[Karunanidhi, who earned sobriquets of ‘Thalaivar’ (The Leader) and ‘Kalaignar’ (The Artist) from his ardent followers, became DMK president in 1969 and held the position till his death] – Thalaivar Karunanidhi is dead, leaves void in Tamil Nadu – by Press Trust of India
One who did not groom an heir to a secular institution confirms high level of subjectivity. The official retirement age in Indian Public Service is reported to be 60. Thalaivar Karunanidhi therefore retired from position of Thalaivar at the 34 years ago. Thereafter he was Kalaignar – free to do as he pleased. Tamil Nadu failed to draw the line between Structural leadership and Spiritual leadership.
The other example of indiscriminate mixing of the two through subjective powers is Mr N Sathiya Moorthy, who is presented by the Island as follows:
[The writer is Director, Chennai Chapter of the Observer Research Foundation, the multi-disciplinary Indian public-policy think-tank, headquartered in New Delhi.]
Wikipedia states under Objectives of the Observer Research Foundation :
[ORF has wide ranging objectives pertaining to the aid and formulation of government policies; enabling representation of a broad section of opinions from all walks of life to strengthen India’s democracy; providing a coherent, well-thought out policy formulations and recommendations to improve governance; improving economic development and consequently bettering the quality of life for Indian citizens and giving directions to India’s foreign policy objectives.]
The Observer Research Foundation states about itself:
[Our mandate is to conduct in-depth research, provide inclusive platforms and invest in tomorrow’s thought leaders today.]
One is therefore entitled to conclude that Mr Sathiya Moorthy is entitled to contribute to India’s policy and through such set examples to other nations. But has Mr Sathiya Moorthy and therefore the Observer Research Foundation acted in breach of its Objects clause in relation to Sri Lankan Opposition Leadership – as if it was ‘made in India?’
Sri Lankan Tamils who are not currently conscious of their Indian origins – are Indigenous to various parts of Sri Lanka which are the only ‘homes’ they recognize. Tamils of Sri Lanka who fought for Separation to preserve this Indigenous identity are a diverse group within the Tamil Community. One such example is a Tamil who is now in France with whom I had the following conversation earlier this week:
Tamil in France : [Sorry l was not born here in France. My democratic rights here are respected under the contract sighed between the people according to their human rights declaration of 1873.
Sri Lanka did not respect the contract ]
Gaja : Thank you. To my mind, one does not need to have biological / birth connections to feel ownership and therefore Sovereignty
Tamil in France : BAD, SADLY YOUR ADOPTED COUNTRY AUSTRALIA, DID NOT FEEL YOUR RIGHTS AND YOUR EARNED SOVEREIGNTY AND SENT YOU TO PRISON,
AND SRI LANKA IS ALSO ADOPTED COUNTRY AS THEY ARE NOT WILLING TO ACCEPT ALL AS EQUALS TO THEM AND WHO WANT TO KEEP THEIR SOVERIGNTY TO THEMSELVES.
SO NO DIFFERENCE.
Gaja: In Thunaivi – they stoned my roof and would have raped and murdered me if I had continued to stay there accepting them stealing my things and using my property as if it was theirs. So Thunaivi ranks first in disowning me. Here in Australia I now distance myself from those who try to USE me. With those who show respect – I am fellow Australian. They are in the majority. Likewise, in Colombo including Northern Sri Lanka & Thunaivi. My sense of Independence guides me.
One who feels indigenous to any part of the country defined as Sri Lanka – is entitled to be treated as Sovereign to the extent Sri Lanka is considered Sovereign by a party.
I lived in Thunaivi which is an indigenous area within Vaddukoddai in Northern Sri Lanka. This helped me sense the possible pitfalls that would lead to them losing their independence as indigenous group. But to identify with their natural reactions I had to ‘forget’ my own investments in law and order in common areas. It’s virtual reality experience. At the time I felt personally threatened I drew the line to preserve my own true culture. That was when I reported the matter to the Police which resulted in my cottage being stoned.
Yesterday, I received a report from Vaddukoddai that like the Grease-man threats a few years back which was blamed on the Army as well – there are stone-throwing threats including near the famous Pathrakali Temple in Vaddukoddai. Some blamed the Armed forces. But those who had the direct experience like I did in Thunaivi – do not have the right to blame the Armed Forces unless they have clear evidence of it. Otherwise we are interfering in their Sovereignty and thereby diluting our own investment in preserving our heritage.
As an individual, I felt rewarded by my ownership – in Thunaivi that protected me from becoming a victim of those who indiscriminately expand the problem by blaming others. Mrs Vijakala Maheswaran is one such example. They are also infiltrators.
Sathiya Moorthy likewise, has infiltrated the Sri Lankan system as confirmed by the following:
[It started with Speaker Karu Jayasuriya elevating the TNA to the status of the ‘Leader of the Opposition’, when the ‘real Opposition’ to this Government, was already inside-outside, in the form of the ‘SLFP rebels’ of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa. To argue that there was a likely ‘national consensus’ on key issues as the Leader of the Opposition, TNA’s R Sampanthan, was on board, was a self-delusion at best and farcical otherwise.
Sampanthan’s elevation as the Leader of the Opposition became possible obviously done at the behest of incumbent President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, who too were expected to fall out at the first conceivable occasion. They have done so since, but then neither seems to be too bothered about the Constitution-making no real progress.]
Those of us who claim to be independent of the group that ‘claims’ to be ‘Sinhalese Nationalists’ have to not ‘think’ with them and therefore their dreams. As per the principles of Democracy – the same entity cannot be in Government as well as in Opposition. As per autocracy – the other side of our emotional expressions – happens with time. Hence ‘Time Will Tell’ philosophy. In Democracy – the other side is known immediately by the other half which is Independent and Equal in status to the custodian of authority. A party that is in Government as well as in Opposition does not have this independence. Hence it was as per the principles of Democracy that Mr Sampanthan became the leader of the Opposition.
Holding that position is the strongest contribution to Constitution that Mr Sampanthan makes. One must first live the existing Constitution and know its weaknesses that would lead to others ‘telling us’ how to make our home. Mr Sampanthan may or may not fail in this duty of his. To my mind, due to Section 157 A (1) which states – “ No person shall, directly or indirectly, in or outside Sri Lanka, support, espouse, promote, finance, encourage or advocate the establishment of a separate State within the territory of Sri Lanka.”
Mr Sampanthan would be erring if he did not fight against a de facto opposition to replace the Constitutional opposition and therefore the true half of Sri Lanka.
One who sees what happens – and judges – is an outsider who lacks the Sri Lankan experience. As a Tamil, Mr Sathiya Moorthi has failed to protect the dignity of Tamil Leadership and to my mind, this happens when one takes the Big Brother attitude.