belief which apparently persists in America that Palestine has somehow "always been a Jewish land." Recently an American I talked to cleared up this mystery. He pointed out that the only things most Americans know about Palestine are what they read in the Bible. It was a Jewish land in those days, they reason, and they assume it has always remained so.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is absurd to reach so far back into the mists of history to argue about who should have Palestine today, and I apologise for it. Yet the Jews do this, and I must reply to their "historic claim." I wonder if the world has ever seen a stranger sight than a group of people seriously pretending to claim a land because their ancestors lived there some 2,000 years ago!
If you suggest that I am biased, I invite you to read any sound history of the period and verify the facts.
Such fragmentary records as we have indicate that the Jews were wandering nomads from Iraq who moved to southern Turkey, came south to Palestine, stayed there a short time, and then passed to Egypt, where they remained about 400 years. About 1300 BC (according to your calendar) they left Egypt and gradually conquered most—but not all—of the inhabitants of Palestine.
It is significant that the Philistines—not the Jews—gave their name to the country: "Palestine" is merely the Greek form of "Philistia."
Only once, during the empire of David and Solomon, did the Jews ever control nearly—but not all—the land which is today Palestine. This empire lasted only 70 years, ending in 926 BC. Only 250 years later the Kingdom of Judah had shrunk to a small province around Jerusalem, barely a quarter of modern Palestine.
In 63 BC the Jews were conquered by Roman Pompey, and never again had even the vestige of independence. The Roman Emperor Hadrian finally wiped them out about 135 AD. He utterly destroyed Jerusalem, rebuilt under another name, and for hundreds of years no Jew was permitted to enter it. A handful of Jews remained in Palestine but the vast majority were killed or scattered to other countries, in the Diaspora, or the Great Dispersion. From that time Palestine ceased to be a Jewish country, in any conceivable sense.
This was 1,815 years ago, and yet the Jews solemnly pretend they still own Palestine! If such fantasy were allowed, how the map of the world would dance about!
Italians might claim England, which the Romans held so long. England might claim France, "homeland" of the conquering Normans. And the French Normans might claim Norway, where their ancestors originated. And incidentally, we Arabs might claim Spain, which we held for 700 years.
Many Mexicans might claim Spain, "homeland" of their forefathers. They might even claim Texas, which was Mexican until 100 years ago. And suppose the American Indians claimed the "homeland" of which they were the sole, native, and ancient occupants until only some 450 years ago!
I am not being facetious. All these claims are just as valid—or just as fantastic—as the Jewish "historic connection" with Palestine. Most are more valid.
In any event, the great Moslem expansion about 650 AD finally settled things. It dominated Palestine completely. From that day on, Palestine was solidly Arabic in population, language, and religion. When British armies entered the country during the last war, they found 500,000 Arabs and only 65,000 Jews.
If solid, uninterrupted Arab occupation for nearly 1,300 years does not make a country "Arab", what does?
The Jews say, and rightly, that Palestine is the home of their religion. It is likewise the birthplace of Christianity, but would any Christian nation claim it on that account? In passing, let me say that the Christian Arabs—and there are many hundreds of thousands of them in the Arab World—are in absolute agreement with all other Arabs in opposing the Zionist invasion of Palestine.
May I also point out that Jerusalem is, after Mecca and Medina, the holiest place in Islam. In fact, in the early days of our religion, Moslems prayed toward Jerusalem instead of Mecca.
The Jewish "religious claim" to Palestine is as absurd as the "historic claim." The Holy Places, sacred to three great religions, must be open to all, the monopoly of none. Let us not confuse religion and politics.
We are told that we are inhumane and heartless because do not accept with open arms the perhaps 200,000 Jews in Europe who suffered so frightfully under Nazi cruelty, and who even now—almost three years after war’s end—still languish in cold, depressing camps.
Let me underline several facts. The unimaginable persecution of the Jews was not done by the Arabs: it was done by a Christian nation in the West. The war which ruined Europe and made it almost impossible for these Jews to rehabilitate themselves was fought by the Christian nations of the West. The rich and empty portions of the earth belong, not to the Arabs, but to the Christian nations of the West.
And yet, to ease their consciences, these Christian nations of the West are asking Palestine—a poor and tiny Moslem country of the East—to accept the entire burden. "We have hurt these people terribly," cries the West to the East. "Won’t you please take care of them for us?"
We find neither logic nor justice in this. Are we therefore "cruel and heartless nationalists"?
We are a generous people: we are proud that "Arab hospitality" is a phrase famous throughout the world. We are a humane people: no one was shocked more than we by the Hitlerite terror. No one pities the present plight of the desperate European Jews more than we.
But we say that Palestine has already sheltered 600,000 refugees. We believe that is enough to expect of us—even too much. We believe it is now the turn of the rest of the world to accept some of them.
I will be entirely frank with you. There is one thing the Arab world simply cannot understand. Of all the nations of the earth, America is most insistent that something be done for these suffering Jews of Europe. This feeling does credit to the humanity for which America is famous, and to that glorious inscription on your Statue of Liberty.
And yet this same America—the richest, greatest, most powerful nation the world has ever known—refuses to accept more than a token handful of these same Jews herself!
I hope you will not think I am being bitter about this. I have tried hard to understand that mysterious paradox, and I confess I cannot. Nor can any other Arab.
Perhaps you have been informed that "the Jews in Europe want to go to no other place except Palestine."
This myth is one of the greatest propaganda triumphs of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, the organisation which promotes with fanatic zeal the emigration to Palestine. It is a subtle half-truth, thus doubly dangerous.
The astounding truth is that nobody on earth really knows where these unfortunate Jews really want to go!
You would think that in so grave a problem, the American, British, and other authorities responsible for the European Jews would have made a very careful survey, probably by vote, to find out where each Jew actually wants to go. Amazingly enough this has never been done! The Jewish Agency has prevented it.
Some time ago the American Military Governor in Germany was asked at a press conference how he was so certain that all Jews there wanted to go to Palestine. His answer was simple: "My Jewish advisors tell me so." He admitted no poll had ever been made. Preparations were indeed begun for one, but the Jewish Agency stepped in to stop it.
The truth is that the Jews in German camps are now subjected to a Zionist pressure campaign which learned much from the Nazi terror. It is dangerous for a Jew to say that he would rather go to some other country, not Palestine. Such dissenters have been severely beaten, and worse.
Not long ago, in Palestine, nearly 1,000 Austrian Jews informed the international refugee organisation that they would like to go back to Austria, and plans were made to repatriate them.
The Jewish Agency heard of this, and exerted enough political pressure to stop it. It would be bad propaganda for Zionism if Jews began leaving Palestine. The nearly 1,000 Austrian are still there, against their will.
The fact is that most of the European Jews are Western in culture and outlook, entirely urban in experience and habits. They cannot really have their hearts set on becoming pioneers in the barren, arid, cramped land which is Palestine.
One thing, however, is undoubtedly true. As matters stand now, most refugee Jews in Europe would, indeed, vote for Palestine, simply because they know no other country will have them.
If you or I were given a choice between a near-prison camp for the rest of our lives—or Palestine—we would both choose Palestine, too.
But open up any other alternative to them—give them any other choice, and see what happens!
No poll, however, will be worth anything unless the nations of the earth are willing to open their doors—just a little—to the Jews. In other words, if in such a poll a Jew says he wants to go to Sweden, Sweden must be willing to accept him. If he votes for America, you must let him come in.
Any other kind of poll would be a farce. For the desperate Jew, this is no idle testing of opinion: this is a grave matter of life or death. Unless he is absolutely sure that his vote means something, he will always vote for Palestine, so as not to risk his bird in the hand for one in the bush.
In any event, Palestine can accept no more. The 65,000 Jews in Palestine in 1918 have jumped to 600,000 today. We Arabs have increased, too, but not by immigration. The Jews were then a mere 11 per cent of our population. Today they are one third of it.
The rate of increase has been terrifying. In a few more years—unless stopped now—it will overwhelm us, and we shall be an important minority in our own home.
Surely the rest of the wide world is rich enough and generous enough to find a place for 200,000 Jews—about one third the number that tiny, poor Palestine has already sheltered. For the rest of the world, it is hardly a drop in the bucket. For us it means national suicide.
We are sometimes told that since the Jews came to Palestine, the Arab standard of living has improved. This is a most complicated question. But let us even assume, for the argument, that it is true. We would rather be a bit poorer, and masters of our own home. Is this unnatural?
The sorry story of the so-called "Balfour Declaration," which started Zionist immigration into Palestine, is too complicated to repeat here in detail. It is grounded in broken promises to the Arabs—promises made in cold print which admit no denying.
We utterly deny its validity. We utterly deny the right of Great Britain to give away Arab land for a "national home" for an entirely foreign people.
Even the League of Nations sanction does not alter this. At the time, not a single Arab state was a member of the League. We were not allowed to say a word in our own defense.
I must point out, again in friendly frankness, that America was nearly as responsible as Britain for this Balfour Declaration. President Wilson approved it before it was issued, and the American Congress adopted it word for word in a joint resolution on 30th June, 1922.
In the 1920s, Arabs were annoyed and insulted by Zionist immigration, but not alarmed by it. It was steady, but fairly small, as even the Zionist founders thought it would remain. Indeed for some years, more Jews left Palestine than entered it—in 1927 almost twice as many.
But two new factors, entirely unforeseen by Britain or the League or America or the most fervent Zionist, arose in the early thirties to raise the immigration to undreamed heights. One was the World Depression; the second the rise of Hitler.
In 1932, the year before Hitler came to power, only 9,500 Jews came to Palestine. We did not welcome them, but we were not afraid that, at that rate, our solid Arab majority would ever be in danger.
But the next year—the year of Hitler—it jumped to 30,000! In 1934 it was 42,000! In 1935 it reached 61,000!
It was no longer the orderly arrival of idealist Zionists. Rather, all Europe was pouring its frightened Jews upon us. Then, at last, we, too, became frightened. We knew that unless this enormous influx stopped, we were, as Arabs, doomed in our Palestine homeland. And we have not changed our minds.
I have the impression that many Americans believe the trouble in Palestine is very remote from them, that America had little to do with it, and that your only interest now is that of a humane bystander.
I believe that you do not realise how directly you are, as a nation, responsible in general for the whole Zionist move and specifically for the present terrorism. I call this to your attention because I am certain that if you realise your responsibility you will act fairly to admit it and assume it.
Quite aside from official American support for the "National Home" of the Balfour Declaration, the Zionist settlements in Palestine would have been almost impossible, on anything like the current scale, without American money. This was contributed by American Jewry in an idealistic effort to help their fellows.
The motive was worthy: the result were disastrous. The contributions were by private individuals, but they were almost entirely Americans, and, as a nation, only America can answer for it.
The present catastrophe may be laid almost entirely at your door. Your government, almost alone in the world, is insisting on the immediate admission of 100,000 more Jews into Palestine—to be followed by countless additional ones. This will have the most frightful consequences in bloody chaos beyond anything ever hinted at in Palestine before.
It is your press and political leadership, almost alone in the world, who press this demand. It is almost entirely American money which hires or buys the "refugee ships" that steam illegally toward Palestine: American money which pays their crews. The illegal immigration from Europe is arranged by the Jewish Agency, supported almost entirely by American funds. It is American dollars which support the terrorists, which buy the bullets and pistols that kill British soldiers—your allies—and Arab citizens—your friends.
We in the Arab world were stunned to hear that you permit open advertisements in newspapers asking for money to finance these terrorists, to arm them openly and deliberately for murder. We could not believe this could really happen in the modern world. Now we must believe it: we have seen the advertisements with our own eyes.
I point out these things because nothing less than complete frankness will be of use. The crisis is too stark for mere polite vagueness which means nothing.
I have the most complete confidence in the fair-mindedness and generosity of the American public. We Arabs ask no favours. We ask only that you know the full truth, not half of it. We ask only that when you judge the Palestine question, you put yourselves in our place.
What would your answer be if some outside agency told you that you must accept in America many millions of utter strangers in your midst—enough to dominate your country—merely because they insisted on going to America, and because their forefathers had once lived there some 2,000 years ago?
Our answer is the same.
And what would be your action if, in spite of your refusal, this outside agency began forcing them on you?
Ours will be the same.
I copied the article from here.
Monday, December 29, 2008
On the problem of Palestine
The shabby treatment of the Palestinian people leaves many a decent Muslim feeling aggrieved. I believe this issue is at the centre of the conflict between militants of a Muslim persuasion and people that they view as their oppressors.
The problem has dragged on far too long for a solution to come from within. It is time for out-of-the-box thinking and the imposition of a solution from outside.
Let us accept that the Jewish people need a home. There are only 5.3m of them living in Israel, so that is not too large a number. The problem is that the state of Israel is too small. Israel's Law of Return accords any Jew and eligible non-Jews with immediate Jewish relatives, the legal right to assisted immigration and settlement in Israel, as well as automatic Israeli citizenship.
The implosion of the Soviet Union in 1990 resulted in a huge influx of people of Jewish ancestry from that region. According to statistics by the Jewish agency for Israel, a total of 985,400 people migrated to Israel from Eastern Europe between 1989 and 2007, alone.
The steady inflow of people puts pressure on resources, particularly land, hence the need for Israel to colonise parts of the West Bank and Gaze Strip for settlements. What is needed is therefore more space.
Israel's many supporters often point out that it is almost the only functioning democracy in the Middle East and this points to an important truth. Although geographically located in the East, in habits, behaviour and spirit the people are of the West.
Israel's most important ally the US and until recently, the country with the largest Jewish population (according the Jewish Virtual Library, the US has 5.275m Jews against 5.313m in Israel) holds the key to the solution.
There are no closer allies than Israel and the US. Britain, the EU and others are important but none enjoy the warmth and real friendship that exists between these two. Naturally the US does not want to abandon its small ally, hanging on precariously amidst the large and unfriendly states of the Middle East.
The solution therefore is to bring them home. The US is a vast and sparsely populated land, they can easily afford to give up to provide for a new home for the Jewish people. The US is 9.6m sq.km. in extent, Israel is 20,770 sq km in extent, about 0.2% of the US.
The new state of Israel could be located in the Southern-most states: Texas and the adjoining states bordering Mexico. In anycase the state of Texas was seized barely a century ago from the Mexicans so giving up a bit of it will not hurt too much.
Better still, the new state of Israel could stretch the entire Southern border with Mexico. Israel could then be encouraged to construct its security barrier along the Mexican border which would have the added benefit of keeping out the pesky Mexicans not to mention the drug smugglers, so we have a win-win situation all around.
The cost of moving the state of Israel will no doubt be gladly borne by the Saudi Arabia, the UAE and other allies of the US. Indeed given a chance, sworn enemies of the US such as Iran and Libya may contribute even more than their allies to see the back of Israel.
The problem has dragged on far too long for a solution to come from within. It is time for out-of-the-box thinking and the imposition of a solution from outside.
Let us accept that the Jewish people need a home. There are only 5.3m of them living in Israel, so that is not too large a number. The problem is that the state of Israel is too small. Israel's Law of Return accords any Jew and eligible non-Jews with immediate Jewish relatives, the legal right to assisted immigration and settlement in Israel, as well as automatic Israeli citizenship.
The implosion of the Soviet Union in 1990 resulted in a huge influx of people of Jewish ancestry from that region. According to statistics by the Jewish agency for Israel, a total of 985,400 people migrated to Israel from Eastern Europe between 1989 and 2007, alone.
The steady inflow of people puts pressure on resources, particularly land, hence the need for Israel to colonise parts of the West Bank and Gaze Strip for settlements. What is needed is therefore more space.
Israel's many supporters often point out that it is almost the only functioning democracy in the Middle East and this points to an important truth. Although geographically located in the East, in habits, behaviour and spirit the people are of the West.
Israel's most important ally the US and until recently, the country with the largest Jewish population (according the Jewish Virtual Library, the US has 5.275m Jews against 5.313m in Israel) holds the key to the solution.
There are no closer allies than Israel and the US. Britain, the EU and others are important but none enjoy the warmth and real friendship that exists between these two. Naturally the US does not want to abandon its small ally, hanging on precariously amidst the large and unfriendly states of the Middle East.
The solution therefore is to bring them home. The US is a vast and sparsely populated land, they can easily afford to give up to provide for a new home for the Jewish people. The US is 9.6m sq.km. in extent, Israel is 20,770 sq km in extent, about 0.2% of the US.
The new state of Israel could be located in the Southern-most states: Texas and the adjoining states bordering Mexico. In anycase the state of Texas was seized barely a century ago from the Mexicans so giving up a bit of it will not hurt too much.
Better still, the new state of Israel could stretch the entire Southern border with Mexico. Israel could then be encouraged to construct its security barrier along the Mexican border which would have the added benefit of keeping out the pesky Mexicans not to mention the drug smugglers, so we have a win-win situation all around.
The cost of moving the state of Israel will no doubt be gladly borne by the Saudi Arabia, the UAE and other allies of the US. Indeed given a chance, sworn enemies of the US such as Iran and Libya may contribute even more than their allies to see the back of Israel.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Is truly representative democracy possible?
Churchill is supposed to have remarked that democracy is the worst form of government, save for all others.
I have been thinking about this for a while and have come to the conclusion that for best effect, democracy needs to work within a well established class system.
The problem is that truly popular democracy must cater to truly popular public taste. While this egalitarian ideal sounds fine, the net effect of catering to the lowest common denominator of public sentiment is likely to leave everyone worse off.
This is where a good class system comes in to play. The class system ensures that those who rise to the head of parties that may contest an election must necessarily subscribe to a certain set of values. The idea is that only gentlemen or those who subscribe to such values may reach the top ranks of the political arena. The public are then free to choose their leaders, but their choice will tend to be amongst gentlemen and will eliminate bounders, footpads and their ilk from high office.
Thus the population is satisfied that they have a say in the affairs of a nation, while at the same time, there is an automatic check on wilder elements entering the fray. The emergence of far right parties in Austria and extremists in Australia (Pauline Hanson) not to mention the BJP (partially under the sway of the RSS/VHP) are cases in point. Fortunately, the strength of other institutions (particularly the press but also Parliament and the Judiciary) have forced most extremists to moderate their stance when holding office but prevention is better than cure.
The system of proportional representation, which opens the door to extremists, is also not compatible with good governance. The best example is Israel, where an almost mischievous proportional representative system has lead to fragile coalitions that implode whenever a bold decision is taken.
To be fair a class system should not be rigid, but like the British one flexible. There are plenty of foreigners and other outsiders who have reached the top rank of political office, but they have had to go through a period of adaptation before they were accepted.
I have been thinking about this for a while and have come to the conclusion that for best effect, democracy needs to work within a well established class system.
The problem is that truly popular democracy must cater to truly popular public taste. While this egalitarian ideal sounds fine, the net effect of catering to the lowest common denominator of public sentiment is likely to leave everyone worse off.
This is where a good class system comes in to play. The class system ensures that those who rise to the head of parties that may contest an election must necessarily subscribe to a certain set of values. The idea is that only gentlemen or those who subscribe to such values may reach the top ranks of the political arena. The public are then free to choose their leaders, but their choice will tend to be amongst gentlemen and will eliminate bounders, footpads and their ilk from high office.
Thus the population is satisfied that they have a say in the affairs of a nation, while at the same time, there is an automatic check on wilder elements entering the fray. The emergence of far right parties in Austria and extremists in Australia (Pauline Hanson) not to mention the BJP (partially under the sway of the RSS/VHP) are cases in point. Fortunately, the strength of other institutions (particularly the press but also Parliament and the Judiciary) have forced most extremists to moderate their stance when holding office but prevention is better than cure.
The system of proportional representation, which opens the door to extremists, is also not compatible with good governance. The best example is Israel, where an almost mischievous proportional representative system has lead to fragile coalitions that implode whenever a bold decision is taken.
To be fair a class system should not be rigid, but like the British one flexible. There are plenty of foreigners and other outsiders who have reached the top rank of political office, but they have had to go through a period of adaptation before they were accepted.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Is the economy important?
I have been having an on-going debate with a number of people on the economy. Debate on this subject tends to include the war, because it is a very important factor in any discussion on the subject, but as a result the discussion tends to get unnecessarily heated and taken off track. This is not helped by the fact that the subject is complex and terminology obscure. Because of this economic policy tends to be viewed by some as an abstract, distant and unreal.
Is this really so? And does the man on the Galle Road or traveling in the 138 bus have no interest in the matter?
At the outset let me state that I am no economist. I have done some rudimentary study of the subject but I am by no means an expert and therefore am quite open to correction.
Returning to the question, what exactly is the economy? In short it is the living standard of people. People fortunate to live in rich countries enjoy a lot of things that those in poor countries do not. They have a far wider selection of goods and services to enjoy. These range from foodstuffs, to entertainment, to recreation, to the arts, to sports, in short to a lifestyle. Not everyone enjoys these equally and there is plenty of poverty and misery in rich countries but a majority of people are able to lead better lives.
There is legitimate debate on the quality of life, that more does not necessarily mean better but man is a base creature and the satisfaction of base cravings will bring pleasure, even for a while. There is also the important factor of choice. There are many different paths that the people of rich world may tread. They may chose the the path of the ascetic, live simple frugal lives on wholesome organic produce in idyllic rural settings. They may chose the path of gluttony and greed, gorging themselves on cheap junk food that leads them to obesity, ill health and an untimely death.
The important thing is the choice is actually there to be made. One is not locked into a single rutted grind of constant poverty.
Look back to the 1970's in Sri Lanka when living standards were far lower, when there was no television, when a radio or an electric fan were considered luxuries. A time when imported goods of any description were very scare and travel abroad was a rare luxury. A time when almost everything was rationed from cloth to basic foodstuffs and shortages were rife. Produce was bought largely at the co-operative shop, on the production of a ration card and people grew as much vegetables at home so that they would have something to eat.
A friend related an incident from the time. There had been a shortage of soap. (since foreign exchange was strictly controlled imports were difficult and factories were forever short of raw materials, scarcities were common). His father had known someone working at the (now defunct) British Ceylon Corporation (BCC). They produced soap under the such delightful brands as Night & Day, Sno-Wite and most famously Sovereign Bar soap, which was a washing soap that was a about two feet long. My friends father had managed to obtain a number of cakes of soap which they had stuffed into a cardboard box and they were taking it home. On the way the box broke and the soap was scattered around the bus and their fellow passengers had been exclaiming "soap", "soap" almost as if it were manna from heaven.
That was poverty, of 25% unemployment of shortages, of a GDP of US$200 or US$300. In a strange way society was slightly better because inequality was not a big problem. The majority of the people were struggling, the rich were a tiny fragment of society and even they were not so rich and in anycase they faced much the same struggle with daily necessities.
That was what was left behind by growth and that is why the economy is important. Compared to the drudgery of the 1970's, people of today enjoy vastly better standards of living.
That was in the past. Now things are better, so what is the problem? The danger is that things can slip back. Stagnation will lead to increased unemployment which will cause a lot more stress than in the old days. People who enjoy a certain standard of living will feel their lifestyles changing, their quality of life degrading, their choices diminishing. This is made worse all the glitter of the things that are flashed before their faces and which they cannot have, but which they once might have had, at least occasionally. They also see a select few enjoy much much higher living standards. This will cause of resentment, discontent and possibly social unrest. The Banlieues of France did not erupt for nothing.
But surely all this is far-fetched I hear the critics say? We've left this behind, there is a temporary dip but as soon as the war is won we will be alright.
Unfortunately it is not so simple. The problems of the economy are deep seated and fundamental. The makers of policy have dug a pit so deep that it will be extremely difficult to get out of it.
I keep looking with horror, to Zimbabwe. Once the breadbasket of Africa, now a basked case (in the words of no less a person than Desmond Tutu) in the span of twenty-odd year. This is the most extreme example, but there are plenty of others; Pakistan for instance or in many other places in Africa or Latin America where similar short-sighted policies have wracked havoc with the lives of people raining, misery, poverty and destruction on millions.
That is why the economy is important. It is what life is largely about.
Is this really so? And does the man on the Galle Road or traveling in the 138 bus have no interest in the matter?
At the outset let me state that I am no economist. I have done some rudimentary study of the subject but I am by no means an expert and therefore am quite open to correction.
Returning to the question, what exactly is the economy? In short it is the living standard of people. People fortunate to live in rich countries enjoy a lot of things that those in poor countries do not. They have a far wider selection of goods and services to enjoy. These range from foodstuffs, to entertainment, to recreation, to the arts, to sports, in short to a lifestyle. Not everyone enjoys these equally and there is plenty of poverty and misery in rich countries but a majority of people are able to lead better lives.
There is legitimate debate on the quality of life, that more does not necessarily mean better but man is a base creature and the satisfaction of base cravings will bring pleasure, even for a while. There is also the important factor of choice. There are many different paths that the people of rich world may tread. They may chose the the path of the ascetic, live simple frugal lives on wholesome organic produce in idyllic rural settings. They may chose the path of gluttony and greed, gorging themselves on cheap junk food that leads them to obesity, ill health and an untimely death.
The important thing is the choice is actually there to be made. One is not locked into a single rutted grind of constant poverty.
Look back to the 1970's in Sri Lanka when living standards were far lower, when there was no television, when a radio or an electric fan were considered luxuries. A time when imported goods of any description were very scare and travel abroad was a rare luxury. A time when almost everything was rationed from cloth to basic foodstuffs and shortages were rife. Produce was bought largely at the co-operative shop, on the production of a ration card and people grew as much vegetables at home so that they would have something to eat.
A friend related an incident from the time. There had been a shortage of soap. (since foreign exchange was strictly controlled imports were difficult and factories were forever short of raw materials, scarcities were common). His father had known someone working at the (now defunct) British Ceylon Corporation (BCC). They produced soap under the such delightful brands as Night & Day, Sno-Wite and most famously Sovereign Bar soap, which was a washing soap that was a about two feet long. My friends father had managed to obtain a number of cakes of soap which they had stuffed into a cardboard box and they were taking it home. On the way the box broke and the soap was scattered around the bus and their fellow passengers had been exclaiming "soap", "soap" almost as if it were manna from heaven.
That was poverty, of 25% unemployment of shortages, of a GDP of US$200 or US$300. In a strange way society was slightly better because inequality was not a big problem. The majority of the people were struggling, the rich were a tiny fragment of society and even they were not so rich and in anycase they faced much the same struggle with daily necessities.
That was what was left behind by growth and that is why the economy is important. Compared to the drudgery of the 1970's, people of today enjoy vastly better standards of living.
That was in the past. Now things are better, so what is the problem? The danger is that things can slip back. Stagnation will lead to increased unemployment which will cause a lot more stress than in the old days. People who enjoy a certain standard of living will feel their lifestyles changing, their quality of life degrading, their choices diminishing. This is made worse all the glitter of the things that are flashed before their faces and which they cannot have, but which they once might have had, at least occasionally. They also see a select few enjoy much much higher living standards. This will cause of resentment, discontent and possibly social unrest. The Banlieues of France did not erupt for nothing.
But surely all this is far-fetched I hear the critics say? We've left this behind, there is a temporary dip but as soon as the war is won we will be alright.
Unfortunately it is not so simple. The problems of the economy are deep seated and fundamental. The makers of policy have dug a pit so deep that it will be extremely difficult to get out of it.
I keep looking with horror, to Zimbabwe. Once the breadbasket of Africa, now a basked case (in the words of no less a person than Desmond Tutu) in the span of twenty-odd year. This is the most extreme example, but there are plenty of others; Pakistan for instance or in many other places in Africa or Latin America where similar short-sighted policies have wracked havoc with the lives of people raining, misery, poverty and destruction on millions.
That is why the economy is important. It is what life is largely about.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
No private vehicles to BIA
According to the Daily Mirror, no private vehicles will be allowed into the airport.
"All private vehicles are to be prohibited from entering the Bandaranaike International Airport (BIA) due to ‘security concern’ and as a first step in this move all vans and three-wheelers will not be allowed into the departure area with immediate effect, an official said. "
I wonder if they will ban the planes from landing next. Or maybe all planes except for Mihin Air. After all, who knows, Tiger Air might decide to land at BIA ?
Confusingly, the rule applies for departures but not for arrivals. “The restriction only applies to departing passengers for now. For persons coming to the airport to pick up arriving passengers, usual security procedures l apply,” the duty officer said.
Why there should a difference in security procedures for the two is a mystery. The risk is about the same as far as I can see but this may be a smart move minimise inconvenience to the diminishing number of tourists coming in. Hmm given the standard of English better coach the guards on the difference between tourist and terrorist, the words might easily be confused..
"All private vehicles are to be prohibited from entering the Bandaranaike International Airport (BIA) due to ‘security concern’ and as a first step in this move all vans and three-wheelers will not be allowed into the departure area with immediate effect, an official said. "
I wonder if they will ban the planes from landing next. Or maybe all planes except for Mihin Air. After all, who knows, Tiger Air might decide to land at BIA ?
Confusingly, the rule applies for departures but not for arrivals. “The restriction only applies to departing passengers for now. For persons coming to the airport to pick up arriving passengers, usual security procedures l apply,” the duty officer said.
Why there should a difference in security procedures for the two is a mystery. The risk is about the same as far as I can see but this may be a smart move minimise inconvenience to the diminishing number of tourists coming in. Hmm given the standard of English better coach the guards on the difference between tourist and terrorist, the words might easily be confused..
Sunday, December 07, 2008
Someone needs to take Visakha Vidyalaya to court
I spent about a quarter of an hour stuck in traffic today. This was not caused by the usual suspects by Viskha Vidyalaya which has erected two massive barriers across Viskha Road.
These barriers came up few years ago when paranoia was sweeping the City that the LTTE was going to attack schools.
The barricades take up almost half the street and are placed on either side of the school a couple of hundred metres across.
To begin with, unless they have obtained special permission, these are illegal. They have absolutely no right obstruct a public road. Even if they have obtained permission, the sheer lack of consideration for the public at large leaves me speechless with rage.
Somebody needs to get them to remove these monstrosities and teach these barbarians some manners. Civilised people don't do things like that, whatever the justification.
These barriers came up few years ago when paranoia was sweeping the City that the LTTE was going to attack schools.
The barricades take up almost half the street and are placed on either side of the school a couple of hundred metres across.
To begin with, unless they have obtained special permission, these are illegal. They have absolutely no right obstruct a public road. Even if they have obtained permission, the sheer lack of consideration for the public at large leaves me speechless with rage.
Somebody needs to get them to remove these monstrosities and teach these barbarians some manners. Civilised people don't do things like that, whatever the justification.
Friday, December 05, 2008
The roots of this wretched war
I have often wondered as to the factors that have driven this ruinous war in the country. Language, religion, culture and many other factors besides have been put forward as to the causes that fuel the feelings of discrimination and alienation that seem to plague the minority.
I don't think any of these are really the true cause of the problem, the cause is economic. It is competition for resources that causes conflict between people; at a micro level where people are reported to have fought over the last Christmas turkey in the supermarket, to a macro level where border disputes arise between nations.
The issue flared up in 1956 with the Official Languages Act. From the Tamil point of view this act was designed to exclude them from the appointments in the prestigious and much sought-after civil service and from higher education, which meant that even opportunities outside the civil service would be limited.
This is something that would be pretty hard for people of today to understand. How many youngsters who have completed their A'levels are contemplating entry to the State university system? How many would see themselves looking for a career in the public service? Only a minority of the urban population, I would reckon.
Yet in the 1950's, when opportunities were very limited: one either became a planter or a civil servant. Those who failed at either would join the tiny mercantile sector or would be unemployed. This is why language was important. (for a superb a first hand account of how the Official Languages Act was implemented read the articles I've collected here)
Today, it is not the case, education in no longer a monopoly of the state and the broad-basing of the economy has opened up many other employment opportunities, not mention the availability of overseas employment. Indeed proper English has almost disappeared, with only a handful using it properly.
Why then, does the conflict persist? This is a much harder question. There is still the petty discrimination, the petty hassle of receiving correspondence in Sinhalese and suchlike matters but this is not sufficient to fuel a war such as this. It is similar to the discrimination faced by minorities in places like Malaysia. There is plenty of grumbling and annoyance but no outright war. The Palestinian's for example face difficulties of an altogether different magnitude and this can explain the conflict in that benighted land, but the Tamils are not so badly off.
I believe what has happened is that the symptoms of the problem, the militant movement, has grown as a result of the bungled handling of the situation.
For much of its early days, the militant movement was only supported by a tiny minority. It was a joke. They were referred to commonly as 'the boys' almost like a gang of naughty schoolboys, which in a sense they were.
My father was serving in Mannar when the first policeman was murdered in 1981 or 1982. How was it done? Someone rode upto the unfortunate man on a bicycle and shot him with a rusty old pistol at point-blank range. Why did they ride right up to him to shoot? Because they could not even shoot straight. The LTTE greatest triumph, in 1983, was the killing of 13 soldiers who were caught in a landmine. It was sheer accident that there were so many killed, the jeep was overloaded.
It was the events of July 1983 that gave the rebels their first boost. The anger at the government translated into moral and material support for the armed groups. The Government response was always a mess and ended up creating more support for them until they evolved into the terrorists of today.
The real roots of the problem, were, I believe exposed once more during the CFA. By 2001 a whole generation of Tamils had grown up knowing nothing but the war. People who visited Jaffna during the CFA tell me that Jaffna was twenty years behind Colombo by that time. Not that Colombo is a particularly advanced place either. These people, who had known nothing but war, suddenly saw an existence other than war and this was Prabakharan's problem.
He needed a solution, fast, because popular support for a war was evaporating and his cadres were deserting. The removal of the common enemy exposed the fissures that lay within the movement of which the breakaway of a senior commander, Karuna Annan, was only the most obvious outward sign.
Wily Ranil, on the other hand did not give him a solution, talks were dragging on, but no solution was in sight, which is why I believe Prabakharan ensured that Rajapakse won the election. If Ranil had been around for much longer his movement would have imploded from within. Reading the Maveera speech of 2005 and the blame he puts on Ranil tells the whole story.
Having got his war, he now fights what appears to be a losing battle. Whether the State's heavy-handed response is sowing the seeds of a new round of conflict remains to be seen.
ps. For a more detailed view on this read this.
pps. For those who have wondered where the moderate Tamil voice has disappeared to read this, to understand why they are silent.
I don't think any of these are really the true cause of the problem, the cause is economic. It is competition for resources that causes conflict between people; at a micro level where people are reported to have fought over the last Christmas turkey in the supermarket, to a macro level where border disputes arise between nations.
The issue flared up in 1956 with the Official Languages Act. From the Tamil point of view this act was designed to exclude them from the appointments in the prestigious and much sought-after civil service and from higher education, which meant that even opportunities outside the civil service would be limited.
This is something that would be pretty hard for people of today to understand. How many youngsters who have completed their A'levels are contemplating entry to the State university system? How many would see themselves looking for a career in the public service? Only a minority of the urban population, I would reckon.
Yet in the 1950's, when opportunities were very limited: one either became a planter or a civil servant. Those who failed at either would join the tiny mercantile sector or would be unemployed. This is why language was important. (for a superb a first hand account of how the Official Languages Act was implemented read the articles I've collected here)
Today, it is not the case, education in no longer a monopoly of the state and the broad-basing of the economy has opened up many other employment opportunities, not mention the availability of overseas employment. Indeed proper English has almost disappeared, with only a handful using it properly.
Why then, does the conflict persist? This is a much harder question. There is still the petty discrimination, the petty hassle of receiving correspondence in Sinhalese and suchlike matters but this is not sufficient to fuel a war such as this. It is similar to the discrimination faced by minorities in places like Malaysia. There is plenty of grumbling and annoyance but no outright war. The Palestinian's for example face difficulties of an altogether different magnitude and this can explain the conflict in that benighted land, but the Tamils are not so badly off.
I believe what has happened is that the symptoms of the problem, the militant movement, has grown as a result of the bungled handling of the situation.
For much of its early days, the militant movement was only supported by a tiny minority. It was a joke. They were referred to commonly as 'the boys' almost like a gang of naughty schoolboys, which in a sense they were.
My father was serving in Mannar when the first policeman was murdered in 1981 or 1982. How was it done? Someone rode upto the unfortunate man on a bicycle and shot him with a rusty old pistol at point-blank range. Why did they ride right up to him to shoot? Because they could not even shoot straight. The LTTE greatest triumph, in 1983, was the killing of 13 soldiers who were caught in a landmine. It was sheer accident that there were so many killed, the jeep was overloaded.
It was the events of July 1983 that gave the rebels their first boost. The anger at the government translated into moral and material support for the armed groups. The Government response was always a mess and ended up creating more support for them until they evolved into the terrorists of today.
The real roots of the problem, were, I believe exposed once more during the CFA. By 2001 a whole generation of Tamils had grown up knowing nothing but the war. People who visited Jaffna during the CFA tell me that Jaffna was twenty years behind Colombo by that time. Not that Colombo is a particularly advanced place either. These people, who had known nothing but war, suddenly saw an existence other than war and this was Prabakharan's problem.
He needed a solution, fast, because popular support for a war was evaporating and his cadres were deserting. The removal of the common enemy exposed the fissures that lay within the movement of which the breakaway of a senior commander, Karuna Annan, was only the most obvious outward sign.
Wily Ranil, on the other hand did not give him a solution, talks were dragging on, but no solution was in sight, which is why I believe Prabakharan ensured that Rajapakse won the election. If Ranil had been around for much longer his movement would have imploded from within. Reading the Maveera speech of 2005 and the blame he puts on Ranil tells the whole story.
Having got his war, he now fights what appears to be a losing battle. Whether the State's heavy-handed response is sowing the seeds of a new round of conflict remains to be seen.
ps. For a more detailed view on this read this.
pps. For those who have wondered where the moderate Tamil voice has disappeared to read this, to understand why they are silent.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Remember, remember the fourth of November
I wonder how many recall the nursery rhyme:
Remember remember the fifth of November
Gunpowder, treason and plot.
I see no reason why gunpowder, treason
Should ever be forgot...
The rhyme, like some of their kind, refers to events in history; in this case to the gunpowder plot. On the 5th November 1605 Guy Fawkes was caught in the cellars of the Houses of Parliament with several dozen barrels of gunpowder. He and his fellow plotters (eight in all) were attempting to blow up parliament.
On the fourth of November 2003, Chandrika Bandaranaike staged a coup d’état overthrowing the government of Ranil Wickremesinghe and setting in motion events that stilled any hope of peace.
There have been a few turning points in the bloody history of post-colonial Ceylon and this was one of them. The election of SWRD Bandaranaike in 1956 and the riots of 1958; the dismembering of the civil service in the 1960's; the new constitutions of 1972 and 1978; black July 1983. Although seemingly less dramatic than some of the other crucial forks in the rocky road to serfdom, this was surely no less important for it set the stage for the autocratic state.
I have come to think that the power of democracy lies entirely in its institutions: the press, the judiciary and the legislature. Power does strange things to even the most well-meaning of people and once obtained it is rarely parted with willingly.
One never leaves office, one is always forced out; by the institutions. If one tries to cling on, one is first made a fool of by the press, one then finds it impossible to execute any orders for no one would carry them out, fearing retribution by the courts or possibly parliament.
These institutions have been neutered: directly by the constitution of 1978 and indirectly by the corruption it has enshrined. Now how much influence one wields is entirely dependent on how much money one can throw. The courts, the police, parliament are all under the sway of the executive and what rights that have been guaranteed under the constitution have been in near permanent suspension -for decades under the emergency regulations. Measures that were supposedly short-term are now a permanent feature.
Countries that succeeded in the post-colonial period did so largely to the extent that they preserved the status quo. Democracy is a fragile flower and is easily destroyed by those who do not understand what makes it work. In Europe, where it evolved in its modern form, it was the result of a thousand years of struggle - dating back to the Magna Carta of 1215, which was essentially a pact that attempted to check the King's power. Holding power in check is the essence of the system and it was not an easy victory either, being fiercely resisted over the centuries by many a ruler.
These hard-won freedoms will not be given up easily in Europe or the heirs to her traditions in the Americas or the former white dominions of Australia, Canada, New Zealand and elsewhere but in the strange lands of the East, where the peoples received their freedom more or less on a platter and where they do not understand the substance of the matter even though they speak highly of its forms, then there is danger and flower can whither and die.
Look no farther than our neighbours - Pakistan and Bangladesh and it is not difficult to see what lies at the end of the path that we tread.
Remember remember the fifth of November
Gunpowder, treason and plot.
I see no reason why gunpowder, treason
Should ever be forgot...
The rhyme, like some of their kind, refers to events in history; in this case to the gunpowder plot. On the 5th November 1605 Guy Fawkes was caught in the cellars of the Houses of Parliament with several dozen barrels of gunpowder. He and his fellow plotters (eight in all) were attempting to blow up parliament.
On the fourth of November 2003, Chandrika Bandaranaike staged a coup d’état overthrowing the government of Ranil Wickremesinghe and setting in motion events that stilled any hope of peace.
There have been a few turning points in the bloody history of post-colonial Ceylon and this was one of them. The election of SWRD Bandaranaike in 1956 and the riots of 1958; the dismembering of the civil service in the 1960's; the new constitutions of 1972 and 1978; black July 1983. Although seemingly less dramatic than some of the other crucial forks in the rocky road to serfdom, this was surely no less important for it set the stage for the autocratic state.
I have come to think that the power of democracy lies entirely in its institutions: the press, the judiciary and the legislature. Power does strange things to even the most well-meaning of people and once obtained it is rarely parted with willingly.
One never leaves office, one is always forced out; by the institutions. If one tries to cling on, one is first made a fool of by the press, one then finds it impossible to execute any orders for no one would carry them out, fearing retribution by the courts or possibly parliament.
These institutions have been neutered: directly by the constitution of 1978 and indirectly by the corruption it has enshrined. Now how much influence one wields is entirely dependent on how much money one can throw. The courts, the police, parliament are all under the sway of the executive and what rights that have been guaranteed under the constitution have been in near permanent suspension -for decades under the emergency regulations. Measures that were supposedly short-term are now a permanent feature.
Countries that succeeded in the post-colonial period did so largely to the extent that they preserved the status quo. Democracy is a fragile flower and is easily destroyed by those who do not understand what makes it work. In Europe, where it evolved in its modern form, it was the result of a thousand years of struggle - dating back to the Magna Carta of 1215, which was essentially a pact that attempted to check the King's power. Holding power in check is the essence of the system and it was not an easy victory either, being fiercely resisted over the centuries by many a ruler.
These hard-won freedoms will not be given up easily in Europe or the heirs to her traditions in the Americas or the former white dominions of Australia, Canada, New Zealand and elsewhere but in the strange lands of the East, where the peoples received their freedom more or less on a platter and where they do not understand the substance of the matter even though they speak highly of its forms, then there is danger and flower can whither and die.
Look no farther than our neighbours - Pakistan and Bangladesh and it is not difficult to see what lies at the end of the path that we tread.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)