Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Saturday, November 10, 2018

 

Time to tame the dictatorial politics in Sri Lanka

Your silence cannot do anything at the moment; fight against dictatorial politics in Sri Lanka

by Dr Indi Akurugoda-
( November 11, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) In a context where opportunists spread several rumours about the current political situation in Sri Lanka, I believe that remaining in silence is not suitable for an academic who still value democratic and good governance principles as the most important needs of a respectable citizen. Against a disgraceful background of his two weeks of arbitrariness against public opinion, Parliament and the legally appointed Prime Minister of Sri Lanka, the President has shown his real uncultured and immature nature again by dissolving the Parliament disregarding and violating the Constitution. This indicates the increasing danger and uncertainty towards democracy and good governance in Sri Lanka. The political turmoil created by the President-led coup has driven the whole country to a total chaos resulting in international disrespect, a financial crisis and stagnation of policy making processes and administrative mechanisms.
After the unconstitutional appointment of Mahinda Rajapaksa as the Prime Minister, the Parliament was suddenly prorogued by the President. This step was taken when the country’s legal Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe stated his confidence in assuring the majority support in the Parliament. The President prorogued the Parliament to provide a ‘grace period’ for Mahinda Rajapaksa to ‘purchase’ MPs to secure a Parliamentary majority against the real public opinion in the legislature. While terribly discouraging the objectives of electoral politics, this action has resulted in badly damaging the democratic public opinion in Sri Lanka.
Now there is an unwanted election in front of us. A huge public expense is supposed to be spent on a general election that people have not expected or requested at the moment. The whole unstable situation is a created atmosphere to achieve opportunistic political goals of a few.
Without listening to continuous local and international appeals to summon the Parliament, the President has violated every democratic principle by putting the country into an anarchic front where people’s lives have been threatened with danger, instability and uncertainty. Knowing the fact that Mahinda Rajapaksa cannot secure a Parliamentary majority, the President dissolved the Parliament by repeatedly violating the Constitution. The Article 17 of the 19th Amendment amends the Article 70 of the Constitution substituting the following paragraph:
(1) The President may by Proclamation, summon, prorogue and dissolve Parliament:
Provided that the President shall not dissolve Parliament until the expiration of a period of not less than four years and six months from the date appointed for its first meeting, unless Parliament requests the President to do so by a resolution passed by not less than two-thirds of the whole number of Members (including those not present), voting in its favour.
This clearly states that unless Parliament requests the President to do so by a resolution passed by not less than two-thirds of the whole number of MPs (including those not present), the President does not have power to dissolve Parliament until the expiration of a period of not less than four years and six months from the date appointed for its first meeting. It is, therefore, evident that the sudden dissolution of Parliament is totally unconstitutional. The President has repeatedly violated the Constitution to fulfill his selfish political desires. When a democratically elected President who promised to establish good governance in Sri Lanka, suddenly acts as a cruel dictator bluntly ignoring constitutional law and ethical considerations, what shall be the role of the general public?
Now there is an unwanted election in front of us. A huge public expense is supposed to be spent on a general election that people have not expected or requested at the moment. The whole unstable situation is a created atmosphere to achieve opportunistic political goals of a few. The only way forward to get rid of this political chaos is to gather all democratic forces and fight continuously against the misuse of public opinion and the dictatorial suppression towards establishing democracy and good governance. Although this is not an easy task, keep your democratic spirits alive and fight against current Sri Lankan dictatorial politics using your maximum capacity because your silence cannot do anything at the moment.
Dr Indi Ruwangi Akurugoda did a PhD in Political Science and Public Policy at the University of Waikato, New Zealand and later obtained a post-doctoral writing scholarship awarded by the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Waikato. She is a lecturer in Political Science attached to the Department of Public Policy, University of Ruhuna, Sri Lanka, working in the areas of decentralisation, local government, community development, conservation ecology and NGO politics.

Sri Lanka's president dissolves parliament, deepening political crisis

Sri Lanka's newly appointed Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa and President Maithripala Sirisena talk during a rally near the parliament in Colombo, Sri Lanka November 5, 2018. REUTERS/Dinuka Liyanawatte

Shihar AneezRanga Sirilal-NOVEMBER 9, 2018 

COLOMBO (Reuters) - Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena dissolved parliament on Friday night and called a general election for Jan. 5 in a move that will likely deepen the country’s political crisis.

The dissolution, which is expected to be challenged in court, was revealed in an official gazette notification signed by Sirisena which also set the next sitting of parliament for Jan. 17.

The move comes after an intense power struggle in the past two weeks which followed Sirisena’s sudden sacking of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and the appointment of former leader Mahinda Rajapaksa, a pro-China strongman, in his place.

Following the sacking, the president suspended parliament in a move which Wickremesinghe said was intended to prevent the ousted prime minister from contesting the decision in the legislature.
Later Sirisena agreed to reconvene parliament on Nov. 14, but that will now not happen.

Wickremesinghe has refused to vacate the official prime minister’s residence saying he is the prime minister and had a parliamentary majority.

Before he signed the papers dissolving parliament and calling the election, Sirisena appointed allies of his and of Rajapaksa to cabinet positions.

“This is a gross violation of the constitution,” Harsha De Silva, a lawmaker in Wickremesinghe’s party, told Reuters in reference to the dissolution of parliament.

Independent legal experts had told Reuters that parliament could be dissolved only in early 2020, which would be four-and-half-years from the first sitting of the current parliament. The only other legal ways would be through a referendum, or with the consent of two thirds of lawmakers.

Given those views, it was not immediately clear how Sirisena can legally dissolve parliament, though his legal experts have said there are provisions for him to do so.

Sri Lanka’s Election Commission was quoted in some local media as saying that it will seek a Supreme Court opinion before conducting the election.

Sirisena also put the police and government’s printing office under his defense portfolio, local media reported.

Ajith Perera, a lawmaker of the Wickremesinghe-led United National Party (UNP) said the party will challenge the decision at the Election Commission first and then may head to the Supreme Court.
Perera said the dissolution was carried out so that Sirisena could avoid defeat in parliament next week.

Keheliya Rambukwella, a spokesman for Sirisena’s government, said the president’s coalition had the backing of 105 lawmakers as of Friday, eight short of a parliamentary majority.

Sirisena has said he fired Wickremesinghe because the prime minister was trying to implement “a new, extreme liberal political concept by giving more priority for foreign policies and neglecting the local people’s sentiment.”

India and Western countries have requested that Sirisena act in line with the constitution while they have raised concerns over Rajapaksa’s close ties with China. Beijing loaned Sri Lanka billions of dollars for infrastructure projects when Rajapaksa was president between 2005-2015, putting the country deep into debt.

Reporting by Ranga Sirilal and Shihar Aneez; Edited by Martin Howell and Toby Chopra

Sri Lanka crisis: Rajapaksa short of 'magic number' to prove premiership, says spokesperson

Sri Lanka crisis: Rajapaksa short of 'magic number' to prove premiership, says spokesperson

PTI | Nov 9, 2018, 06.58 PM IST

COLOMBO: Sri Lankan strongman and former president Mahinda Rajapaksa remains short of the 'magic number' 113 required to prove his majority in Parliament, his spokesman acknowledged on Friday, days ahead of the floor test in the House.

Sri Lanka is facing a major constitutional crisis after President Maithripala Sirisena ousted Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and replaced him with Rajapaksa and suspended Parliament.

Without specifying the exact figure of the lawmakers supporting Rajapaksa, United People's Freedom Alliance (UPFA) spokesman Keheliya Rambukwella told reporters, "At the moment we have 105 to 106 MPs."

Rambukwella is one of the ministers appointed after the political crisis erupted on October 26. He is currently the incumbent Media and Information Minister.

Sirisena had earlier claimed at a public rally that he has the support of 113 parliamentarians in the 225-member House to prove the premiership of Rajapaksa.

His comments came after Speaker Karu Jayasuriya slammed Sirisena's "unconstitutional and undemocratic" actions to sack Wickremesinghe and suspend Parliament, saying he will not recognise Rajapaksa as the new premier unless he wins a floor test.

With eight United National Party (UNP) and one Tamil National Alliance (TNA) legislators defecting to the Rajapaksa camp, the former president was hopeful of passing the floor test.

Sirisena had suspended parliamentary proceedings until November 16 after abruptly firing Wickremesinghe and replacing him with Rajapaksa.
 
However, owing to domestic and international pressure, Sirisena later issued a notice to reconvene Parliament on November 14.

The sudden constitutional crisis came amid growing tensions between Sirisena and Wickremesinghe on several policy matters and the President has been critical of the Prime Minister and his policies, especially on economy and security.
 
Meanwhile, Wickremsinghe remains confident of proving his majority in Parliament.
 
Wickremesinghe, whose party dubbed Sirisena's move a "constitutional coup", has refused to vacate his official residence, saying he is the lawful prime minister and that the president has no constitutional right to replace him. 

Even ‘flutterbys’ and leeches are not spared

Let the people decide; not ‘Kaluhamis’ and ‘Kalu Appus’

From Golden-horses to butterflies

Political reality does not necessarily reflect popular sovereignty. It is the people who have the final say in State decisions
Did President Sirisena, as he once told, risk his life four years ago, but betrayed all the moral values for political expediency when he offered on a platter, the ruling powers to his bĂȘte noire Mahinda Rajapaksa? 
2018-11-10
Gona’ and ‘Buruwa’ reverberated in the house by the Galle Face in good old days of NM, Colvin, Philip and Sir John, who later shared an erotic anecdote with Marxists at tea. They would not mean it, just the spur of the moment, as there were absolutely no ‘animals’ in politics then. Do not waste time turning pages of 1950s and ’60s searching for such derogatory terms; even before the expunge order comes from the Speaker, the Hansard reporter had done his part, while the smart lobby journalists who shone with literary quality conveyed it to the reader who had to read between lines. The name “butterfly” originated from “flutterby”—an insect with colourful wings, a ‘FLY’ that eats butter. 
‘ELOWA GIHIN MELOWA AVA’  
Prof. Sarachchandra created the comedy play based on old Sinhala folktale ‘Elowa Gihin Melowa Ava’ which narrates how a deceitful beggar scrupulously cheated Gamarala’swife ‘Kaluhami’ who wanted her dead daughter’s jewellery delivered to Elova [world of the dead] through this man when he said, “Mama Elowa Gihin Melowa Ava,” meaning he just recovered from a terminal illness. In the absence of Gamarala, he collects not only the valuables but steals Kalu Appu’s ‘Sudu Assaya’ [golden horse?]. Gamarala on his return learns the stupid act of wife, but realise it was too late. He, like all those who voted for ‘Hansaya’ and ‘Pohottuwa’ and assembled at Temple Trees and Diyawanna, ‘Come Rain or Shine,’ finally enjoys the fun dancing and singing a duet proudly claiming; 
“Assayapita nega yanakota dakina dakina aya kiyavi aan yanawa kaluappuge duui kiyala—kalu hamige duui kiala” [People seeing the daughter wearing all the jewellery and riding his horse would say, there goes (he)… Kalu Appuu’s daughter… (she).. Kaluhami’s daughter…] The writer is not comparing the tens of thousands who congregated at the two venues with Kaluhami’s stupidity, but their inherent idiocy. 
This maybe one of the most disgraceful political games ever played and of course played men-of-chance, says anti-Sirisena analysts — “Sirisena, Ranil and Mahinda whose only wish is survival at any cost. The present unprecedented occurrence of dethroning PM Wickremesinghe and appointing Rajapaksa brings with it all the rudiments of a ‘legitimate coup’ swiftly accomplished,” they add, “it was carefully concealed from the victims to the very second.” 
But what most of us fail to understand is that they vigilantly concealed the fact that a precedent was created on November 21, 2014 with that unprecedented crossover, followed by the appointment of opposition leader as Prime Minister, a man who could muster only 46 votes, while the sitting PM had 151 backing him. 
LEECHES AND TICKS 
Coming back to flies and leeches; Butterflies are insects in the order lepidoptera. Adults have, often brightly coloured wings, and striking, fluttering flight. It is impolite to use its name to describe lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender humans. Did LGBTQ get it from the first mainstream TV drama named ‘Butterfly’ or was it the rainbow flag. Story is about a transgender child who wants to transition. All those who jump from one healthy source to the other in search of ‘food’ are called leeches. Can one leech call another a leech in an offensive manner? 
Political reality does not necessarily reflect popular sovereignty. It is the people who have the final say in State decisions. 
“In a free government, the rulers are the servants and the people their superiors and sovereigns,” Benjamin Franklin - A founding father of the United States, author and political theorist. 
Everyone talks about the low depth the Parliamentarians have sunken into but the irony is that the very people cry for re-summoning of the House as a matter of priority? The ‘international community’ clamour for a decision by Parliament too; they know little about the dismal standard of the 225 clowns, jokers and rogues running it? That is why they attach so much of significance to the ‘Den of Thieves’ [as it was described by Karl Marx, the 19th century political philosopher]. The appointed MP in the UNP National List, obviously one of Ranil’s loyal and trusted lieutenants, was not only a permanent resident at Temple Trees since October 26 and up to the fourth morning [it was he who had been in charge of organising the continuous Pirith chanting] was enlightened listening to sutras for a week uninterrupted surprisingly abandoned the party and left his boss in the lurch before deserting Temple Trees after a sumptuous lunch [not hoppers] but rushed to President’s office to take oaths in the afternoon as a new government Deputy Minister. Another who took oaths as deputy a few days ago, suddenly realised the value of upholding democratic values and was back at Temple Trees. 
“In the republic of Sri  Lanka, sovereignty is in the people and is inalienable. Sovereignty includes the powers of government, fundamental rights and the franchise” – Chapter One - Article 3of the Constitution.  
The next or the new government must introduce legislation totally banning crossover: by implementing such rules only we can get rid of a good number of unprincipled, deceitful and roguish elements retuning to the sacred precincts of Diyawanna. Let’s take Parliament back to the ‘Galle Face Front’ days when it was the most supreme symbol of democracy. This rule can be extended to cover other elected bodies like provincial councils and local government bodies as well. 
RULE BY THE PEOPLE 
It should be the ‘Rule by the People,’ the foundation of all political power associated with political philosophers Thomas Hobbes, a founder of modern political philosophy, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the developer of modern political thought; and John Locke the political philosophers to mention a few. President Maithripala has created the path for MR to come storming back. The country is beleaguered by indecision, a totally chaotic political unrest, economic disaster and enormous fraud at all levels. It is the new government’s duty now to find solutions. It is the people who transfer the authority of a State and its government through the concept of ‘sovereignty of the people’ or popular sovereignty, the principle sustained by the consent of people who temporarily empower their elected representatives to make decisions and pass laws. The drama played out so fittingly demonstrates, the famous saying, ‘in politics there are no permanent friends or permanent enemies, but only permanent interests.’ Did President Sirisena, as he once told, risk his life four years ago, but betrayed all the moral values for political expediency when he offered on a platter, the ruling powers to his bĂȘte noire Mahinda Rajapaksa? 
His critics also say that four years ago, in one evening in November 2014, he joined his colleagues at Temple Trees for a meal of hoppers and lunumiris hosted by the then all-powerful President, and the very next day appeared in an historical media briefing flanked by a famous political strategist and his former boss and ex-President, to announce his stand. 
CREATE MANDATORY CONDITIONS 
Political leaders must take adequate precautions in selecting persons with honesty and integrity, who have proven soundness of ethical principles in conduct and free from moral wrong or fault, are left out of nominated lists. The candidates must be decent, upright, veracious and straightforward. It should be made mandatory that the nominees clear a knowledge-hurdle regarding politics, history, culture and public affairs; and not degrees in rocket science or financial matters. If one would analyse real statistics meticulously, most of the reported heinous crimes against the people and the nation have been committed by the so-called professionals and the ‘educated’ lot and not by the 123 without A/Levels or 63 minus O/Levels among the present 225 members [Some of them even had acted like jokers or third grade kids!] 
ARCHBISHOP’S ADVICE 
The Archbishop Cardinal’s views expressed to the UNP delegation is a good lesson to the UNP leadership. When he asked them why they were reluctant to take this matter to the Supreme Court, the response was ‘the anticipated ruling would be against them.’ 
True people voted Rajapaksas out in 2015, but after three years at the LG elections, this result was reverted. However, as far as the UNP is concerned, the Rajapaksa family has come through the backdoor. Shamelessness is on both sides. What the public don’t understand is that both parties have deceived them and do very little of what they undertook. They must cast their vote to a decent person who can oppose his own party against corruption at a future election which is not very far — some sections in the society anticipate certain urgent and inevitable consequences in a new Rajapaksa rule. Firstly, will there be the dislodging of ongoing police and judicial processes into numerous irregularities committed during the previous regime? It is unlikely that there will be changes to the Armed Forces, the police and the judiciary, replacing the current holders with their cronies; for they have learnt lessons. 
The writer recollects how the then United States Secretary of State [Foreign Minister] Colin Powell in January 2004 did call on both President Chandrika Kumaratunga and PM Ranil Wickremesinghe to enlighten them on the importance of working together to find a quick resolution to end the Constitutional impasse that existed between the two sides which was similar to the present Constitutional crisis. Two separate letters addressed to the two heads were delivered individually by the then US Ambassador Jeffrey Lunstead. Today, they are taking sides though. 
kksperera1@gmail.com 

Logic Of The Republican Constitution & Relative Autonomy Of The Presidency: A Response To Dayan

P. Soma Palan
logoI refer to the above titled article by Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka (DJ) in the Sunday Observer of 4th November and wish to respond to the views expressed, therein, by him. I am not a learned expert on Constitution, but a civic minded citizen, who has the capacity to think and discriminate between the truth and the false.
1. Republican Constitution and the Presidency
For DJ, conclusion precedes reason. He is seeking reason to justify his pre-determined conclusion. The pre-conclusion is, the President has overriding autonomy over the other arms of the Constitution. DJ qualifies by saying “relative autonomy of the Presidency”, which itself is a limitation, and an admission of the President’s autonomy, is not absolute. DJ separates (a) National Sovereignty and (b) Supremacy of the Legislature. These two are not distinctly separate, but one and the same thing. National Sovereignty means the Sovereignty of the State, Nation or the Country. Call it whichever way you like. But it amounts to the same. National Sovereignty is not purely a territorial concept. This will lead to the ludicrous result of a territory without people, having sovereignty. There should necessarily be “people” to exercise that territory’s sovereignty. Therefore, there is no confrontation between national sovereignty or peoples sovereignty versus Supremacy of the Legislature. In the ultimate analysis, if “Sovereignty resides in the people” as the Constitution proclaims, then that Sovereignty is expressed by the Legislature ( Parliament). Thus the Legislature is the microcosm of the macro National Sovereignty. Peoples’ Sovereignty is represented in the Legislature by their elected representatives. Thus the People and the Legislature are synonymous. If this is so, Supremacy of the Legislature (Parliament) overrides the Presidency, irrespective of the fact that the latter is directly elected by the people.
2. 19th Amendment
 DJ states that “the 19th Amendment is not a new Constitution”. This is common knowledge. Every informed person knows it. It requires no constitutional punditry. An Amendment is an integral part of the Constitution- whether as an addition, deletion, or modification of an Article, Proviso, Section or sub-section of the Constitution. No Article or Proviso by itself, either singularly or severally, can be deemed as the Constitution. The Constitution is a composite whole, including subsequent amendments.
3. Separation of Powers
The Separation of Powers is a cardinal pillar of a Parliamentary form of Government. The three pillars of the Constitution are: (a) Legislature (b) Executive and (c) Judiciary All three arms of the Constitution are co-equal and co-lateral in their autonomy. DJ states that despite the 19thAmendment, the logic of the 1978 Constitution is “a strong and stable Executive free from   whims and fancies of the Legislature, and the Executive still remains above and relatively autonomous of the Legislature”. This view is antagonistic to the principle of Separation of Powers- that is, no one arm of the Government can be above or lower than other arm of the Government. If the President is,“above and autonomous of the Legislature”, then why the need for a Cabinet of Ministers, which is a creature of the Legislature? The President cannot act or take decisions unilaterally of his own, like during the historical Monarchies. The President is the creature of the People as much as the Legislature is the creature of the People. The President is part of the Cabinet of Ministers and decisions taken in the Cabinet are not the decisions of the President, it is the collective decisions of the Cabinet and accordingly the decision of the Government. If the President is above and has overriding autonomy over the Cabinet, which is an integral part of the Legislature, as claimed, then, he should be above and have overriding power over the Judiciary also. This is not so, as it would be ridiculous. The very principle of the Separation of Powers is to ensure checks and balances between the three organs of the Government.
4. Sovereignty

Read More

Political Crisis in Sri Lanka in Brief

Think of what has been happening in this country since January 2015

by Zulkifli Nazim-
( November 10, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) There’s nothing quite like a constitutional crisis to expose what can only be described as the most contemptible stinking garbage of our political class.
This ruling Party under the auspices of President Maithripala shows total incompetence, craven self-interest, and this embarrassing stupidity, chaos and greed is what you get where political leaders are mainly selected by accepting astronomical bribes and vandalism of every individual’s self-respect and conscience, rather than talent.
It’s no surprise that people feel alienated by politics and locked out of democracy, and view the people who represent them as unapproachable. Bribe takers and bribe givers means it reveals that quite a number of these people are basically defunct – obsolete in this new era of crisis.
Think of what has been happening in this country since January 2015.
In mainstream politics there has been virtually no analysis of what caused the financial crisis, no attempts to address the underlying structural problems in the economy, no retribution for the people that caused it, no serious attempt to stem widening inequality, no proper investigation and punishment for the people who lost their lives, no viable solution to a worsening housing crisis, no hope for a generation of young people entering into an unstable, precarious economy and degenerate and debauched leadership.
This is not about individual politicians. Indeed, there are many who are talented. But the political class as a whole, and how it functions alongside its outer circle of pundits, lobbyists, policymakers and so on, has proven itself to be woefully unqualified to cope with crisis as well as being utterly unable to comprehend the country it is supposed to be governing.
The consequences of this are already obvious: an entire country that is so angry and mistrustful of its leaders that it becomes susceptible to the likes of total charlatans like Maithripala Sirisena and Mahinda Rajapaksa. They may be dishonest, but make no mistake – they will capitalise upon this crisis by taking advantage of the ineptitude, weakness, stupidity and vanity of the mainstream. They will, amazingly, lead the charge against broken promises. They will attract voters by vocalising their utter dissatisfaction with the mediocrity of their leaders.
And then we will all lose.
To turn things around, the United National Party leadership will need to display a level of self-reflection that it has hitherto been incapable of. It needs to display its strength, ability, talent and capability, and recognise that it has got pretty much every major political event of the past three years completely wrong. It needs to display more than a cursory interest in ordinary people’s lives. And finally, it needs to find some way to guide the country out of this crisis – starting with a profound and sincere acknowledgement that the status quo before it was not good. Things are not good, and they need to be better. Start there.

THE SECOND COMING OF SRI LANKA’S MAHINDA RAJAPAKSA – RAJESH VENUGOPAL


Sri Lanka Brief09/11/2018

In Sri Lanka, it’s yesterday once more. Mahinda Rajapaksa and his family are back in charge. For those who are very young, or with very short memories, the experience of the last few days will serve as a quick explainer of the past, and a guide to the potential future.

Elected MPs have been purchased like cattle, the media has been intimidated and cowed, and the constitution is subverted and creatively re-interpreted on a daily basis, to serve the whims and convenience of the rulers. The majority community is equated to the country as a whole, and its insecurities stoked and inflamed to win consent for this illegality, while the minorities who are targeted by this process are left insecure and anxious. In the north and east, those who have been brave enough to hold vigils, speak about their missing, or to memorialise the dead are left vulnerable and exposed to an emboldened securitocracy waiting for the right signal to spring back into action.

President Maithripala Sirisena’s stealthy dismissal of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe on 26 October, 2018 has triggered an extraordinary political crisis, and has set the stage for a prolonged period of instability and even worse.

A predictable cast of characters: the brothers, corrupt cronies, flattering sycophants, inflammatory monks, lesser demagogues, fake hunger-strikers, habitual quoters of Gramsci, disgraced public officials, and ex-Tamil paramilitaries, have all crawled back out of the woodwork to remind everyone just how egregious, malevolent, chauvinistic and corrupt the Rajapaksas were and will be.

Shortly after what is misleadingly referred to as a ‘constitutional coup’, the President and his newly appointed Prime Minister appeared to have woken up to the reality that their actions were constitutionally invalid.

The President simply does not have the authority to dismiss a Prime Minister in this manner. That power was expressly removed by the 19th amendment to the constitution, passed in 2015 a few short months after Sirisena’s own election, and which he himself along with his faction of MPs campaigned for and helped to bring into being.

In other words, this wasn’t a ‘constitutional’ coup at all. It was in reality an unconstitutional seizure of power that has no validity

Regardless, Sirisena and Rajapaksa ploughed on, and took charge of state institutions, under the assumption that the political crisis and instability they had triggered can be settled in parliament through a show of strength.

A parliamentary majority and a vote of confidence for the newly appointed Prime Minister would infuse them with authority, bring post-hoc legitimacy to their illegal seizure of power, and dismay the opposition and public at large into silence and passivity. However, this too, did not go according to plan, and the President apparently came to learn after the fact that Rajapaksa did not have the requisite majority and would struggle to find one, and would need time.

With no easy option in sight, an increasingly desperate Sirisena doubled down, and prorogued parliament for almost three weeks in the hope that it would give Rajapaksa adequate time needed to bribe opposition MPs to cross-over. After an intense period of negotiation, parliament is now set to be convened on 14 November.

Since then, a string of MPs have crossed over, walking the walk of shame to accept the offer of ministerships under Rajapaksa. This process has revealed, among other truths, that the going price for an MP is now in the hundreds of millions of rupees (in the millions of US dollars), and is payable in foreign currency in London.

One brave MP even recorded and made public the fateful phone conversation making that offer and inducing him to cross the floor. Another MP who crossed over has since crossed back, and has since apparently fled to London. The Sri Lanka Muslim Congress’s leader took the precaution of dispatching all seven of its MPs out of the country in the midst of the crisis to perform Umrah in one group together, and to focus their minds on matters more spiritual in nature.

It actually remains to be understood why exactly Rajapaksa ever agreed to this coup and why he found it to be in his political interest. Left to itself, the yahapalanaya project of ‘good governance’ was already paralysed and crumbling. The UNP-led government was losing popularity with each passing day and would have died a natural death at the polls in 2020.

Sirisena himself was fast becoming politically irrelevant, and his remaining parliamentary supporters could, with time, have lapsed back into the Rajapaksa fold. Mahinda, or his chosen family anointee could easily, with a little patience, have sat back and won the presidency and parliament fair and square in little over a year. Instead, the coup has now possibly given the UNP and Ranil Wickramasinghe an undeserved life-line.

As Sri Lanka’s political establishment heaves its way tortuously to its day of reckoning in parliament on 14 November, there is still no certainty as who will ultimately win the confidence vote in parliament and how it will all end. At the time of writing, Rajapaksa still lacks a majority, and is set to lose the vote and bring back the status quo ante. If that happens, it would be an immense humiliation for Sirisena and Rajapaksa.

With no way back, they are likely to resort to increasingly desperate, obscure, or illegal ways to preclude the holding of such a vote. One such possibility that has been floated by Sirisena is to bypass parliament and hold a referendum to seek approval for his actions. Another option, which would be a further unconstitutional step if he attempted it, is to dissolve parliament and hold fresh elections. In other words, the options available are not likely to resolve the crisis as much as to deepen and prolong it into the future.

Moreover, the reality is that the confidence vote itself cannot possibly resolve the political crisis, regardless of who wins. Although the President, the purported Prime Minister, and their staff have issued a steady stream of gazette notifications, ministerial appointments, and policy announcements, the incumbent in Temple Trees has correctly refused to accept his dismissal, and remained in place, as did his cabinet and ministers.

A Rajapaksa government that emerges out of a successful confidence vote on November 14 will continue to bear the stain of illegitimacy. The opposition parties will refuse to accept it, and it will not have the consent of a significant part of the population.

In contrast, the Rajapaksa presidency from 2005– 14, for all its flaws and hideousness, was not questioned on the grounds of its fundamental legitimacy to rule. It came to power on the basis of elections and the opposition accepted the verdict. This is of course not to forget the circumstances of the 2005 election, and the role of the LTTE’s boycott that handed a razor-thin victory to Rajapaksa.

One should not also not forget the circumstances of the 2010 election, in which the losing presidential candidate was arrested and subsequently spent two years in jail. But regardless of these evident abuses and assaults on the democratic conscience, Rajapaksa’s authority as President from 2005– 14 was not challenged and decried in the way that his appointment as Prime Minister in 2018 has been subject to dispute and to the existence of another rival Prime Minister.

A parliamentary confidence vote might bring forth a clear winner, temporarily end the political instability, and determine who is the Prime Minister in terms of raw numerical strength. But political instability is not the same as a political crisis. Instability is commonplace whenever there is flux and disequilibrium among political forces within a system.

In contrast, a political crisis signifies a deeper disequilibrium in the system itself, in terms of its rules, integrity, and legitimacy. The system was tipped into a state of crisis when the President
unconstitutionally dismissed the Prime Minister. It will end only when the integrity of the system is restored, or when a new and different legitimate system is established. In this case, it requires, at the minimum, a transparent process of accountability for the President’s misuse of power that has consequences, and that does not reward the beneficiaries of his unconstitutional actions.

Without such a process of reckoning or regulation, there is literally nothing to stop Sirisena from capriciously doing it again and dismissing the newly appointed Prime Minister yet again the day after the confidence vote, or to try some other unconstitutional prank that throws the system into turmoil again.

Finally, it is worth mentioning that the last time that any such comparable level of national political illegitimacy existed in Sri Lanka was in 1983. At that time, J.R. Jayawardena held a questionable and probably rigged referendum to extend the life of his parliament (which had a super-majority) by another term without holding elections. Jayawardena got his way, but his authoritarianism, and the wilful flouting of democratic norms was not without consequences.

Similarly, while there is much to chuckle about in recounting the travails of Rajapaksa’s second coming, it would be false comfort to assume that the second time is always just a farce, because as with the 1983 referendum, it bears the menace of future tragedies and unexpected consequences waiting to unfold.

Rajesh Venugopal is Assistant Professor at the Department of International Development at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His book,  Nationalism, Development, and Ethnic Conflict in Sri Lankahas just been published by Cambridge University Press in September 2018.

Courtesy thewire.in.

New beginnings 


article_image

Sanjana Hattotuwa-November 10, 2018, 6:49 pm

A significant disadvantage of being in a country several hours ahead in time is that I wake up to news from the final hours of the day in Sri Lanka. On October 26, I woke up to news of the President swearing in Mahinda Rajapaksa as PM. On November 10, I woke up to the news that Parliament had been dissolved. If not already evident for long-time readers of this column, I consider the first and most treacherous act to be a debilitating blow to our democracy, the results of which polity, society and Sri Lanka’s economy have been reeling from over the past fortnight. The second exponentially compounds the problems and extends the chaos.

Sri Lanka, based on the actions of the President, no longer holds true to its official name as a Democratic Socialist Republic. We have left democracy behind, and jettisoned it along with our constitution. We are no longer a republic, because the people have been divested of their power and elected representatives denied their opportunity to reflect the people’s will – one way or the other. Given the revelations around the eye-watering sums of money offered to MPs to join the ranks of Mahinda Rajapaksa, neither are we remotely socialist nor are we heading towards communism. These are governance frameworks that love or hate, are defined by established theories of power, politics and economics. There is some order, even in the madness. Sri Lanka today is just pure madness. It is an unmitigated, unprecedented constitutional crisis, unimaginable just three weeks ago.

To be very clear, I consider the present state of the country far worse than the context of 2014’s presidential election. Mahinda Rajapaksa, at his worst, introduced the 18th Amendment through parliament – of course, making a mockery of proceedings and informed debate in the chamber, but still, in retrospect, without doing away with the constitution altogether. Maithripala Sirisena considers the constitution entirely optional to what he wants to do, see or bring about. This makes him, incredibly, more illiberal and undemocratic than the President he replaced. That really takes some doing. At stake is, in fact, more than every single democratic gain and every single law, institution, process, body, commission and structure set up since 2015. At stake is the very democratic fabric of the country,

Not that readers of this newspaper would necessarily know. Brutishly taking over the newsrooms and newspapers of State media was considered action to shape the public imagination, by deforming news, deflecting critical opinion, denying access to alternatives perspectives and decrying political opponents. It was also signalling to private media to stem or stop critical perspectives. Both are working, and very well. We are back to the authoritarian’s rulebook.

A case in point is the coverage, or lack thereof, afforded to the speeches made at Ven. Maduluwe Sobitha’s Memorial last week. Speaker after speaker, including the very architects of the political movement that saw the incumbent President emerge as the common candidate to Mahinda Rajapaksa in 2014, vehemently decried his actions. Prof. Jayadeva Uyangoda’s deeply intense, insightful and incisive keynote in Sinhala, lasting around 40 minutes, was widely shared and referred to over social media. And yet, there was almost no coverage in print or electronic media. And even on social media, very influential accounts controlled by mainstream media on Facebook and Twitter simply didn’t give the speech or event the coverage it deserved.

Amplify this across a broader spectrum. Well over a hundred statements, messages or updates from the international community – India, the UN, Commonwealth, EU, British, American and Australian governments included – transnational civil society including Nobel laureates, internationally renowned jurists, Sri Lankan constitutional experts including Dr Jayampathy Wickramaratne who was entrusted with drafting the new constitution, leading academics from abroad and universities in Sri Lanka, artists, activists, citizens who have gathered every single day in Colombo and many more have since Oct. 26 strongly and on solid principled, legal ground, condemned the President’s actions. Very little, if at all, has made it to print or broadcast. It is clear this almost complete capture of the mainstream media will be further entrenched in the weeks to come.

I need to recalibrate and rethink this column. These are unprecedented times, in a context where the retaining or capturing power has lives at stake. Prof. Uyangoda’s repeated warning around the possibility of violence to emerge as a consequence of the current political instability is real, present and growing. Our winner takes all, zero-sum political culture, evident in all its clawing, repulsive horror since Oct. 26, joins a hyper-partisan polity and society. Anything can be a spark, whether engineered or inadvertent. And everyone is on edge. Sirisena cannot turn back. Rajapaksa is caught in a bind, and has no option but go with what Sirisena started. Wickremesinghe is, rightfully and as the legitimate PM, not backing down. And yet, merely saying this is enough to set off an enfilade of comments by those hell-bent to equate those of us interested in constitutional supremacy with those who vote for a political party or politician. It’s truly an awful, toxic time to be a public commentator!

This weekend is too early to opine where this will all go or how it will be resolved. It is, however, a good place to start reflecting on how we all have, and will always have, democratic agency as citizens. To so clearly cede it to those who are clearly unprincipled, untrustworthy politicians, as we have done for so long, at elections, requires a rethink. Entirely independent party political love, loathing or indifference, an overriding interest in retaining Sri Lanka’s democratic credentials must guide our considered engagement, reflection and action. On social media, the urgency and importance of this message is much greater, amongst a key electoral demographic that is rent asunder by partisan opinions and other communal, religious, language, identity and economic fault lines. But elections seen as scorecards around tenure can shift perspectives to reflect on what was really done, instead of what is promised. The course correction even from 2015’s Presidential election is clear and significant. We must not ask voters, anymore, to believe in a saviour. There are none. As Bertolt Brecht warned us, pity the country that needs heroes.

While those in power are battling for survival or supremacy, citizens - as custodians of democracy, invigilators of governance and as an engaged, questioning, informed body - must consider the long-term implications of the present moment. We must and may differ, on who can and should deliver the good life. How economics should be managed. What our foreign policy alignments should be. Whether fuel pricing formulae are sensible or risible. But the negotiation of differences must be pegged to democratic norms. What I hope, though through awful circumstances, is that this pivotal moment brings about a greater, fuller understanding of what it is to be a citizen; and how important it is, flowing from this, that we have an absolute, unwavering commitment to constitutional governance.

Our ignorance, partisan loyalty or blind faith in personalities is what politicians count on, seed and harvest to get away with what they do. What is happening in Sri Lanka is a travesty. Pushing back with every sinew is an expression of citizenship. Ceding to it risks its repetition and entrenchment, meaning that anyone, at any time, for any reason, can do anything as Executive President. Clearly, this wretched office needs to go, but the start of a renewed democratic struggle is not by trying to change the world. It must start within, and with ourselves.

Friday, November 9, 2018

Syrian government approves return to Yarmouk


A damaged street in Yarmouk refugee camp in October 2018.Omar SanadikiReuters

Maureen Clare Murphy - 10 November 2018

The Syrian government has reportedly given a green light for the rebuilding and return of residents to Yarmouk refugee camp more than five years after their mass displacement.

Known as the capital of the Palestinian diaspora, Yarmouk was previously the largest population center for Palestinian refugees in Syria and a hub of trade and commerce at the southern gate to Damascus.

The first mass displacement of residents occurred after rebel forces infiltrated the camp and government forces bombed it in December 2012. Yarmouk subsequently became a battleground in the country’s long and bloody civil war.

Electricity and water supplies to the camp were cut and a complete siege was imposed by government forces and allied groups in July 2013. Dozens starved to death the following winter.
Islamic State fighters took control of most of the camp in April 2015.

In April this year, the Syrian army declared victory after a month-long siege to purge the last fighters from Yarmouk, leaving much of the depopulated camp in ruins.

Witnesses reported that Syrian government forces looted homes in the camp after its takeover.
Some 160,000 Palestinians lived in Yarmouk before the war – or 30 percent of the Palestinian refugee population in the country.

“Challenge”

UNRWA, the United Nations agency for Palestine refugees, welcomed the Syrian government’s announcement.

Spokesperson Chris Gunness said that UNRWA is “assessing its installations in the camp; the agency has 23 premises including 16 schools.”

Gunness added that UNRWA’s emergency appeal for its operations in Syria is only 16 percent funded for the year and called for international support.

The return of refugees to Yarmouk “will be a challenge,” Gunness said. “The camp is largely destroyed and there is a need for the municipality to restore basic infrastructure, including water, electricity and sewage in order to allow people to reestablish their lives and livelihoods.”

The Action Group for Palestinians of Syria also welcomed the decision and called on the government to equip the camp with water, electricity, sanitation and communications infrastructure. The group also called for the acceleration of mine removal from Yarmouk to ensure the safe return of refugees, as well as the entry of building materials to the camp.

The group also urged the Palestinian Authority and Palestine Liberation Organization to ensure the return of refugees to the camp and work with the Syrian government to guarantee that refugees would not be turned away or detained.

Refugees displaced

More than 120,000 Palestinian refugees have fled Syria during the past seven years of violence.
Nearly 60 percent of the 438,000 Palestinian refugees remaining in Syria are internally displaced, according to UNRWA, and nearly all require sustained humanitarian assistance.

In early September, more than 50,000 pupils started classes at more than 100 UNRWA schools throughout Syria. Some of UNRWA’s schools are being rehabilitated after being used as shelters for internally displaced persons during the height of violence in the country.
In September, UNRWA opened a school in Yalda to serve 1,200 students displaced from nearby Yarmouk camp.

“Al-Jarmaq school, [formerly] operated in Yarmouk camp, was moved to the neighboring area of Yalda due to the deteriorating security situation in September 2016, when the school continued to serve students with the help of volunteers throughout the conflict,” according to UNRWA.
UNRWA was thrown into unprecedented financial crisis after the US, formerly the agency’s largest donor, announced earlier this year that it would cut $300 million in aid as part of an effort to punish the Palestinian leadership for rejecting President Trump’s Jerusalem embassy move and coerce them into going along with his administration’s “peace” plan.

 

The Dystopian Future of Facebook

It is already obvious we don’t know how much Facebook and other big tech platforms monitor us, neither do we know how much data they hold on us individually and collectively and, critically, who has access to that data and how they could use it.

by Mark Kernan-
( November 9, 2018, Boston, Sri Lanka Guardian) This year Facebook filed two very interesting patents in the US. One was a patent for emotion recognition technology; which recognises human emotions through facial expressions and so can therefore assess what mood we are in at any given time-happy or anxious for example. This can be done either by a webcam or through a phone cam. The technology is relatively straight forward. Artificially intelligent driven algorithms analyses and then deciphers facial expressions, it then matches the duration and intensity of the expression with a corresponding emotion. Take contempt for example. Measured by a range of values from 0 to 100, an expression of contempt could be measured by a smirking smile, a furrowed brow and a wrinkled nose. An emotion can then be extrapolated from the data linking it to your dominant personality traits: openness, introverted, neurotic, say.
The accuracy of the match may not be perfect, its always good to be sceptical about what is being claimed, but as AI (Artificial Intelligence) learns exponentially and the technology gets much better; it is already much, much quicker than human intelligence.
Recently at Columbia University a competition was set up between human lawyers and their AI counterparts. Both read a series of non-disclosure agreements with loopholes in them. AI found 95% compared to 88% by humans. The human lawyers took 90 minutes to read them; AI took 22 seconds. More incredibly still, last year Google’s AlphaZero beat Stockfish 8 in chess. Stockfish 8 is an open-sourced chess engine with access to centuries of human chess experience. Yet AlphaZero taught itself using machine learning principles, free of human instruction, beating Stockfish 8 28 times and drawing 72 out of 100. It took AlphaZero four hours to independently teach itself chess. Four hours from blank slate to genius.
A common misconception about algorithms is that they can be easily controlled, rather they can learn, change and run themselves-a process known as deep “neural” learning. In other words, they run on self-improving feed back loops. Much of this is positive of course, unthought of solutions by humans to collective problems like climate change are more possible in the future. The social payoffs could be huge too. But what of the use of AI for other means more nefarious. What if, as Yuval Noah Hariri says, AI becomes just another tool to be used by elites to consolidate their power even further in the 21stcentury. History teaches us that it isn’t luddite to ask this question, nor is it merely indulging in catastrophic thinking about the future. Rapidly evolving technology ending up in the hands of just a few mega companies, unregulated and uncontrolled, should seriously concern us all.
Algorithms, as Jamie Bartlett the author of The People Vs Tech puts it, are “the keys to the magic kingdom” of understanding deep seated human psychology: they filter, predict, correlate, target & learn. They also manipulate. We would be naive in the extreme to think they already don’t, and even more naive to think the manipulation is done only by commercial entities. After all, it’s not as if there aren’t lots of online tribes, some manufactured and some not, to be manipulated into and out of political viewpoints, our fleeced of their money.
In 2017 Facebook said they could detect teenagers’ moods and emotions such as feeling nervous and insecure by their entries, a claim they denied later, adding we do not, “offer tools to target people based on their emotional state”. The internal report was written by two Australian executives-Andy Sinn and David Fernandez. The report according to The Guardian was written for a large bank and said that, “the company has a database of its young users – 1.9 million high schoolers, 1.5 million tertiary students and 3 million young workers”.
Going one better still, Affectiva, a Boston company, claims to be able to detect and decode complex emotional and cognitive data from your face, voice and physiological state using emotion recognition technology (ECT)-amassing 12 billion “emotion data points” across gender, age & ethnicity.  Its founder has declared that Affectiva’s ECT can read your heart rate from a webcam without the you wearing any sensors, simply by using the reflection of your face which highlights blood flow-a reflection of your blood pressure. Next time you’re listening to Newstalk’s breakfast show, think of that.
Affectiva’s ultimate goal of course, when you get past all the feel-good optimistic guff about “social connectivity”, “awesome innovation”, and worst of all “empowering” is, to use their own words, to “enable media creators to optimize their content”. Profiting from decoding our emotional states in other words.
Maybe Facebook (and Google) would use this technology wisely for our benefit, then again maybe not. It isn’t such a stretch to imagine how it could be used unethically too. To microtarget customised ads and messages at us depending on our state of mind at given time, say, and allowing Cambridge Analytica to harvest the personal data of 87 million Facebook users to subvert democracy with Brexit & Trump. Facebook claims they weren’t aware of this though.  Well, maybe, maybe not, and in spite of their protests in recent years they are still not especially transparent or accountable given their enormous cultural and social power in our lives. Curiouser and Curiouser you might think, and you’d be right.
The second Facebook patent is even more interesting, if that’s the right word, or dystopian if you prefer. Patented this June, published under the code US20180167677 (with the abstract title of Broadcast Content View Analysis Based on Ambient Audio Recording, application no: 15/376,515) illustrates a process by which secret messages- ‘ambient audio fingerprints’ in the jargon-embedded in TV ads, would trigger your smart technology (phone or TV) to record you while the ad was playing. Presumably to gauge your reaction to the product being advertised at you through, perhaps, voice biometrics (i.e. the identification and recognition of the pitch and tone of your voice).
As the patent explains in near impenetrable but just about understandable jargon this is done by first, detecting one or more broadcasting signals (the advertisement) of a content item. Second, ambient audio of the content item is recorded, and then the audio feature is extracted “from the recorded ambient audio to generate an ambient fingerprint” and finally, wait for it, “ the ambient audio fingerprint, time information of the recorded ambient audio, and an identifier of an individual associated with a client device (you and your phone or smart TV) recording the ambient audio” is sent, “to an online system for determining whether there was an impression of the content by the individual.” It goes on to say that “the impression of the identified content item by the identified individual” is logged in a “data store of the online system”.
It goes on to state that “content providers have a vested interest in knowing who have listened and/or viewed their content” and that the feature described in the patent are not exhaustive, and that “many additional features and advantages will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art…”.
It is already obvious we don’t know how much Facebook and other big tech platforms monitor us, neither do we know how much data they hold on us individually and collectively and, critically, who has access to that data and how they could use it.
If you can sell consumer goods by such manipulation why not whole ideologies, chipping away at our human agency one dystopian tech innovation at a time, paving the way for the morphing of late stage capitalism into authoritarian capitalism; one efficiency gain at a time.
If put into place such “innovations” are designed to monitor our emotional states for monetary gain. In essence, it is a type of online mood tracking where we are the digital lab rats.  Facebook is already valued at half a trillion US dollars giving it huge economic and cultural power.
According to Private Eye magazine, Facebook’s legal team say the patent was filed “to prevent aggression from other companies”, and that “patents tend to focus on future-looking technology that is often speculative in nature and could be commercialised by other companies”.    As Private Eye pointed out though, it’s not as if Facebook has been completely transparent about such secretive issues in the past or present. The fact that Facebook generates billions by manipulating our emotions is not a surprise us, their business model is based on it, but how they intend to do it in the future should surprise, and alert us. We are after all the product. Over 90% of their revenues comes from selling adverts. They have the market incentive.
How will all this play out in the future? It isn’t difficult to build a picture of a commercialised and rapacious big tech dystopia, the very opposite of the freedoms and civil liberties envisaged by the original pioneers of the internet, and the opposite of how they currently perceive themselves.
Verint, a leading multinational analytics & biometric corporation, with an office in Ireland, has been known to install and sell, “intrusive mass surveillance systems worldwide including to authoritarian governments”, according to Privacy International. Governments that routinely commit human rights abuses on their own citizens.
China, a world leader in surveillance capitalism, recently declared that by 2020 a national video surveillance network, Xueliang, will be fully operationable, Sharp Eyes in English-Kafka and Orwell must be smirking knowingly somewhere. The term sharp eyes harks back to the post war slogan in communist China of “The people have sharp eyes”, when neighbours were encouraged to spy and tell on other neighbours of counter revolutionary or defeatist gossip about the 1949 revolution.
Democracies too have built overarching systems of surveillance. Edward Snowden told us in 2013 that the NSA was given secret direct access to the servers of big tech companies (Facebook, YouTube, Google and others) to collect private communications. As Glenn Greenwald said, the NSA’s unofficial “motto of omniscience” is: Know it all, Collect it all, Process it all.
Jaron Lanier, pioneer of virtual reality technology and a tech renegade, and an apostate to some, recently called the likes of Facebook and Google “behaviour manipulation empires”. Their pervasive surveillance and subtle manipulation through “weaponised advertising” he argues debases democracy by polarising debate at a scale unthinkable even just five or ten years ago, and it’s not only advertising that can be weaponised. Facebook, Google, Twitter and Instagram all have “manipulation engines” (algorithms we know little about) running in the background Lanier says, designed specifically by thousands of psychological & “emotional engineers” (“choice architects” or “product philosophers” to use the inane corporate gobbledygook). Their job is to keep you addicted to what’s now known as the “attention economy”-and attention equals profit. A better description still might be the attention/anxiety economy. Twitter has for instance a 3 second time delay between the page loading and notification loading, Facebook something similar-and always red for urgent. They are known in psychology as intermittent variable rewards, negative reinforcement in this context which keep behaviour going by the hope of maybebeing rewarded, with a like or a follower. This builds anticipation and releases feel good neurotransmitters, and taps into your need to belong, and to be heard-we’re intensely social creatures. The downside is the opposite of course,where we can be thrown into an emotional rollercoaster if the expected dopamine hit doesn’t come.
The goal is addiction into a consumption frenzy of socially approved validation. Big Tech’s social media universe is, as one reformed “choice architect” put it, “an attention seeking gravitational wormhole” that sucks you into their profit seeking universe. If you don’t think so, check how many times you look at your phone every day. The average person checks 150 times. Most of that is social media. We’re all in an attention arms race now.
There is a great German word: Zukunftsangst. It means translated, roughly, future-anxiety. Maybe it should be renamed Zuckerbergangstinstead.
Mark Kernan is a Freelance Writer and Independent Researcher. Follow him @markkernan1. This article first appeared on Counterpunch