Quest for system change paralysed by our metathesiophobia

If we are to thrive, as a nation, in this dynamic landscape, we must adopt a mindset that is not fearful of change

Whither our quest for the long-awaited system change? Is metathesiophobia, the intense fear of change, blocking it? 

The clarion call for a ‘system change’ which reverberated through the island in 2022 as the spirit of the ‘Aragalaya’ permeated the fabric of Sri Lankan society has subsided today to just a whimper. Although ‘system change’ was not specifically defined, it was widely accepted as referring to a change in the system of national and public governance. Further, it was referring to change in the inequity in the application of the rule of law, the rampancy of bribery and corruption born out of Government’s inability to provide citizens with the basic necessities of life ranging from education, health care and public transport to services such as licensing, trade permits and construction permits, the unbridled use of political power in all facets of public life, extravagance of politicians and their families, extent of nepotism and unequal opportunities and the prevalence of non-meritocracy in most everything. 

The ‘Aragalaya’ sought radical change. The uprising which was sparked by shortages of fuel, food and medicines, rising prices, long power cuts, scarcity of foreign exchange and various Government excesses was very ‘Gandhian’ in its conduct. It was a pivotal, and refreshing, moment in the country’s history when thousands of Sri Lankans from diverse ethnicities, religions and generations came together after eons to collectively, and peacefully, display their frustrations and anger of the economic mismanagement of the then Gotabaya Rajapaksa Government and the many Governments before that. With very little to show after several years of independence it appeared, then, that Sri Lanka was on the cusp of a transformative political and social change. 

In its early days, the movement consisted of citizens from all walks of life. From ‘corporate captains’ keen to secure brownie points by being seen at the ‘Aragalaya’, the ‘in-place’ then, to the humble worker financially burdened by the follies of their leaders, there was a great show of solidarity and camaraderie. The call for a new order was widespread and deafening. With Galle Face being the principal meeting place of the ‘Aragalaya’ movement it was not surprising that most of the participants were citizens resident in Colombo and its suburbs. This was noteworthy because the citizens resident in Colombo had at various times in the past shown aloofness in supporting the economic and social needs of their poorer cousins resident outside of Colombo. 

The movement was totally non-violent until its infiltration by parties who had objectives different to those pursued by the originators of the ‘Aragalaya’. On the eve of another presidential election in Sri Lanka, we need to ask ourselves, “What happened to the fervour of purpose which fuelled the ‘Aragalaya’? Have the citizens, particularly those living in Colombo, lost their passion for a change in the system because they are happy with the availability of fuel and gas and the absence of queues and power cuts? 

Easily satisfied by superficial changes

The objective of this article is not to analyse the pros and cons of the ‘Aragalaya’ but to understand why we, the citizens of Sri Lanka, are so easily satisfied by superficial changes and are so hesitant in taking those uncomfortable steps which are critical in addressing the root cause of many significant issues which we have faced at various moments of our history. Whilst opinions may differ, the facts are stubborn in evidencing that we are easily satisfied with quick, short-term wins brought about by ‘path of least resistance’ actions which have merely altered the optics but have not attacked the root causes such as bribery and corruption, inequality and nepotism. Although we talk big, behave ‘macho’, and exhibit a great desire to right the wrongs per our initial approaches, we frequently fall well short in delivering the ‘coup de grace’. 

We are loath to supporting, implementing and tolerating the painful measures which are essential in terminating the offending elements once and for all, despite the ruinous effects they have had on our lives. Why is that we rarely attack the heart of the problem? Superficial improvements make us forget our initial agitations. Time and again, we are appeased by the temporary look and feel of the sticking plaster which covers the festering sore and the comforting effect of the soft wool which is pulled over our eyes. We rarely take things to a conclusion.

For example, we have been demanding the abolition of the executive presidency since the early 1980s. This is because the citizens of Sri Lanka recognised the negatives of the strong nexus between the concentration of power in the executive president and Sri Lanka’s multiple crises which have arisen because of excessive powers, lack of accountability, substandard governance, and economic mismanagement. Lest we forget, this is a promise which all the presidential candidates have made since 1994. President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga was swept into power on a pledge to abolish the executive presidency system. She received a clear mandate to do so in 1994. She did not live up to her promise. Yet, despite the broken promise, we the citizens rewarded her by re-electing her in 1999. We are so quick to forget. We have always been so gullible.

Although the ‘Yahapalanaya Government’ which came into power in 2015 fell well short of what it had originally promised and what the public expected of them vis a vis a system change, it did introduce some reform through the 19th Amendment to the Constitution. Among those were the limiting of the term of office of the President to five years, the limiting of the number of terms to two and the establishment of a Constitutional Council. However, the abolishment of the executive presidency never happened nor was it sincerely attempted. It is oft found that the taste of power overwhelms even the noblest intentions. 

The Government attributed the watering down to a lack of consensus in parliament, a lack of consensus within the reform coalition and a choice between a long haul and a short haul due to the Supreme Court holding that the envisaged change required a two-thirds majority in parliament and the assent of the public through a referendum. The convenience of short termism over the permanency of long termism prevailed. The Government, therefore, presented a very modest bill and we the citizens were satisfied with the small win. 

Then there was the Constitutional Crisis of 2018 when the then president Maithripala Sirisena (MS) dismissed the incumbent prime minister Ranil Wickremesinghe (RW) and appointed Mahinda Rajapaksa (MR) resulting in two concurrent prime ministers. The majority in parliament refused to accept this move on the grounds it was unconstitutional. After attempts by RW to reconvene parliament and move by MS to dissolve parliament, the Supreme Court initially stayed MS’s move to dissolve parliament and then ruled that MS’s actions were unconstitutional. MR backed down from claiming the office and RW was reinstated. The crisis saw the awakening of the spirit of democracy in Sri Lanka’s citizenry. Citizens spontaneously mobilised to defend constitutional governance, democracy, and freedom. 

Political consciousness was raised

The initial response of citizens was mutedly aggressive. There was nevertheless an outcry for a system change. Civil rights movements backed by scholars, thought leaders, pundits and experts proposed alternate governance models. Political consciousness was raised. Political education increased. Something positive was happening. Unfortunately, like most other initiatives, these movements fell prey to the allure of “what is there for me” syndrome and soon fizzled out. They deviated from a starting approach of selflessness to one of selfishness. It was starkly evident that unless we take the “I” and “Me” out of the purpose/goals of these efforts, future attempts to change the current political system will bear no fruit. The dangers of too much power in the executive president was experienced and was there for all to see. 

However, as soon as the crisis ended, the hunger and demand for a system change waned and life reverted to the passive Sri Lankan norm. We had more opportunities for system changes at the Presidential elections in 2019 and general elections in 2020. The Gotabaya Rajapaksa government, which came into power with a comfortable majority, made no attempt to abolish the executive presidency. As it so happened, a combination of citizen’s votes and parliamentary crossovers enabled the Gotabaya Rajapaksa Government to enjoy the two-thirds majority which was essential in enacting the 20th Amendment to the constitution. This happened within two months of coming into power.

This amendment not only rolled back the democratic reforms introduced via the 19th Amendment in 2015 but conferred on the presidency the unfettered executive rights which the masses and legislators had been wanting to curtail since the early 1980s. The excessive powers of the executive president have been a constant bane of Sri Lankan life. It was therefore not surprising that an unequivocal demand of the ‘Aragalaya’ was the abolition of the executive presidency. As another presidential election draws nigh, there has been no clear promise from any of the aspiring candidates to abolish the executive presidency and we, the citizens, also appear to be content with that?

As we prepare to vote in the 9th Executive President of Sri Lanka, let us recognise some hard truths. Sri Lanka has very little to show after 76 years of independence. Selfish, sleazy, sly, corrupt and unaccountable leaders and their Governments have, through their policies, actions, and inactions, over the past several years, led the country into various political and economic crises ranging from ethnic conflicts including a 30-year-long civil war, insurrections, constitutional uprisings, race-based riots, ‘Easter bombings’ to economic collapse, social discord and bankruptcy. Bribery and corruption pervade every nook and corner of the system. It has been the scourge of our society particularly in the past half century. 

Skilful deception and masterful subtlety

The inequal application of the law has given rise to an inequality of opportunity. Freedom of expression has been, and is being, whittled down gradually with skilful deception and masterful subtlety under the guise of preventing terrorism and safeguarding rights. Meritocracy is no longer a differentiator, but nepotism is. The country’s health, education and public transport services are woefully inadequate, inefficient and outdated. The economic and social burdens created by the incompetence of the rulers and their henchmen, and the greed of the ‘well to do’ have been conveniently and insensitively piled on those who are least able to bear it. Wrong doers and perpetrators roam free and some of them are still highly sought by power hungry presidential candidates and their political parties. Poverty levels have increased. So has malnutrition among children. 

Poorly worded legislation hastily introduced for political and personal expediency has attracted regular challenge and is creating great uncertainty in everyday life and economic markets. Their shallowness has led to a loss of credibility in the rulers. Just as it happened when Sri Lanka gained its independence, the formulation of policies and the establishment of procedures and processes are, in the main, still the domain of the ‘Colombo’ elites who have no inkling of the hardships of the common man and woman. While there has been significant improvement in some aspects of everyday life relative to late 2021 and early 2022 it has come at an ‘unfair’ cost to taxpayers and consumers. 

The ‘all-knowing’ superiority complex of leaders has resulted in no genuine attempt by them to hear the aspirations of a broader base of citizens as an initial step in inspiring a shared vision. Are these not outcomes of a bad system? Do we wish to continue with the same system, do we wish to change it, or do we wish to give room for new thinking?

Despite the on and off spurts of agitations, our continued tolerance of misery and mediocrity leads me to believe that we, the citizens of Sri Lanka, are suffering from metathesiophobia, this being the intense fear of change. The annals of the 20th century and 21st century of Sri Lanka show that, as a society, we resist change out of fear and an affinity to maintain the status quo by sticking with the known devil. However, what we must recognise is that such an attitude limits our potential and impedes our growth and advancement. Rather than fearing change, we must see it as an opportunity to learn and innovate. Yet, despite its potential for positive outcomes, we tend to resist change. Such resistance is a significant roadblock to transformation and progress. Yes, I admit, change can be scary. However, there is no reward without risk. 

Change is a fundamental aspect of reality

It was Heraclitus, the Greek philosopher who stated that, “Change is the only constant in life” and that the natural world was in a constant state of movement and that change is a fundamental aspect of reality. He used the concept of “everything flows” to describe this constant motion. His famous statement, “You cannot step into the same river twice,” highlighted the constant change of both the river and the person stepping into it. Change is a natural and inevitable part of life. It is a galvanizing force which allows us to grow as individuals and societies. We must constantly evolve in adapting to the needs and critical success factors of new situations. 

Yet, despite its inevitability, we resist it, fear it, ignore it, and often find ourselves clinging to the familiar, even when it no longer serves us. If we are to thrive, as a nation, in this dynamic landscape, we must adopt a mindset that is not fearful of change. We must welcome change as an essential factor which converts sources of uncertainty into catalysts for success for all Sri Lankans. When we vote to elect the 9th Executive President of Sri Lanka on 21 September 2024, we must elect the candidate who will best deliver that change.  

As election fever heats up, candidates are employing every available trick to influence voting behaviour. In a political play book, fear mongering and fear tactics take the top slot. The past will be raked in creating a fear of the future. Though this is natural we must not overdo it. The media and the chatter in the cocktail circles are already doing that effectively. If the past is the only factor in electing the new president, then none of the leading candidates will qualify. We are, therefore, looking for the lesser of the evil. 

Fear is being used, increasingly, in manipulating the voters’ minds to seeing threats which may or may not exist. These are methods used by crafty communicators in exploiting our instinct to find safety in numbers. While fear of the unknown is natural, it can sometimes be very motivating also. The key is to identify when fear is being used deceptively. In this light, knowing the deliberate and strategic ways in which our fears are exploited can help lessen its effects. 

We have procrastinated too long. Do not let our fear of change paralyse our long-standing desire for a radical system change. Our wait is akin to waiting for Godot!

(The writer is currently a Leadership Coach, Mentor and Consultant and boasts over 50 years of experience in very senior positions in the corporate world – local and overseas. www.ronniepeiris.com)