#GoHomeGota, ‘the struggle’ and the rhetoric – The Island
By Erandika de Silva
I use the hashtag #GoHomeGota to mark this defining moment in Sri Lanka’s post-colonial history. It is in honor of the people who took to the streets to tear down the Bastille of a dynastic and nepotistic political regime that left Sri Lanka in economic collapse. People of all classes and creeds have united against a “common enemy”; the Rajapaksas. Various types of rhetoric seep into “the struggle” to fight the Rajapaksas, and they require careful scrutiny and unpacking for a more inclusive, pluralistic and egalitarian struggle. When I use the term “the struggle”, I use it to refer to the #GoHomeGota struggle, however, with the awareness that it is not a homogeneous struggle that can be captured with this term: each of us who engages in this struggle comes from various places and subject positions.
#GoHomeGota, fight or no fight?
One of the main concerns people seem to have about the waves of protest in Sri Lanka is how “Protestant” they are. Young people joining the #GoHomeGota protest movement use various forms of expression of dissent, and some social media users criticize them for their supposed lack of seriousness and depth. This created a division among dissidents. Social media stories against these “not-so-serious” protesters undermine their contribution to the #GoHomeGota fight. A problem with this dichotomy is that it serves to restrict the forms of expression of dissent. A widely circulated social media post reads: “aragalaya aathal ekak kara noganna” [do not make the struggle an aathal/farce—although “farce” barely captures the nuances of aathal]. The problem is that we cannot expect the same reaction or response from all of these groups because their needs, goals, feelings, struggles, reasons and reactions are diverse. Although this crisis has united people from all walks of life, we cannot view it as a crisis that affects all citizens equally: it affects people differently based on factors such as class, gender, religion , ethnicity and caste who are very active while we talk. The struggles in Mirihana and Tangalle (but not limited to) were the culmination of pent up anger and frustration of the working classes, (perhaps) especially disadvantaged and marginalized people and communities. Awakened by their struggle to meet the needs, protesters from diverse backgrounds took to the streets in a show of support. Therefore, it is simplistic to view this struggle as a monolithic or homogeneous struggle – we should not expect it to be so. Every dissident is an asset to this fight. There is no pattern or format for wrestling. Struggles and revolutions are diverse and this diversity must be embraced.
The dangers of trying to standardize #GoHomeGota
This diversity of our expressions of dissent is a result of the diverse subject positions we occupy, our privilege, and the creativity of our expression. The attempt to standardize this struggle, in a way, weakens its force and effect. Uniformity in struggles also runs the risk of rapid elimination in the face of counter-resistance, retaliation and government repression – diversity and inclusion increase the strength of protests. Why standardize struggles? Will these predetermined patterns allow us to dismantle oppressive social structures and ever-changing hierarchies?
#GoHomeGota and the question of egalitarianism: sexism and casteism
Kudos to the pressure we put on the government through the #GoHomeGota movement. However, it is important to take a moment of introspection and reflection. Some signs reek of sexism. For example, Gotage ammata enna kiyapiya [ask Gota’s mother to come]and Tasting…. Gnanakkage Katey [Gota’s … are in Gnanakka’s mouth]. Calling Gota’s mother is a form of threat implying physical and sexual assault on Gota’s mother, and the second is a graphic sexual metaphor indicating that Gota is under the sway of his astrologer, Gnanakka.
Another text/catch that reads Adoh naattami adu kuley upan…. invokes sexism, casteism, classism and snobbery. Although inconsistent and fragmented, a loose translation would be; Yo, doorman! Low caste born… These words from a protester at the Mirihana protest site quickly permeated social media as a catchy slur aimed at Gota. The question is how a revolution is possible when we rely on such insults with their basis in the very social structures and hierarchies that have oppressed us for centuries. When we have fought the oppressive grip of caste for generations, why are we now reigniting caste in a struggle against another era of oppression? If we perpetuate these insults without question, it will only further marginalize the peripheries and exclude oppressed groups from this fight for an egalitarian society without corruption.
Speaking of egalitarianism, let’s also ask who this struggle is, and who has access to this struggle. “The struggle” as it manifests itself in the streets of metropolises and centers is perhaps not accessible to those who struggle in the peripheries of the peripheries which are increasingly marginalized; minorities who do not speak Sinhalese; and perhaps people excluded because of the digital divide. Moreover, hegemonic Sinhalese Buddhist discourse mainly fuels this struggle and obliterates Tamil narratives and rhetoric. Living in Jaffna for the past two years has given me a new perspective on how people view the protests here. In Jaffna, people have been protesting for decades, but their suffering has gone unnoticed – does this wave of #GoHomeGota protest sufficiently acknowledge their suffering?
A fetish for kings and despots
Although the #GoHomeGota movement is driven by the call to end dynasticism, nepotism, totalitarianism and corruption, the unconditional use of certain rhetoric involves the deep and latent ideologies that overthrow this cause by showing a underlying fetishism for kings and despots. For example, Katin Poutine waeda Tin Tin, implying that Gota talks like Putin but works like Tin Tin, is unacceptable on several levels: Tin Tin is an honorable, just and law-abiding man while Putin is a megalomaniac who pushed Russia to launch missiles and bombs. bombs on the Ukrainians. The slogan implies a latent desire for a megalomaniac like Putin as opposed to the honorable Tin Tin. Is Putin the leader we want? It’s time for us to rethink the dangers of these slogans.
Another example, Magul aethaa maerunama rajaata asubai kiuwe kata kahanawata newi Nandasena, loosely translates to “it was not without reason that they said that the death of the holy tusker brings bad luck to the king”. This is, of course, a reference to the death of the tusker, Nedungamuwe Raja, but the inference is that there is a clear connection between the death of Nedungamuwe Raja and the misfortune that befell Gota. This connection equates Gotabaya with a king and links his fortune to the holy tusker which has symbolic meaning for Buddhists – this rhetoric reinforces Sinhalese Buddhist hegemony which in turn excludes those who are not Sinhalese Buddhists.
The creativity of the signs, slogans and hashtags took the #GoHomeGota fight to a whole new level. They are one of the driving forces in this fight and their contribution to #GoHomeGota must not be compromised. Yet, let’s not forget to reflect on the problems that arise here and there. It is understandable that not everyone is able to understand the subtle implications or nuances of these texts and speeches that are going viral on social networks. It is the suppressed anger and frustrations of citizens that emerge from these texts and speeches – (and perhaps they also have a use to serve?). To be both involved in this struggle and distant enough to be self-critical is a great privilege that few can afford. It is a privilege that education grants us. With this privilege, we cannot see certain ironies created by the types of rhetoric used in #GoHomeGota. I like to quote my colleague, Anushka Kahandagama (also from the Kuppi Collective), who writes, “Let me first pay tribute to free education and to the people whose tax dollars have funded free education for raising me to a privileged position where I can stop a instant and analyze this situation”. On this very note, I write that it is important that we understand the underlying causes of these various narratives and rhetoric as we move forward. These -isms manifesting in these protests also reflect divisions and fissures in society at large, including within supposedly progressive social movements. If we can tackle sexism, classism, casteism, racism and other flaws, there is room for more pluralism, egalitarianism and justice in Sri Lanka.
Erandika de Silva is attached to the Department of Linguistics and English at Jaffna University
Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy taking place on the fringes of the amphitheater that simultaneously parodies, subverts and reaffirms social hierarchies.
