Deconstructing Ravi - Island.lk

World Test Championship set to stay nine-team contest till 2031

‘Cricket reforms wouldn’t have happened if not for AKD’ – Wettimuny

Lihini wins Girls Under 18 Hard Court singles title

Aaron’s six wickets help S. Thomas’ take first innings lead

Matt Henry six-for and Will Young hundred crush India

A book on Ravindra Randeniya was long incoming, and now we have two. Full disclosure: I am the author of one of them. Gamini Weragama, arguably the most knowledgeable and reputed film critic writing in Sinhala today, has authored the other.

Weragama’s book was published by Sarasavi, mine by FastADS. Both were launched at a ceremony at the BMICH last Wednesday, June 5. The event, excellently put together by a hardworking, passionate team led by Dr Ranga Kalansooriya, witnessed a galaxy of actors, directors, critics, writers, MPs, even the president and prime minister. My friend Indunil put it in perspective: “the whole of Sinhala cinema was there that night.”

Ravindra is Ravi aiya to his colleagues, contemporaries, and juniors. He is by far the most distinguished, reputable actor alive in Sri Lanka. This is not to underplay or ignore any criticism we can make of him. Yet, as far as Sri Lankan actors go, he remains unmatched in the dazzling range and complexity he has embraced in role after role.

But there is more to Ravindra than the films he has been in and the roles he has taken on. Much more. To assess his career more carefully, I believe we need to look at him through a different lens and prism, specifically a sociohistorical one. This is the perspective I have adopted in parts of my book, but it is one which requires a radically different conception of actors and their place in our society.

Any assessment of Randeniya must, I think, begin from the fact that he came of age in 1956. That year has become pivotal for reasons which warrant a separate essay. More than anything, it launched the careers of an entirely different generation of artistes, including playwrights, filmmakers, musicians, and dancers.

While S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike was spreading the gospel of Sinhala Only throughout the country, Ravindra Randeniya was taking part in a Fifth Standard production of Sigiri Kashyapa at his school, St Benedict’s College, Kotahena. Incredibly, it was the only stage production he took part in at school. Indeed, he would not act in any production of any sort until more than a decade later, when he joined the Lionel Wendt Theatre Workshop. Why so? Because, in his own words, “I was more interested in literature than in theatre.”

A highly literate student, Ravindra immersed himself in the literature of his time, reading everyone from Martin Wickramasinghe to Siri Gunasinghe to Gunadasa Amarasekara to Mahagama Sekara. Though he watched films, he did so only occasionally, and was limited to standard Hollywood and Bollywood fare. Over time, he saw himself as a litterateur, though his larger ambition was to become a doctor.

For better or worse, Ravindra could not pursue his medical ambitions. He then got down to working for his father. By now, he was living through a completely different time. The Sinhala theatre was undergoing a revival, as was the cinema. Spurred on by the likes of Ediriweera Sarachchandra and Lester Peries, these mediums became more accessible to the Sinhala speaking masses, leading to the formation of independent theatre collectives which went against the grain and questioned accepted artistic conventions.

Ravindra’s entry into the cinema was preceded by three long but fateful years at the Lionel Wendt Theatre Workshop. The Workshop was a product of its time, and its impact on the country’s cultural community was considerable. However, for some reason, it has escaped the attention of critics. To understand its relevance for Ravindra, we ought to delve into the changes that were sweeping through Sri Lanka at that point.

In the 1950s and 1960s, a number of playwrights and theatre practitioners made their way to Western countries, through grants and scholarships. One of the first of these was Henry Jayasena, who travelled to both Russia and England. Gunasena Galappatti, who introduced García Lorca to Sri Lankan audiences, won a Fulbright Scholarship to the US, where he came under the influence of Uta Hagen and the Actors’ Studio. This was around the time that two other pioneering intellectuals – Gananath Obeyesekere and J. B. Disanayake – secured the Fulbright. The impact of these scholarships and exchange programmes on Sri Lanka’s cultural trajectory was massive, though it has never been researched in full.

Freed from the conventions of their predecessors, these dramatists experimented in different artistic forms and idioms. They fostered the growth of a bilingual cultural elite in Sri Lanka. They also attracted another group of playwrights, who hailed from a Sinhala-speaking lower middle-class and had found jobs in the country’s administrative service. Many among this group went on to form independent theatre collectives, the most popular of which was Sugathapala de Silva’s Ape Kattiya , along with Premaranjith Tillekeratne’s 63 Kandayama – a breakaway faction from Ape Kattiya – and G. D. L. Perera’s Kala Pela.

These playwrights were driven by an almost visceral aversion to Sarachchandra’s mixture of stylised and realist theatre. Premaranjith, in particular, took a strong dislike to what he saw as the great man’s opposition to Western theatrical forms. “When I once played for him a recording from West Side Story,” he related to me, “he just winced and said, ‘What is this cacophony?’” Such encounters persuaded Tillekeratne and his peers that the country was in need of a different conception of theatre and art.

Of course, to limit the Lionel Wendt Theatre Workshop to the efforts of these innovators alone would be to credit one group, when there was in fact several other groups involved in its establishment and founding. Sarachchandra himself became a founding figure, as did scholars like Percy Colin-Thomé, A. J. Gunawardena, and Wimal Dissanayake, together with artistes from other fields, like Chitrasena, Manjusri, and Amaradeva.

Looming above all of them was Dhamma Jagoda. A dramatist, connoisseur of the arts, and fiery radical, Jagoda was instrumental in formulating a syllabus for the Workshop. Together with Harold Peiris, he came up with a curriculum which could impart the best and the latest in Western, European, and Asian theatre to students.

Jagoda himself had travelled abroad on a grant. In 1967-1968, following his production of Tennessee Williams’s A Streetcar Named Desire – Sinhalised as Ves Muhunu and starring the likes of Roma de Zoysa, Rukmani Devi, and Sunethra Sarachchandra – he had secured a scholarship from the British Council. Visiting more than 15 countries, and ending up in New York, he had not just met Lee Strasberg but also talked with Marlon Brando.

Jagoda was tempestuous and unpredictable, a Picasso-like genius who resorted to the most unconventional methods. “He gave up everything to dedicate himself to teaching,” his wife Manel, who became involved in the Workshop, first as a student and then as an organiser, recalls. Ravindra’s senior by four years, he mentored the budding actor well. “He was an almost fanatical stickler for time,” Ravindra remembered him. “Once I got five minutes late, and he put me out, telling me that we should be five minutes early.”

If these anecdotes and encounters put Ravindra in the background, that is because Ravindra was a product of his times, and there is no use deconstructing him without deconstructing the period he hailed from. Moreover, Ravindra’s forays into the cinema were conditioned by his experience in the theatre, for at least two reasons.

First, the Workshop made him more receptive to the intricacies of acting: he had signed up originally for backstage work, among other subjects, but Dhamma pulled him into acting classes. “It made me more sensitive to the art of acting, which I had not seen as an art until then.” Second, because it involved the leading cultural figures of the day, the Workshop attracted the interest of filmmakers, actors, and critics. By 1972, when he passed out with a Diploma, Ravindra was hence getting offers from the likes of Lester Peries.

All these points have been laid bare in the two books on Ravindra. The man’s achievements cannot be emphasised enough. Ravindra redefined what it meant to be an actor in Sri Lanka. The stage had already been set for him by Gamini Fonseka, Joe Abeywickrema, and Tony Ranasinghe. Ravindra continued their legacy while breaking with their tradition: in effect, by cultivating a range almost unparalleled among his predecessors.

It is thus wrong to pigeonhole Ravindra into one type of role and to overlook his diversity. That diversity is what makes the man tick. The Lionel Wendt Theatre Workshop, and the developments of the 1960s, had a huge say on his evolution. It would be wrong to overlook those developments too. This is the point of our books.

Uditha Devapriya is a writer, researcher, and analyst who writes on topics such as history, art and culture, politics, and foreign policy. He is one of the two leads in U & U, an informal art and culture research collective. He can be reached at [email protected] .

Rising election fever; feminine concerns and help

President chief guest at “Ravi – Self-Reflection on Half-Century in Cinema”

From rural Sri Lanka, solidarity for Gaza and American students protesting for Palestine

“Dadayama” and the Sinhala middle – cinema

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

by Prof. Ranjith Bandara Emeritus Professor of Economics, University of Colombo

The 2027 Budget has been presented with ambitious promises, large financial allocations and renewed assurances of economic transformation. The government speaks confidently about recovery, stability and a better future.

But one important question remains.

Is this a budget designed to transform Sri Lanka’s economy, or another exercise in presenting attractive numbers and political promises?

A national budget should be more than a statement of government income and expenditure. It should tell the country where its economy is heading and how it intends to get there.

After years of economic hardship, people expect more than financial targets. They want affordable living, secure employment, better incomes and confidence in their future.

Investors want policy certainty. Young people want opportunities. Businesses want an environment in which they can grow.

Unfortunately, the 2027 Budget does not offer a sufficiently convincing strategy to meet these expectations.

Economic recovery is not economic development

Sri Lanka has made progress in restoring macroeconomic stability. Inflation has become more manageable than during the worst of the crisis. Revenue collection has improved. Fiscal discipline has received greater attention.

These achievements should be recognised.

However, economic stability is only the starting point.

The Budget estimates revenue and grants of Rs. 6.18 trillion against expenditure of approximately Rs. 7.93 trillion, including supplementary disaster-related spending.

The fiscal deficit is projected at around Rs. 1.75 trillion. Interest payments alone amount to Rs. 2.64 trillion.

These figures reveal the continuing pressure on government finances.

More importantly, they raise a question about development priorities.

How much of public expenditure will genuinely strengthen the country’s productive capacity? How much will create lasting employment? How much will generate future income rather than merely finance current commitments?

The government hopes to achieve economic growth of at least 7% in the medium term. Yet the World Bank projects growth of 4.2% for 2027.

Closing this gap requires investment, productivity improvements and institutional reforms.

Announcing an ambitious growth target is easy. Creating the conditions to achieve it is much harder.

Cost of living remains real economic test

For ordinary families, economic recovery is measured differently.

They look at the cost of food, electricity, transport, medicine and education. They compare their monthly income with their household expenses.

Many still struggle to make ends meet.

The Budget proposes tax concessions and social assistance. The increase in the monthly income-tax-free threshold to Rs. 162,500 will benefit some employees. Allocations for Aswesuma and other social protection programmes will also help vulnerable households.

But they do not fully address the underlying problem.

Millions of low-income workers receive no direct benefit from income tax reductions. Their main problem is inadequate income and the high cost of essential goods.

Colombo inflation reached 8.3% in October 2026. Even when inflation falls, prices do not necessarily return to earlier levels.

People need higher real incomes, not merely announcements about lower inflation.

A meaningful budget should explain how production costs will fall, how market competition will improve and how household purchasing power will increase.

Economic recovery means little if families continue to struggle to afford a decent life.

A generation without economic confidence

Youth unemployment remains one of Sri Lanka’s greatest challenges.

In the second quarter of 2026, overall unemployment stood at 4%. But unemployment among young people aged 15–24 was 17.8%. Among young women, it was even higher.

These are not merely labour market statistics. They represent thousands of young people uncertain about their future.

The Budget refers to training, digital development and public-sector recruitment.

But training alone does not create employment. Nor can the government continue expanding public employment indefinitely.

The country needs businesses that invest, expand production and recruit skilled workers.

Where is the comprehensive strategy to create well-paid jobs in manufacturing, technology, modern agriculture, logistics and professional services?

How many such jobs are expected from the Budget’s proposals?

Without clear answers, overseas employment will remain attractive to educated and skilled young Sri Lankans.

Migration can support households through remittances. But the continued loss of skilled people also weakens the country’s long-term development prospects.

A successful development strategy must give young people reasons to build their futures in Sri Lanka.

Who will benefit from economic growth?

Another major concern is the unequal distribution of economic opportunities.

According to World Bank estimates, poverty remained at 16.9% in 2025.

Many rural households, estate communities and low-income urban families continue to face serious difficulties.

Economic growth does not automatically improve their lives.

The Budget includes welfare payments, housing support and regional development allocations.

But the critical question is whether these measures will create lasting economic opportunities.

Will farmers earn more from their production? Will small businesses gain better access to finance and markets? Will women have greater opportunities to enter productive employment?

Social assistance is essential for vulnerable households. Yet welfare payments cannot replace income-generating opportunities.

The real achievement of development is not the number of people receiving assistance, but the number who can eventually live without depending on it.

Perhaps the greatest weakness of the Budget is the absence of a sufficiently clear and integrated economic transformation strategy.

Sri Lanka cannot build a strong future through government expenditure, tourism and workers’ remittances alone.

It must produce more, export more and compete more effectively in international markets.

The Budget includes proposals for public investment, railway modernisation, business financing, export incentives and investment facilitation.

Which industries will become the country’s major sources of future growth? How will agriculture become more productive? How will small enterprises connect with export markets? How will technology improve industrial competitiveness?

A development budget should answer these questions through clear priorities and measurable targets.

Investment confidence is equally important.

Investors need predictable taxation, efficient government services, reliable infrastructure and consistent economic policies.

They also need confidence that political decisions will not suddenly change the business environment.

A country cannot attract sufficient private investment through incentives alone.

Unless these structural problems are addressed, the ambition of creating a competitive production and service economy will remain uncertain.

Problem is not allocation, but belivery

The Budget proposes approximately Rs. 2 trillion for public investment, including supplementary reconstruction spending.

However, public expenditure figures mean little unless projects are implemented effectively.

By the end of June 2026, only 16.3% of the annual capital expenditure allocation had been spent. By September, reported spending had reached just 31.6%.

Such slow implementation raises serious concerns about administrative capacity.

Will project approvals become faster? Will procurement procedures improve? Will government institutions coordinate more effectively?

The Budget should not merely announce money for development. It should establish accountability for delivery.

Every major project should have a timetable, an identified responsible institution and measurable results.

A billion rupees announced is not a billion rupees of development achieved.

From the Election Manifesto to Economic Reality

The government’s election manifesto promised a more productive, fair and prosperous Sri Lanka.

It raised expectations of a different approach to economic management and public administration.

The 2027 Budget should therefore be judged against those commitments.

There are positive proposals. But much of its immediate appeal comes from allowances, concessions, public-sector benefits and visible spending announcements.

These may provide political advantages. Some also respond to genuine social needs. Yet political popularity and economic transformation are not the same. A government must demonstrate how its policies will increase productivity, expand employment, reduce inequality and improve living standards.

Otherwise, the distance between election promises and economic reality may continue to widen.

This matters beyond politics. When people see impressive announcements without meaningful changes in their daily lives, frustration grows. Social unrest may not disappear simply because macroeconomic indicators have improved. Public confidence depends on visible progress, fairness and credible opportunities.

Are we heading towards another IMF programme?

The Budget also raises important questions about Sri Lanka’s future relationship with the International Monetary Fund.

The President stated that the present IMF programme is expected to conclude in March 2027. A Cabinet-appointed committee is examining the possibility of another arrangement.

This deserves serious public discussion.

Another IMF programme is not necessarily a sign of failure. A precautionary arrangement may help protect the economy against future shocks.

However, repeated dependence on external financial support would raise questions about the sustainability of Sri Lanka’s recovery. Are export earnings expanding sufficiently? Is private investment recovering strongly enough? Are foreign exchange reserves and debt-servicing capacity becoming more secure? If these weaknesses remain unresolved, the country may need further IMF support sooner or later. The real challenge is not simply completing an IMF programme. It is building an economy that can maintain stability, finance investment and meet its external obligations without repeatedly depending on emergency assistance.

Sri Lanka needs direction, not another number game

The 2027 Budget contains useful proposals. It also reflects some progress in fiscal management.

But it remains more convincing as a statement of financial intentions than as a comprehensive development strategy.

The government must clearly identify the industries it wants to develop, the jobs it intends to create, the investments it hopes to attract and the improvements people should expect in their living standards. It must connect spending with outcomes.

It must also strengthen public administration and rebuild trust among investors, businesses and ordinary citizens.

Most importantly, it must explain how economic stability will become broadly shared prosperity.

Sri Lanka does not need another competition over the size of budget allocations. It needs a credible national economic direction.

A budget may impress Parliament with billions. But its real success must be measured in the lives of millions.

Until that happens, one uncomfortable question will remain:

Are we rebuilding the economy, or merely managing its problems while preparing for the next crisis?

Continue Reading Features Saving Sri Lanka’s tomato crop from destructive pest Published

Tomatoes are among Sri Lanka’s most widely consumed vegetables, providing income to thousands of farming families and supporting rural traders, restaurants and food-processing enterprises. Yet a destructive insect pest threatens both production and farmers’ livelihoods, warranting urgent national attention.

, commonly known as the tomato leaf miner and fruit borer, attacks tomato leaves, shoots and fruits. Its larvae feed inside plant tissues, making infestations difficult to detect and control once established.

Field observations have raised concerns that approximately 30% of Sri Lanka’s annual tomato crop could be wasted, with inadequate farmer knowledge of pest management identified as a possible contributing factor. This figure, however, is not a scientifically established national loss estimate. Independent research is needed to determine the proportion of losses directly attributable to this pest, as distinct from other pests, diseases and post-harvest losses.

Nevertheless, the concern raises an important question: how much food and farmer income could Sri Lanka save through better scientific knowledge, timely monitoring and affordable pest management?

A known threat requiring renewed attention

Sri Lanka has known about Tuta absoluta for several years. Research published in The Tropical Agriculturist in December 2019 documented its first detection in the country in July 2017, in tomato polytunnels in the Keppetipola, Boralanda and Kolathenna areas of Badulla District. By 2018, the pest had also been identified in open-field cultivation.

Scientists associated with agricultural research institutions, including the Regional Agricultural Research and Development Centre in Bandarawela and the Horticultural Crops Research and Development Institute (HORDI) at Gannoruwa, investigated different management strategies.

Their findings established a scientific basis for monitoring and controlling the pest. Pheromone traps were found useful for monitoring adult moth populations, while compact fluorescent light traps showed potential for mass trapping under the greenhouse conditions studied.

A separate study reported through the University of Peradeniya in 2019 found infestations in different tomato-growing environments in Badulla District. All four varieties examined were susceptible, with significantly higher infestation levels in protected cultivation than in open fields.

Sri Lanka therefore possesses research evidence on the pest’s presence and potential management methods. The crucial question is whether this knowledge has reached farmers effectively.

Pheromone technology: bridging the knowledge gap

Species-specific sex pheromones are an important component of Tuta absoluta management. These chemical signals attract male moths to monitoring traps, enabling growers to detect pest activity before extensive damage becomes apparent.

Pheromone traps are not a complete control solution. They should form part of integrated pest management, incorporating regular crop inspection, field sanitation, removal of infested plant material, biological control where appropriate and other scientifically validated interventions.

Agricultural discussions have raised concerns that pheromone products were previously made available to growers through Cargills, but insufficient farmer demand may have discouraged further imports. This account requires verification.

Cargills and other suppliers should be invited to clarify whether they imported or marketed Tuta absoluta -specific pheromone lures, the quantities and prices involved, the level of farmer adoption and whether subsequent imports were discontinued. If supplies were withdrawn, the reasons should be established.

The objective is not to criticise a private company without evidence. Rather, the experience could reveal weaknesses in agricultural extension and technology transfer.

Making a product available does not automatically constitute successful innovation. Farmers must understand its purpose, learn how to use it and recognise whether its benefits justify the cost. Without adequate education and field demonstrations, even effective technologies may fail commercially.

A damaging cycle can then emerge: farmers remain unaware of the technology, sales remain low, suppliers hesitate to reorder, and access becomes more difficult. Government agricultural extension services and private-sector distributors must work together to break this cycle.

A national awareness and monitoring programme

The Director General of Agriculture should initiate a coordinated Tuta absoluta awareness and monitoring programme in consultation with provincial agricultural authorities.

The first phase should begin in Welimada and surrounding tomato-growing areas of Badulla District, where the pest was initially detected. The programme should then expand to suitable tomato-growing areas in Nuwara Eliya and Matale districts before extending surveillance and training across all nine provinces according to actual cultivation patterns and pest risks.

Agricultural instructors should be equipped to explain the insect’s life cycle, recognise its characteristic damage and demonstrate appropriate monitoring methods. Training should be conducted in Sinhala and Tamil, supported by clear illustrations and practical demonstrations in farmers’ fields.

Farmers must understand that Tuta absoluta is an insect pest rather than a plant disease, because accurate identification determines the appropriate response. They should also be warned that indiscriminate insecticide applications can increase production costs, harm beneficial organisms and contribute to insecticide resistance.

Training should therefore promote integrated pest management rather than dependence on any single commercial product.

Agricultural retailers, nursery operators, vegetable collectors, supermarkets, transporters and producer organisations should also participate in identifying problems and disseminating recommendations. Universities, research institutes and responsible private-sector suppliers can contribute scientific expertise and practical support.

Radio, television, newspapers and mobile-friendly educational materials should reinforce field demonstrations. Communication must continue throughout tomato-growing seasons rather than being confined to occasional publicity campaigns.

The programme should have clearly assigned responsibilities, measurable outcomes and a defined timetable.

First 30 days: establish scientific leadership.

The Director General of Agriculture should appoint a technical committee led by agricultural entomologists and integrated pest management specialists. HORDI Gannoruwa, the Bandarawela research establishment, relevant universities and provincial extension services should participate. The committee should review available research, assess current infestation patterns, identify reliable pheromone products and prepare a standard monitoring protocol.

The reported 30% crop-loss figure should also be subjected to independent field assessment. Potential suppliers should be consulted about product availability, historical demand, import constraints and distribution prospects.

Days 31–90: conduct field demonstrations.

Demonstrations should begin in Welimada and extend to selected locations in Nuwara Eliya and Matale districts. Existing farmer practices should be compared with scientifically supervised integrated pest management incorporating pheromone monitoring.

Researchers should record pest activity, fruit damage, marketable yields, intervention costs and farmer understanding. The Department of Agriculture should publish practical guidance on trap selection, positioning, inspection and replacement, based on validated local recommendations.

Months 4–6: expand provincial participation.

Provincial agricultural authorities should appoint focal officers to coordinate training and monitoring. Resource allocation should reflect actual tomato cultivation and documented pest incidence. A national information system should record confirmed infestations, monitoring results, farmer participation and the availability of essential equipment.

Quality-assured pheromone lures should be distributed through appropriate agricultural service centres and commercial suppliers. Targeted support for small growers could be considered if evidence demonstrates that cost is a significant barrier.

Months 7–12: evaluate and institutionalise the programme.

An independent assessment should examine adoption rates, reductions in damaged fruit, changes in marketable yields and economic benefits. Successful practices should become part of routine agricultural extension services, with procurement and distribution arrangements strengthened where necessary.

Preventable crop losses affect more than individual farmers. They reduce food availability, weaken rural incomes and disrupt the vegetable supply chain.

Consider an illustrative calculation. A farmer expecting 25,000 kilograms of tomatoes per hectare who suffers a 30% loss would lose 7,500 kilograms of potential marketable production. At an assumed farm-gate price of Rs. 200 per kilogram, the resulting gross revenue loss would be Rs. 1.5 million per hectare.

These figures are illustrative assumptions, not verified national yields, current prices or confirmed losses caused by Tuta absoluta . Nevertheless, they demonstrate why even a modest reduction in avoidable damage could benefit farmers substantially.

A proper national assessment should distinguish losses attributable to this pest from those caused by other factors. It should also determine whether early monitoring reduces unnecessary insecticide expenditure and protects beneficial insects.

Ultimately, programme success should be measured through improved marketable yields, higher net farm returns and more reliable vegetable supplies.

Accountability must accompany awareness

The initiative must not become another programme whose success is measured merely by the number of workshops conducted. Indicators should include farmers reached, confirmed pest incidence, adoption of recommended monitoring methods, availability of quality-assured lures, reductions in crop damage and improvements in farmer income.

Independent researchers should validate the results, while provincial authorities submit regular progress reports and the Department of Agriculture publishes consolidated findings. Private companies should participate through transparent arrangements that protect scientific independence and prevent inappropriate product promotion.

The Director General of Agriculture is respectfully urged to convene the relevant scientific, extension and commercial stakeholders, establish an action plan and launch the programme in Welimada before extending it according to verified need.

Cargills and other agricultural input suppliers should be invited to share their experience and assess opportunities to restore or expand access to reliable pheromone-monitoring technology.

Above all, farmers must be treated as partners in agricultural innovation. Sri Lanka’s agricultural future depends not only on generating scientific knowledge but also on ensuring that it reaches the field, is understood by growers and produces measurable improvements.

Every tomato saved from preventable pest damage represents additional food for consumers, income for farmers and value for the national economy. The time has come to turn existing scientific findings into practical national action.

Lalin I. de Silva is a value chain management journalist at Vivonta Green Tech Consultants and the Proprietary Planters Alliance (Pvt) Ltd, and a former senior planter and agricultural adviser/consultant.

Principal scientific reference: Hadji, T. K. A. I., et al. (2019). Evaluation of different management

strategies to control Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) in tomato. Tropical Agriculturist, 167(4), 34–50.

Neoliberalism operates on the core philosophical premise that greed is a functional virtue. Popularised by thinkers like Milton Friedman and politically implemented by the Reagan and Thatcher administrations, in the US and the UK, respectively, the doctrine argues that unrestrained individual self-interest and profit maximisation naturally yield the most efficient distribution of resources. Over time, this created a structural dependence on greed through several key mechanisms. Firstly, to maximise quick capital gains, advanced economies shifted away from building physical infrastructure or supporting robust jobs toward speculative finance. Profit was prioritised over human development. This resulted in wages for the working and middle classes remaining largely stagnant while corporate profits surged. Consequently, consumer demand could only be maintained through cheap credit. When consumers failed to pay up and the debt bubbles burst, the state stepped in as the “lender of last resort” which saved the companies at the expense of people. Further, privatisation and state austerity targeted public services like healthcare, affordable housing, and education. Treating these fundamental human needs as profit-driven market commodities has led to extreme wealth inequality and diminished social welfare. This shows that neoliberalism cannot afford to hurt the corporate world which appears to be needing protection at the expense of public good.

Symptoms of implosion within the structure of neoliberal model are already visible. The neoliberalists expected tax cuts and deregulation to have a “trickledown effect” resulting in widespread prosperity. On the contrary such policies have caused wealth accumulation enriching the top 1% while crippling the purchasing power of the majority. Unfettered free trade and globalization was expected to ensure borderless stability but what has happened instead is that extreme vulnerabilities in supply chains have prompted a massive return to protectionism and tariff wars. Furthermore, champions of market economy expected markets to foster individual liberty and safeguard open societies, but rampant inequality and economic insecurity have fueled deep institutional distrust, loss of confidence in democratic governance, spawning sharp populist reactions on both the political left and right. Youth-led unrest in Europe is the latest manifestation of the apparent failure of the global economic system. There had been previous uprisings against this system in Europe as well as the US where the “Occupy Wall Street” campaign was a strong message against greed.

There is a growing global consensus among policymakers, including former critics and defenders alike, that the neoliberal era is coming to a close and the practical reality is being realised that an economy built solely around capital returns eventually runs out of the stability it needs to survive. That is the economic aspect of it, while the psychological aspect is greed and selfishness. The latter two human characteristics were considered ‘good’ because they were supposed to promote enterprise and sharpen competitiveness. Now, it is being realised that competition could be harmful to the human system and entrepreneurship is a tool of exploitation.

Leaving aside greed, which may be the driving force of consumerism, the vital ingredient for the survival of capitalism, one could examine the inherent contradiction of the present global economic system. As mentioned above in the last several decades the profits have surged while wages have stagnated and the purchasing power of the working class has reduced. Large profits are necessary to keep capitalism afloat. This in turn made it difficult to keep real incomes of the working class commensurate with rising cost of living. The incongruity of this situation is that capitalism cannot survive unless consumerism thrives which does not happen when purchasing power of people dwindles. State intervention by lending to keep consumerism going does not work as the ‘debt buble’ would eventually burst. This is the inherent contradiction of capitalism particularly in unfettered neoliberalism. The IMF and the World Bank were restructured to enable design of the world economic order to suit the neo-liberal policies.

Western philosophers did not study the psychology of greed in depth and therefore could not see the overall damage it could cause. Although the Bible and Jesus Christ have advised against avarice, John Calvin the 16th Century French theologian proclaimed that making profit was morally acceptable within Christianity giving a licence, as it were, for unfettered capitalism. In contrast the Buddha saw the fallacy of theories that encouraged greed and he delved deeply into the psychology of greed. He saw that the cause of human predicament is greed and found the means to control it. The political and economic message that Buddha’s theory conveys is that if poverty (suffering) is to be resolved greed needs to be brought under control.

There is another dimension to the problem pertaining to the present world order, and that is the climate change which is also caused by excessive human greed. Planet Earth is in peril due to global warming and overconsumption of its resources, two factors that contribute to climate change and cause damage to ecosystems that are essential for its survival. This is a direct result of adopting consumerism as the driving force of the present world order, the underlying philosophy of which is neo-liberalism driven by market forces. This market heavily depends on human greed which by nature could be insatiable, particularly when there seems to be unlimited attractions produced by the capitalist system. Paradoxically, if greed is controlled this economic system may collapse. Consumerism has been made the purpose of existence so that greed continues to operate unabated. Free market and greed feed each other. Furthermore, this state of affairs causes widening inequality and extreme poverty that constitutes yet another threat to the continuation of the present world order.

It is obvious that this state of affairs is unsustainable as the twin threats of poverty and environmental degradation would make life impossible on this planet. Unfortunately, world leaders are slow in reacting to this threat. Trump has repeatedly stated that climate change and associated environmental outcomes to be a ‘hoax’ a ‘scam’ and a ‘con-job’. The French President has blamed left politics for the youth-led uprisings which in fact have been caused by unaffordability and inequality. Both global poverty and climate change are caused by excessive greed and neither could be resolved without dismantling neoliberalism. The world cannot wait until neoliberalism implodes and destroys itself. The world must unite and create a new world order as early as possible, aimed at alleviating poverty and safeguarding the environment. Third World countries must cooperate with one another in this endeavour.

Unfortunately, some countries, including ours, though said to be governed by a left leaning party, still continue to embrace neoliberalism without reservation and they wholeheartedly collude with the worst offenders of consumption and pollution.

GMOA seeks restoration of duty-free vehicle permits

Government makes charity difficult in Sri Lanka – Pethiyagoda

Iran allows ship carrying fertiliser for SL to pass Strait of Hormuz

Failure to heed PM’s directive worsened Colombo floods: Patali

Monks defy court order as protest over A’pura development plan intensifies

Colombo floods: Facts beneath political sludge

Devananda to hand back Jaffna shops he held for 30 years to their owners

“It Will Be Forgotten in a Week” No Longer Works: Colombo’s Floods and the Demand for Proactive Governance

Copyright © 2020 Upali Newspapers (Pvt) Ltd. Solution by LankaCom Privacy Policy