ICFI

books

In defence of SEP: The call to build on historical lessons of the Trotskyist movement for intra-party democracy

By Nihal Gikianage for SEP-SL Left Faction

books
Revolutionary Handbooks

The letter posted below was sent on October 28, 2022 by the comrades of the Left Faction of Sri Lanka Socialist Equality Party (SEP), Chilaw branch, to its General Secretary Deepal Jayasekara, to defend the party from the anti-democratic and conspiratorial activities of the party leadership.  Such efforts by the members were frowned upon by the party bureaucracy and led to the party leadership’s disastrous decision that there was no other option but to expel a large number of comrades.  It should be noted that the first time even the party members were reading this letter was when this was published originally in Sinhala language here on August 7, 2023.  Dozens of letters sent by the SEP-SL left faction to the party leadership were thrown into the dustbin without any discussion within the membership.

***

Deepal Jayasekara, 

General Secretary, Socialist Equality Party- Sri Lanka.

Dear Comrade,

Three months have passed since the membership of comrades Nandana, Sanjay and Ananda Wakkumbura has been suspended, but up to date no political issue has been raised regarding these three.

There must be political reasons for a dispute in the revolutionary party. They must be irreconcilable class antagonisms, not mere ‘reasons’. We categorically state in all seriousness that you have no such reasons to offer.

We are engaged in a continuous struggle in our branch opposing the undemocratic suspension of the party membership of these comrades. The branch leadership says that raising this issue itself is against the centralism of the party. Establishing centralism against democracy is the practice of the party regime. As against this, every effort made to examine the historical experience of the world Marxist movement was opposed by the party regime including the branch leadership. It is a sign that the political health of the party has deteriorated.

In analyzing the issues that arise within the party, the policy based on dialectical materialism is to call upon the historical wisdom of our movement. But it is difficult to get the majority of the membership towards this approach. Even under these circumstances, we the undersigned, Wijesinghe, Punyawardena and Nihal in the Chilaw branch are fighting without let up against this anti-democratic action taken by the party.

Engaging in political struggle or trying to develop discussions for political clarity are the real reasons for suspending the membership of these comrades. The leadership has worked to carry out their actions without facing serious opposition in the party membership although they were done without any discussion with the three comrades and without giving them an opportunity to present the facts. This was achieved by a campaign of lies and accusations against these comrades. For example, the propaganda that they have rejected the party’s invitations to negotiate. Another one is the propaganda that comrade Nandana chases away those who come to join the party saying they are police spies.

Nihal raised this question in his intervention at the members’ meeting last attended by Comrade Wijay in last July.

He quoted this passage taken from the Declination of the Bolshevik Party from Trotsky’s brilliant work “Revolution Betrayed” ” The inner regime of the Bolshevik party was characterized by the method of democratic centralism. The combination of these two concepts, democracy and centralism, is not in the least contradictory. The party took watchful care not only that its boundaries should always be strictly defined, but also that all those who entered these boundaries should enjoy the actual right to define the direction of the party policy.

Freedom of criticism and intellectual struggle was an irrevocable content of the party democracy. The present doctrine that Bolshevism does not tolerate factions is a myth of epoch decline. In reality the history of Bolshevism is a history of the struggle of factions. And, indeed, how could a genuinely revolutionary organization, setting itself the task of overthrowing the world and uniting under its banner the most audacious iconoclasts, fighters and insurgents, live and develop without intellectual conflicts, without groupings and temporary factional formations? The farsightedness of the Bolshevik leadership often made it possible to soften conflicts and shorten the duration of factional struggle, but no more than that. The Central Committee relied upon this seething democratic support. From this it derived the audacity to make decisions and give orders. The obvious correctness of the leadership at all critical stages gave it that high authority which is the priceless moral capital of centralism.” (Chapter 2: The Degeneration of the Bolshevik Party; 2nd Paragraph – Revolution Betrayed)

After this long quote, he asked Comrade Wijay to re-assess the decision taken against these comrades who are well experienced and very close to the International Committee, placing it in this context.

Taking this struggle forward when Comrade Nihal raised the question about these comrades in the Chilaw branch, Comrade Quintin threateningly requested the local secretary Kapila to call for a vote and throw him out, Kapila said that he would not hesitate to do so.

It was the Ratnasiri leadership of the Ambalangoda branch who first conducted this vote taking. Comrade Nandana accused the party leadership of using gimmicks during the recent party congress. He requested a discussion about the congress to solve these problems. Solely on this matter, when three members of the committee including Nandana were absent, Ratnasiri the local secretary, a member of the party’s political committee, confirmed the allegation by Nandana’s that the party leadership is resorting to gimmicks, by calling for a vote and banning Nandana’s membership. The political committee suspended his membership without any discussion.

We allege that there are threats to implement the same policy in other branches in which, there are members fighting for the suspended comrades. ie. Ambalangoda, Kandy, Kolonnawa and Chilaw.

In the Chilaw branch we continuously fought to consider these questions based on the historical knowledge of our own Trotskyist movement. But the branch leadership always declared that this is a petty bourgeois tendency and will be purged from the party. The party has not made any political explanation up to date of this so-called petty bourgeois tendency. Even if we accept that this is such a tendency for a moment, we cannot agree to the behavior of the leadership at all.

Comrade Nihal brought forth an example from Trotsky’s ” In Defense of Marxism” to inform the branch members about how the Trotskyist movement fought with petty bourgeois tendencies. This was not regarding a bogus charge of ‘petty bourgeois tendency’ that is thrust upon on Nandana, Wakkumbura and Sanjay by the leadership, but of an actual petty bourgeois tendency that arose in the Socialist Workers Party in 1939. “The following question can be posed: If the opposition is a petty-bourgeois tendency does that signify further unity is impossible? Then how reconcile the petty-bourgeois tendency with the proletarian? To pose the question like this means to judge one-sidedly, undialectically and thus falsely. In the present discussion the opposition has clearly manifested its petty-bourgeois features. But this does not mean that the opposition has no other features. The majority of the members of the opposition are doubly devoted to the cause of the proletariat and are capable of learning. Tied today to a petty-bourgeois milieu they can tomorrow tie themselves to the proletariat. The inconsistent ones, under the influence of experience, can become more consistent. When the party embraces thousands of workers even the professional factionalists can re-educate themselves in the spirit of proletarian discipline. It is necessary to give them time for this. That is why comrade Cannon’s proposal to keep the discussion free from any threats of split, expulsions, etc., was absolutely correct and in place.”

(https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/in-defense-of-marxism-leon-trotsky1939/11.html)

Trotsky’s attitude towards the Burnham, Shatman and Abern group, which clearly showed petty bourgeois characteristics in the Trotskyist movement, is clear.

Moreover, let us consider by a short excerpt, how Comrade North used Trotsky’s explanations in ‘In defense of Marxism’ in the work, ‘how did the Workers Revolutionary Party betray Trotskyism’, in his struggle. “To make matters worse, the political differences raised by Thornett, to the extent that they had been developed in the autumn of 1974, had not reached the level at which a split could be justified in front of the working class. It was not sufficient for Healy and Banda to have a hunch, no matter how astute, that Thornett was functioning as an agent of the OCI. In 1940 Trotsky had warned Cannon not to take premature organizational measures against the minority, insisting that “you must act not only on the basis of your subjective appreciations, as correct as they may be, but on the basis of objective facts available to everyone” And he cautioned that organizational impatience “is not infrequently connected with theoretical indifference.” (In Defense of Marxism, New Park, p. 198)

(https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/how-the-wrp-betrayedtrotskyism/06.html )

It is clear that the party has resorted to a policy of those who turned their backs to Trotskyism instead that of Trotskyism. It is a matter that needs to be examined. We are working on it and we think the party leadership will consider it seriously.

For that, we suggest that the party leadership, including you, should re-assess this organizational step in this historical context.

Over the past period, the entire party revolved around secondary issues, and as a result, the party failed to anticipate the class struggle that started in Sri Lanka in April and is still going on, and to make a successful intervention in it. In order to cut through the party’s past political setbacks and make a revolutionary intervention in the class struggle implementing the perspective of developing Action Committees and proceeding towards a congress of Action Committees in keeping with the perspectives of the International Committee, the internal problems of the party must first be resolved. This is because the International Committee has very clearly and brilliantly identified that this decade as the decade of revolutions and wars, and identified this as a unique period for the world Trotskyist movement. The political setback of our party is taking place in this context.

The leadership did not undertake the task of understanding the idea of building Action committees through a serious discussion within the cadre. In a discussion about action committees in the Chilaw branch, we presented a quote from Trotsky’s ‘Death agony of Capitalism’. ” Soviets are not limited to an a priori party program. They throw open their doors to all the exploited. Through these doors pass representatives of all strata, drawn into the general current of the struggle. The organization, broadening out together with the movement, is renewed again and again in its womb. All political currents of the proletariat can struggle for leadership of the soviets on the basis of the widest democracy. The slogan of soviets, therefore, crowns the program of transitional demands.” (The Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International; Chapter 14 – The Soviets – Paragraph 3) On these occasions, the branch secretary Comrade Kapila said, “We are not building them so that each and every person could walk through these doors.” This exposes the party leadership’s idea about working committees.

These differences of opinion call for a genuine democratic discussion to consider the responsibilities our party in facing the current class struggle.

In the book “The Russian Revolution and the Unfinished Twentieth Century”, Comrade Noth’s explanation about internal party democracy, ” The importance of inner-party democracy was not simply one of abstract principle, nor was its practical significance limited to its direct impact on the field of economic policy. What was ultimately at stake in the struggle waged by Trotsky in defense of Soviet democracy was the fate of the entire heritage of socialist culture and revolutionary thought as it had developed in the international workers movement over the previous century. The bureaucracy dealt with Marxism as it did with Lenin’s corpse: it was mummified and made the object of ritualistic and semimystical incantations. After 1927 Marxism, for all intents and purposes, ceased to play any role whatsoever in the formulation of Soviet policy. The defeat of the Opposition sounded the death knell for the development of critical thought in virtually every sphere of intellectual and cultural activity.”

(https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/russian-revolution-unfinishedtwentieth-century/04.html )

Drawing your attention to the points we explained in this letter, the suspension of the party membership of the three comrades should be removed, and this discussion should be resolved within the party. If there is a reason for not doing so, please explain. 

Fraternally, 

Nihal Geekianage, 

Punyawardena, 

K. Wijesinghe 

28.10.2022

In defence of SEP: The call to build on historical lessons of the Trotskyist movement for intra-party democracy Read More »

amarathunga

In defence of SEP: Countering the purge of Comrade Amaratunga from Ambalangoda Local

By L.P. Udayaprema, for SEP-SL Left Faction 

amarathunga
Amaratunga at a SEP May Day demonstration 

The letter posted below was sent on November 16, 2022 by Comrade Udayaprema of the Ambalangoda branch of the Sri Lanka Socialist Equality Party (SEP) to its General Secretary Deepal Jayasekara to defend the party from the anti-democratic and conspiratorial activities of the party leadership.  Such efforts by the members were frowned upon by the party bureaucracy and led to the party leadership’s disastrous decision that there was no other option but to expel a large number of comrades.  It should be noted that the first time even the party members were reading this letter was when this was published originally in Sinhala language here on August 7, 2023.  Dozens of letters sent by the SEP-SL left faction to the party leadership were thrown into the dustbin without any discussion within the membership.

***

Comrade Jayasekara,

Regarding the expulsion of Comrade Amaratunga of the Ambalangoda Local Council by Comrade Ratnasiri, the secretary of the Local, abusing his authority

Comrade Ratnasiri, claiming that comrade Amaratunga has left the party, has barred comrade Amaratunga’s participation in the Local meetings since 7th July 2022. Comrade Ratnasiri considers a statement made by comrade Amarathunga protesting the arbitrary suspension of the three comrades Nandana, Sanjaya and Wakkumbura as the reason for this criminal act, which was carried out arbitrarily without any discussion in the Local assembly. What Comrade Amaratunga said was, “If things are being done this way, there is no point in being in this party any longer”.

As reported to the local council, Ratnasiri’s action was approved by the political committee without any inquiry!

The conflict between Amaratunga and Ratnasiri arose out of Ratnasiri’s continuous wrong political practices in the Local. To understand these differences of opinion, let us bring to your attention of 3 incidents.

It is unconstitutional for the Political Committee to suspend Comrade Nandana’s membership while he was a member of the party Central Committee. Comrade Udayprema cited our constitution and raised these issues in the local assembly. Ratnasiri making a phone call to Amaratunga specifically for this purpose said that there is no such paragraph in the constitution. Later at a subsequent discussion of the Local, Ratnasiri had to admit that what he said was a lie. Amaratunga intervened on that occasion condemning this irresponsible act.

Despite the fact that there were many issues that needed to be resolved, the leadership’s attempt to hold the party conference, without allowing for a discussion, in violation of the constitution, led to a controversy in the Ambalangoda Local committee. 

Ratnasiri said that the constitution is not decisive. To confirm this, he lied that Lenin did not implement the April thesis following a decision in a congress. He further argued that the October Revolution would not have happened if conferences had to be held like that. We pointed out that the above thesis was presented to the Bolshevik Central Committee on 6th April, 1917 and to the Party Congress on April 10 and was adopted by the Congress, but Ratnasiri continued to defend his incorrect position.

Three members, including Comrade Nandana, requested that the Local commitee, which was to be held on 15 th June, be convened on another day as they were not in a position to attend. Despite this , secretary Ratnasiri assembled the Local commitee without the relevant comrades and proceeded to pass a resolution to suspend Comrade Nandana. Condemning this anti-democratic act, Comrade Amaratunga insisted that he is against holding this vote and therefore will not participate in it. Later, he informed the political committee that the Ratnasiri’s resolution was approved by a majority vote and that Amaratunga was neutral and the political committee implemented that decision. Amaratunga was not neutral, but was opposed to holding the vote.

Amaratunga, like many other comrades, was confused by this provocation which the party leadership consciously implemented. Amaratunga suggested to the committee to take steps for political clarity in order to correct these mistakes. Under these circumstances only, came Amaratunga’s remarks that he could no longer continue under this leadership. But Ratnasiri took this as an opportunity to advance the current situation in which actions are being taken to hunt down the party members who do not support anti-democratic, anti-tradition and anti-theoretical actions.

Through the intervention of Udayaprema and Geetha in the local committee, a consensus was reached that the problem should be resolved by discussing with Amaratunga.

Accordingly, Udayaprema was assigned to meet Amaratunga. Amaratunga told Udaya that there is no solution (politically speaking) other than the party; and that he is waiting for the date of the local committee meeting to be announced. It was reported to the local assembly, but Ratnasiri did not agree to invite him. He said that Amaratunga should make a written request to join the party as a new member. Ratnasiri rejected that Amaratunga did not leave the party.

Our party had a tradition of trying to solve problems such as this by sending a representative of the political committee to participate in the local committee. Such practices have been abandoned since many years. Now this is another example of uprooting the traditions and accepted practices needed for gaining political clarity. An important fact here is that the leadership worked to sweep away like dust a worker with a continuous history of 46 years in the party. When Amaratunga was working as a miner, he came forward to oppose the betrayal by the LSSP trade union and, the union leadership and the employers conspired together to sack him. He lost his job. He turned to RCL with this experience. The party has now given him the same treatment as the leaders of that trade union. He was greatly shocked and it affected his health. If not for our intervention and explanations made at the request of his family members, even his life would have been endangered.

He fought tirelessly against the 30-year war and against the JVP’s tyranny. He is a much respected and loved fighter in the area as well as within the party. He has a record of being true to the International Committee and the Party at all times. Since 1989, he has been suffering from a severe heart disease and he did not consider this condition as an obstacle to any of party work. Neighbors regard him as a leader because of the life he spent as a man who does not bow down to backwardness and always standing by principles.

When in 1978 Basil Fernando and Siriwardena rejected party perspectives outright, the RCL discussed with them for 6 months and tried to get political clarity. Such actions were

based on the decisive lessons of the struggle that Trotsky and Cannon had with Burnham Shatman group. When we raised these issues, Ratnasiri denounced this historical experience as mistakes made during the time of Healy. These statements, and the dismissal, shows the petty bourgeoise disregard for the history of the movement. This fact has been confirmed by the way in which the comrades Nandana, Sanjaya and Vakkambura have been treated as well as Amaratunga. What is important is to develop the party and thereby intensify the class struggle by raising the issues regarding perspectives and programme and clarifying them. Instead of that, such behaviors open the doors of the party to petty bourgeoise opportunism. We insist that it is necessary to realize this without delay.

In the first local meeting after 3rd Party conference (on 25.5.2022), Comrade Ratnasiri tried to appoint office bearers, keeping Comrades Nandana, Geetha and Udayaprema away. This has been informed to you by Comrade Nandana in his letter dated 29.5.2022, but you have chosen to ignore it.

Comrade Ratnasiri had informed the above comrades that the meeting would be started at 7.30 PM and, started it at 7 PM informing only the other members of the branch. After that, officials were appointed before the political discussion with an anti-traditional haste. Comrade Nandana’s opposition in this regard was introduced as sabotage. Comrade Amaratunga and the above three comrades left the meeting opposing the suppression of discussion and threatening of the local leadership. 

We warn that it is extremely dangerous for the leadership to continue to disregard the old traditions and constitution of the party in the current intense class struggle, and to expel the comrades who have been members of the party for a long time without any discussion  is opening the door to the reaction.

Comrade Missaka, who was a member of the Central Committee until he left the party, and a young Comrade Hirun, who demanded a discussion about the arbitrary actions of the party leadership have left the party, because even the 3rd Party Congress last year too defended these actions. Even though they have made written submissions to the leadership, no discussion whatsoever had been held within the party regarding them up to this date.

Dismissal of political, theoretical and organizational issues emerging within the acute situation of the contemporary class struggle, without any assessment or clarification is a clear indication that the party is being driven by pragmatism. For this reason, we understand that, it is required to have a genuine democratic discussion on the problems that have arisen regarding the comrades who have been kept away from the party including Amaratunga, which would be an essential requirement in order to understand the tasks of the party at a higher level and to create the necessary organizational preparations in implementing them. For that, we propose all four comrades mentioned here should be reinstated as members immediately.

We suggest that this letter should be shared among the party membership and a discussion should be commenced. 

Fraternally, 

Udayaprema, Geeta 

Local Council, Ambalangoda. 

16.11.2022

In defence of SEP: Countering the purge of Comrade Amaratunga from Ambalangoda Local Read More »

amarathunga

In defence of SEP: Countering the purge of Comrade Amaratunga from Ambalangoda Local

By L.P. Udayaprema, for SEP-SL Left Faction 

amarathunga
Amaratunga at a SEP May Day demonstration 

The letter posted below was sent on November 16, 2022 by Comrade Udayaprema of the Ambalangoda branch of the Sri Lanka Socialist Equality Party (SEP) to its General Secretary Deepal Jayasekara to defend the party from the anti-democratic and conspiratorial activities of the party leadership.  Such efforts by the members were frowned upon by the party bureaucracy and led to the party leadership’s disastrous decision that there was no other option but to expel a large number of comrades.  It should be noted that the first time even the party members were reading this letter was when this was published originally in Sinhala language here on August 7, 2023.  Dozens of letters sent by the SEP-SL left faction to the party leadership were thrown into the dustbin without any discussion within the membership.

***

Comrade Jayasekara,

Regarding the expulsion of Comrade Amaratunga of the Ambalangoda Local Council by Comrade Ratnasiri, the secretary of the Local, abusing his authority

Comrade Ratnasiri, claiming that comrade Amaratunga has left the party, has barred comrade Amaratunga’s participation in the Local meetings since 7th July 2022. Comrade Ratnasiri considers a statement made by comrade Amarathunga protesting the arbitrary suspension of the three comrades Nandana, Sanjaya and Wakkumbura as the reason for this criminal act, which was carried out arbitrarily without any discussion in the Local assembly. What Comrade Amaratunga said was, “If things are being done this way, there is no point in being in this party any longer”.

As reported to the local council, Ratnasiri’s action was approved by the political committee without any inquiry!

The conflict between Amaratunga and Ratnasiri arose out of Ratnasiri’s continuous wrong political practices in the Local. To understand these differences of opinion, let us bring to your attention of 3 incidents.

It is unconstitutional for the Political Committee to suspend Comrade Nandana’s membership while he was a member of the party Central Committee. Comrade Udayprema cited our constitution and raised these issues in the local assembly. Ratnasiri making a phone call to Amaratunga specifically for this purpose said that there is no such paragraph in the constitution. Later at a subsequent discussion of the Local, Ratnasiri had to admit that what he said was a lie. Amaratunga intervened on that occasion condemning this irresponsible act.

Despite the fact that there were many issues that needed to be resolved, the leadership’s attempt to hold the party conference, without allowing for a discussion, in violation of the constitution, led to a controversy in the Ambalangoda Local committee. 

Ratnasiri said that the constitution is not decisive. To confirm this, he lied that Lenin did not implement the April thesis following a decision in a congress. He further argued that the October Revolution would not have happened if conferences had to be held like that. We pointed out that the above thesis was presented to the Bolshevik Central Committee on 6th April, 1917 and to the Party Congress on April 10 and was adopted by the Congress, but Ratnasiri continued to defend his incorrect position.

Three members, including Comrade Nandana, requested that the Local commitee, which was to be held on 15 th June, be convened on another day as they were not in a position to attend. Despite this , secretary Ratnasiri assembled the Local commitee without the relevant comrades and proceeded to pass a resolution to suspend Comrade Nandana. Condemning this anti-democratic act, Comrade Amaratunga insisted that he is against holding this vote and therefore will not participate in it. Later, he informed the political committee that the Ratnasiri’s resolution was approved by a majority vote and that Amaratunga was neutral and the political committee implemented that decision. Amaratunga was not neutral, but was opposed to holding the vote.

Amaratunga, like many other comrades, was confused by this provocation which the party leadership consciously implemented. Amaratunga suggested to the committee to take steps for political clarity in order to correct these mistakes. Under these circumstances only, came Amaratunga’s remarks that he could no longer continue under this leadership. But Ratnasiri took this as an opportunity to advance the current situation in which actions are being taken to hunt down the party members who do not support anti-democratic, anti-tradition and anti-theoretical actions.

Through the intervention of Udayaprema and Geetha in the local committee, a consensus was reached that the problem should be resolved by discussing with Amaratunga.

Accordingly, Udayaprema was assigned to meet Amaratunga. Amaratunga told Udaya that there is no solution (politically speaking) other than the party; and that he is waiting for the date of the local committee meeting to be announced. It was reported to the local assembly, but Ratnasiri did not agree to invite him. He said that Amaratunga should make a written request to join the party as a new member. Ratnasiri rejected that Amaratunga did not leave the party.

Our party had a tradition of trying to solve problems such as this by sending a representative of the political committee to participate in the local committee. Such practices have been abandoned since many years. Now this is another example of uprooting the traditions and accepted practices needed for gaining political clarity. An important fact here is that the leadership worked to sweep away like dust a worker with a continuous history of 46 years in the party. When Amaratunga was working as a miner, he came forward to oppose the betrayal by the LSSP trade union and, the union leadership and the employers conspired together to sack him. He lost his job. He turned to RCL with this experience. The party has now given him the same treatment as the leaders of that trade union. He was greatly shocked and it affected his health. If not for our intervention and explanations made at the request of his family members, even his life would have been endangered.

He fought tirelessly against the 30-year war and against the JVP’s tyranny. He is a much respected and loved fighter in the area as well as within the party. He has a record of being true to the International Committee and the Party at all times. Since 1989, he has been suffering from a severe heart disease and he did not consider this condition as an obstacle to any of party work. Neighbors regard him as a leader because of the life he spent as a man who does not bow down to backwardness and always standing by principles.

When in 1978 Basil Fernando and Siriwardena rejected party perspectives outright, the RCL discussed with them for 6 months and tried to get political clarity. Such actions were

based on the decisive lessons of the struggle that Trotsky and Cannon had with Burnham Shatman group. When we raised these issues, Ratnasiri denounced this historical experience as mistakes made during the time of Healy. These statements, and the dismissal, shows the petty bourgeoise disregard for the history of the movement. This fact has been confirmed by the way in which the comrades Nandana, Sanjaya and Vakkambura have been treated as well as Amaratunga. What is important is to develop the party and thereby intensify the class struggle by raising the issues regarding perspectives and programme and clarifying them. Instead of that, such behaviors open the doors of the party to petty bourgeoise opportunism. We insist that it is necessary to realize this without delay.

In the first local meeting after 3rd Party conference (on 25.5.2022), Comrade Ratnasiri tried to appoint office bearers, keeping Comrades Nandana, Geetha and Udayaprema away. This has been informed to you by Comrade Nandana in his letter dated 29.5.2022, but you have chosen to ignore it.

Comrade Ratnasiri had informed the above comrades that the meeting would be started at 7.30 PM and, started it at 7 PM informing only the other members of the branch. After that, officials were appointed before the political discussion with an anti-traditional haste. Comrade Nandana’s opposition in this regard was introduced as sabotage. Comrade Amaratunga and the above three comrades left the meeting opposing the suppression of discussion and threatening of the local leadership. 

We warn that it is extremely dangerous for the leadership to continue to disregard the old traditions and constitution of the party in the current intense class struggle, and to expel the comrades who have been members of the party for a long time without any discussion  is opening the door to the reaction.

Comrade Missaka, who was a member of the Central Committee until he left the party, and a young Comrade Hirun, who demanded a discussion about the arbitrary actions of the party leadership have left the party, because even the 3rd Party Congress last year too defended these actions. Even though they have made written submissions to the leadership, no discussion whatsoever had been held within the party regarding them up to this date.

Dismissal of political, theoretical and organizational issues emerging within the acute situation of the contemporary class struggle, without any assessment or clarification is a clear indication that the party is being driven by pragmatism. For this reason, we understand that, it is required to have a genuine democratic discussion on the problems that have arisen regarding the comrades who have been kept away from the party including Amaratunga, which would be an essential requirement in order to understand the tasks of the party at a higher level and to create the necessary organizational preparations in implementing them. For that, we propose all four comrades mentioned here should be reinstated as members immediately.

We suggest that this letter should be shared among the party membership and a discussion should be commenced. 

Fraternally, 

Udayaprema, Geeta 

Local Council, Ambalangoda. 

16.11.2022

In defence of SEP: Countering the purge of Comrade Amaratunga from Ambalangoda Local Read More »

PURGE

ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ සමාජවාදී සමානතා පක්ෂ තන්ත්‍රය තවත් සාමාජිකයන් 7ක් පක්ෂයෙන් නෙරපයි

සසප වාමාංශයේ ප්‍රකාශය

PURGE
ස්ටැලින්ගේ මහා විරේකය, 1936-38

ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ සමාජවාදී සමානතා පක්ෂ (සසප) නායකත්වයේ “විරේක” කිරීමේ නිලධාරීවාදී පිලිවෙතට තවත් සාමාජිකයන් 7 දෙනෙකු ගොදුරු කර ගැනීමට 2023 අගෝස්තු 2 දින රැස් වූ මධ්‍යම කාරක සභාව තීන්දු කල බව අදාල සාමාජිකයන් වෙත දැනුම් දී ඇත. “මධ්‍යම කාරක සභාව, ඔබ විසින් දේශපාලන කමිටුවේ නිර්දේශ ප්‍රතික්ෂේප කරමින් සිය විනය විරෝධී ක්‍රියා කලාපය  දිගටම පවත්වාගෙන යාම හේතුකොට ගෙන ඔබව සසප සාමාජිකත්වයෙන් නෙරපීමට තින්දු කරයි,” යනුවෙන් දැනුම් දෙන ලිපියක් ඔවුන්ට එවා ඇත.

එහි සඳහන් දේශපාලන කමිටුවේ නිර්දේශයන් වන්නේ්, සසප විසින් ඉදිරිපත් කොට ඇති විප්ලවවාදී ඉදිරි දර්ශනය පසුගිය මහජන අරගලය තුලට ගෙන යාමත්, එම ඉදිරි දර්ශනය අනුගමනය කරමින් කොලඹ ක්‍රියාකාරී කමිටුව ගොඩ නැගීමත් නිසා පක්ෂයෙන් නෙරපූ සංජය ජයසේකර සහ, පක්ෂ නායකත්වය විසින් තමන් කොටු කිරීමටත්, අපකීර්තියට පත් කිරීමටත් දියත් කල ප්‍රකෝපකාරී ප්‍රචාර (සීඅයිඒ සම්බන්ධකම්, පක්ෂයට බැදෙන අයට බැන වැදී පලවා හැරීම වැනි ප්‍රබන්ධ කථා) ෆේස් බුක් මාධ්‍යය මගින් හෙලිදරව් කිරීම නිසා නෙරපා හල නන්දන නන්නෙත්ති යන අය සමග සියලු සබඳතා නතර කල යුතු බව, සහ කොලඹ ක්‍රියාකාරී කමිටුවට දෙන සහයෝගය නතර කල යුතු බවය. 

නුවර කමිටුවේ 1972 සිට සාමාජිකයෙකුව සිටි රජයේ ලිපිකරුවෙකු වූ අයිවන්, හලාවත කමිටුවේ නිහාල් ගීකියනගේ (1980 ජුලිවල පක්ෂයට බැඳී, පසුව මධ්‍යම කාරක සභාව නියෝජනය කලේය), 1990 සිට සාමාජිකත්වය දැරූ ධීවර කම්කරුවෙක් වන රත්නෙ, හා 2008 සිට සාමාජිකයෙකු වන විජේසිංහ යන සහෝදරවරු තිදෙනා ද, 1982 සිට පක්ෂ සාමාජිකත්වය උසුලා ඇති රෝලන්ඩ් සමාගමේ කම්කරුවෙකු වූ රත්මලාන කමිටුවේ කරුනාසේන, 1988 සිට සාමාජිකත්වය දැරූ හා හිටපු මධ්‍යම කාරක සභික අම්බලන්ගොඩ කමිටුවේ උදයප්‍රේම සහ 1990 දී පූර්නකාලීන සාමාජිකාවක ලෙස නිදහස් වෙලද කලාපයේ කම්කරුවන් අතර දේශපාලන කටයුතු සිදු කල ගීතා යන දෙදෙනා ද මේ සමාජික, සාමාජිකාවන් වේ. කිසිදු අවස්ථාවක දේශපාලනිකව පැහැදිලි නොකර, එසේ පැහැදිලි කර ගැනීම සදහා සාකච්ඡාවකට ඉඩ නො හරින ලද තතු යටතේ, පක්ෂ ව්‍යවස්ථාවට පටහැනිව, විනය පරීක්ෂනයක් තුල සිය නිර්දෝෂීභාවය සනාථ කිරීමට පක්ෂ ව්‍යවස්ථාවෙන් සලසා ඇති ඉඩකඩ ද අහුරා, ආඥාදායක ස්වරූපයෙන් ඉදිරිපත් කල මෙම නියෝගවලට යටත් වීම ඔවුහු සප්‍රතිපත්තිකව ප්‍රතික්ෂේප කලහ. 

2022 මැයි 14-16 පක්ෂයේ තුන්වන සම්මේලනය මෙම නෙරපා හැරීම් සදහා ම සූදානම් කල, කූටෝපායයන් හරහාම මෙහෙයවුනු සම්මේලනයකි. මුලින් ම එය පැවැත්වීමට නියම කර ගත්තේ එම වසරේ මාර්තු මාසයේ දී ය. සම්මේලනය, සාමාජිකත්වයට එයට සූදානම් වීමට කිසිදු ඉඩක් නැති වන පරිදි, දින කීපයකට පෙර දැනුම් දීමකින් පවත්වන්නට උත්සාහ කලේ පක්ෂය තුල සිදුවෙමින් පැවති දේශපාලන, න්‍යායික හා සංවිධානාත්මක පසු බැසීම් හා ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍ර විරෝධී හැඩ ගැස්ම ගැන සාකච්ඡාවක් මතුවීම වලක්වා ගැනීම සඳහා ය. එහෙත් වාම පාර්ශවයේ සාමාජිකයන් විසින් ඒ පිලිබඳව ජාත්‍යන්තර කමිටුවට දැනුම් දෙනු ලැබීමෙන් පසු  එහි මැදිහත් වීමෙන් එම ප්‍රයත්නය පරාජයට පත් කල හැකි විය. 

එම කල් දැමීම, සාමාන්‍ය සම්ප්‍රදාය වන පූර්ව සම්මේලන සාකච්ඡා සදහා කාලය වෙන් කිරීමක් වුව ද, කටයුතු සිදුවූයේ ඉතා නින්දා සහගත ආකාරයකිනි. පූර්ව සම්මේලන සාකච්ඡා සදහා යොමු කල සාමාජිකයන්ගේ ලිපි පක්ෂය තුල බෙදා නොහැරුනා පමනක් නො ව සාකච්ඡා පැවති සීමිත අවස්ථාවල දී පවා විරුද්ධ අදහස් යටපත් කර, එම අදහස් සම්බන්ධයෙන් සාකච්ඡාවක් මතුවීමේ ඉඩකඩ අහෝසි කිරීමට පක්ෂ තන්‍ත්‍රය ක්‍රියා කලේ ය. කොඩිඩ් වසංගත තත්වය නිසා අන්තර්ජාල තාක්ෂනය යොදා ගැනීම වාසියට හරවා ගත් තන්ත්‍රය ඡන්දය පවා වංචා කලේ ය. ඇතැමුන්ට ඡන්ද ප්‍රකාශ කිරීමට ඇති අයිතිය පවා අහිමි කරන ලදී. මූලධර්ම සඳහා සටන් වැදුනු සාමාජිකයන්ට පක්ෂය අත්හැර යාමට හෝ නිෂ්ක්‍රිය වීමට බල කෙරින. උදාහරනයක් ලෙස බුලත්සිංහල කමිටුවේ සිටි පක්ෂයේ දීර්ඝ කාලීන සාමාජිකයෙකු වූ විලියම් සහෝදරයා ඔහුගේ පදිංචියට හෝ සේවා ස්ථානයට කිසිදු සම්බන්ධතාවයක් නැති, ඔහු ජීවත් වන ප්‍රදේශයෙන් කි.මී. 100 කට වඩා දුරින් පිහිටි බන්ඩාරවෙල කමිටුවට අනුයුක්ත කෙරුනේ හුදෙක් නායකත්වයේ අභිමතය පරිදි ය. එය වූ කලී, ප්‍රවාහන වියදම් හා ශ්‍රී ලංකාව වැනි අඩු ප්‍රවාහන පහසුකම් සහිත රටක ගමන් කාලය සැලකිල්ලට ගත් කල සිද්ධිදායක අයුරින් කිව හැකි පරිදි, ඔහු නිෂ්ක්‍රිය කර තැබීමේ තීන්දුවකි. ඒ සඳහා තර්කානුකූල හේතුවක් වී නම්, ඒ, ඔහු සිය අත්දැකීම් මත පදනම් ව නායකත්වයේ ක්‍රියා කලාපය ප්‍රශ්න කිරීම පමනෙකි! තන්ත්‍රයේ බොල්ෂෙවික් විරෝධී ක්‍රියාවන්ට එරෙහි වූ, මූලධර්ම මත පිහිටාගත් සාමාජිකයන් නායකත්වයෙන් ඉවත් කර පසුගාමී ද, ආර්ථික වශයෙන් ශක්තිමත් ද වූ ව්‍යාපාරිකයන් වැනි සුලු ධනේශ්වර කොටස් ඒ තැන්වල ස්ථාපිත කරන ලදී. 

මෙයින් කලකිරුනු සහෝදරවරු දෙදෙනෙක් සම්මේලනයෙන් පසු සති දෙක තුල සාකච්චා කර මෙම තත්වය පැහැදිලි කර ගැනීමට ගත් උත්සාහයට ඉඩ නොදුන් බැවින් යලි කිසිදු සම්බන්ධයක් නැතැයි සහතික කර පක්ෂය හැර ගියහ. ඔවුහු කොටුව ලෝකලය බාරව වැඩ කල විලානි පීරිස්ට හා දේශපාලන කමිටුවට, කරුනු සනාථ කරන සාක්ෂි සහිතව ලිඛිත ප්‍රකාශ ලබා දුන් හ. ඒ අතරින් මිස්සක මධ්‍යම කාරක සභිකයෙක් ලෙස තුන්වන සම්මේලනය දක්වා වැඩ කල අයෙකි.

සම්මේලනයෙන් අනතුරුව අම්බලන්ගොඩ කමිටුව රැස් වූ අවස්ථාවේ දී, දේශපාලන සාකච්ඡාවක් හා සම්මේලනය පිලිබඳ තක්සේරුවක් සිදු කිරීමේ සාමාන්‍ය සම්ප්‍රදායට පිටුපා යාමට දේශපාලන කමිටු නියෝජිත රත්නසිරි මලලගම වැඩ කලේ ය. මීට විරුද්ධවීම හා සම්මේලනය පිලිබද සමාලෝචන සාකච්චාවක් ඉල්ලා සිටීම නිසා නන්දන නන්නෙත්තිගේ සාමාජිකත්වය තහනම් කිරීමට අභිනව ලේකම් දීපාල් ජයසේකර තීන්දු කලේ ය. අනතුරුව නන්දන නෙරපීමට විරුද්ධවීම නිසා අම්බලන්ගොඩ කමිටුවේ අමරතුංග (1976 සිට ක්‍රියාශීලී සාමාජිකයෙකු වන අතර දඩයමට ලක් වූ පතල් කම්කරුවෙකි) නෙරපා හරින ලදී.

පසුව 2022 නොවැම්බර් 19 දින, නන්දනට සහ සංජයට පක්ෂයේ සාමාජිකත්වය සම්පූර්නයෙන් ම අහිමි කෙරින. එවිට කොලොන්නාව කමිටුවේ මිගාර මේ පිලිබද විරුද්ධත්වය ප්‍රකාශ කල අතර ඔහු ද නෙරපා දමන ලදී. රත්මලාන කමිටුවේ සුනිල්ට ද මෙම ඉරනමට මුහුන දීමට සිදු විය. මේ අනුව සම්මේලනයෙන් පසු ගෙවී ගිය වසරකට මදක් වැඩි කාලය තුල 12 දෙනෙකු ‘විරේක’ කර දැමූ අභිනව ප්‍රධාන ලේකම් ජයසේකර ප්‍රමුඛ මේ තන්ත්‍රය 4 වන ජාත්‍යන්තරයේ ඉතිහාසය තුල විශේෂ වාර්තාවකට හිමිකම් කියයි. එපමනක් නොවේ; සම්මේලනයෙන් අනතුරුව තවත් අය පක්ෂය හැර ගිය ලයිස්තුවට එකතු වී සිටිති. විවිධ හේතු ඉදිරිපත් කරමින් හා පැදුරටත් නොකියා පලා ගිය ඒ පිරිස අතර, නුවර කමිටුවේ (මුල් කාලයේ සිට පක්ෂයේ සාමාජිකයෙකු වූ) ධනපාල සහ නිලූකා ද, හලාවත කමිටුවේ මහේෂ් ද, රත්මලානේ සතිස් කුමාර් ද වෙති. අවසන් සම්මේලන දෙක අතර කාලය තුල දුසිම් ගනනක් පක්ෂය හැර ගියහ. අවස්සාවේල්ල ශාඛාව විසුරුවා හැරුනි. එම හැරයාම් වල දේශපාලන ගම්‍යාර්ථ විමසූවන්ට නායකත්වයෙන් ලැබුනු ප්‍රතිචාරය වූයේ, “යනවා, එනවා .. ඒ ගැන සාකච්ඡා අනවශ්‍යය යි” වැනි අති සරල පිලිතුරකි. 

සම්මේලනයේ දී නැවත මධ්‍යම කාරක සභාවට පත් කරගත්, දේශපාලන කමිටු සාමාජික හා ලෝසවෙ අඩවියේ ශ්‍රී ලංකා කතෘ මන්ඩලයේ සාමාජික ප්‍රගීත් අරවින්ද මේ වසර මුල දී පක්ෂය අත් හැර දැමීමට තීන්දු කලේය. කලාවේ හා ප්‍රකාශනයේ  නිදහස සදහා සාර්ථක ලෙස ගොඩ නැගූ ක්‍රියාකාරී කමිටුව, නිලධාරීවාදයේ අපවිත්‍ර අත පොවා වීනාශ කිරීමට සසප නායකත්වය මොහු යොදාගනු ලැබූ අතර, ඒ සම්බන්ධයෙන් එම කමිටුවේ නන්දන සහෝදරයා 2022 නොවැමිබර 19 දින හා එහි හිටපු සභාපති සංජය  සහෝදරයා 2023 ජනවාරි 30 ඔහු වෙත යොමු කල විවෘත ලිපිවලට පිලිතුරු දෙනු නො හැකිව ඔහු මෙසේ පලා ගියේ ය.

සසප මෙන් ම එහි පූර්වගාමී විප්ලවවාදී කොමියුනිස්ට් සංගමයේ (විකොස) ද පුරෝගාමියෙකු වන ආනන්ද වක්කුඹුර, මහජන අරගලය තුල පක්ෂ ක්‍රියා මාර්ගය සඳහා ඔහු කල මැදිහත් වීම නිසා, සාමාජිකත්ව තහනමට ලක් කෙරී මාස ගනනක් ගත කිරීමට සිදු වූ අතර, ඔහු ඉහත චෝදනා හමුවේ දන ගසා සාමාජිකත්වය ලබා ගත් නමුත්, තමන් ම බිහි කල සංවිධානය තුල ම අවලංගු කාසියක තැනට ඇද දමනු ලැබ සිටී. තන්ත්‍රය වාමාංශයෙන් ඉල්ලා සිටින්නේ එම ආදර්ශය අනුව වැඩ කරන ලෙස ය.     

සාමාන්‍යයෙන් සම්මේලනයක් යනු පක්ෂයක ප්‍රශ්න පැහැදිලි කරගෙන හා ප්‍රශ්න අවසාන වශයෙන් විසදා, පක්ෂය න්‍යායිකව, දේශපාලනිකව හා සංවිධානාත්මකව ශක්තිමත්, ඒකාබද්ධ සංවිධානයක් ලෙස නව ජවයකින් වැඩ ආරම්භ කිරීමට පදනම් දමන අවස්ථාවකි. පක්ෂ තන්ත්‍රය ජාත්‍යන්තර කමිටුවේ අධීක්ෂනය යටතේ ඉදිරි දර්ශනයක් වර්ධනය කර ප්‍රකාශයට පත් කල ද එය හුදු ලියවිල්ලකට වඩා දෙයක් ලෙස නො සැලකුනි. සම්මේලනය ප්‍රධාන තැනක් දුන්නේ අවලාද හා මඩ ගැසීම වැනි දේ මගින් එම ඉදිරි දර්ශනය පිලිබද අවධානය යොමු වීම බිඳ දැමීමට ය. පක්ෂය ඉදිරි දර්ශන ගැන කතා කරමින් තත්කාර්යවාදීව ක්‍රියා කරන බව වටහා ගැනීමට මේ නිදසුන පමනක් වුව ප්‍රමානවත්ය.

නමුත්, ලෝක සමාජවාදී වෙබ් අඩවියේ (ලොසවෙඅ) ජාත්‍යන්තර කර්තෘ මන්ඩලයේ සභාපති ඩේවිඩ් නෝර්ත් සහෝදරයා, සම්මේලනයට සුබ පතමින් එය තක්සේරු කලේ මෙලෙසිනි. “මෙම සම්මේලනය මුහුන දෙන මූලික අභියෝගය වන්නේ, මෙම සිද්ධීන් හා ලංකාව ඇතුලතම වර්ධනය වන විප්ලවවාදී අර්බුය කෙරෙහි, ජාත්‍යන්තර කමිටුවේ ලංකා ශාඛාවේ ආකල්පය පැහැදිලිව නීර්නය කර ගැනීම යි. වෙනස් ආකාරයකින් කිවහොත්, විප්ලවවාදී අර්බුදයක් මධ්‍යයේ, ලෙනින් පෙරලා රුසියාවට පැමිනීමෙන් පසුව පැවැත් වූ පලමු සම්මේලනය වන,  1917 අප්‍රේල් බොල්ෂෙවික් පක්ෂයේ සම්මේලනයට, ඔබ දැන් පවත්වමින් තිබෙන සම්මේලනය බොහෝ අංශවලින් සමානකම් දක්වනවා. ගෝලීය යුද්ධයක් මධ්‍යයේ (බොල්ෂෙවික්) පක්ෂයට පැවති අභියෝගය වූයේ, කම්කරු පන්තියට අත්‍යවශ්‍ය නායකත්වය සැපයූ දේශපාලන දිසානතියක්, දේශපාලන ක්‍රියා මාර්ගයක් හා ඉදිරි දර්ශනයක් නීර්නය කර ගැනීම යි.

පක්ෂ තන්ත්‍රය මෙම වෛෂයික ඓතිහාසික තක්සේරුව සලකා ගත්තේ තමන්ට පිදූ සම්මානයක් ලෙස, හා ලෙනින් පැවැත් වුවා වැනි ම සම්මේලනයක් පවත්වන තමන්ට රිසි ලෙස කටයුතු කිරීමට නෝර්ත්ගෙන් ලැබුනු වරපත්‍රයක් ලෙස ය. සැබැවින්ම ඔහුගේ අවධාරනය පක්ෂයේ වගකීම් සම්බන්ධ එකක් විය. එය, ලෝක යුද්ධ තත්වය හා රට තුල ම වර්ධනය වන විප්ලවවාදී අර්බුදයට මුහුන දීමේ අභියෝගය පිලිබඳ අවධාරනයක් විය. මෙකී අවධාරනය නොතකා මෙම තන්ත්‍රය සිදු කලේ, විප්ලවවාදී අර්බුදය උත්සන්න වෙද්දී ඊට පස්ස හරවා සිටීම හා, එතෙකින් නොනැවතී, එම මග හැරීමට එරෙහි වූ සාමාජිකයන්ට විරුද්ධව කුමන්ත්‍රනය කර  පලවා හැරීමට ක්‍රියා කිරීම ය. අරගලයට මෙන් ම කොලඹ ක්‍රියාකාරී කමිටුව වැනි අව්‍යාජ ක්‍රියාකාරී කමිටුවලට ද හතුරුව පක්ෂයේ අනුමැතිය ලබන ඒවා පමනක් සැබෑ ක්‍රියාකාරී කමිටු වේය යනුවෙන් ඉදිරිපත් කිරීමේ අර්ථය වන්නේ, තමන්ට අරගලයේ වර්ධනය මැඩ රඳවා ගැනීමට අවස්ථාව අවශ්‍යය යන්න මිස අනෙකක් නොවේ. මේ තන්ත්‍රයට අනුව, ක්‍රියාකාරී කමිටු යනු හුදෙක් ජාත්‍යන්තර කමිටුවේ නිර්දේශ වලට අනුගත වීම මිස මහජන ව්‍යාපාරයක් වර්ධනය කිරීම නොවේ. 

මෙම තත්වයන්ට එරෙහි වන වාම පාර්ශවය, නෙරපීම්වලින් ද, සියලු ආකාරයේ දඩයම් කිරීම්වලින් ද, හිරිවට්ටනු නොහැකි බව අපි කම්කරු පන්තියට සඵත කරමු. එමෙන් ම, වාම කන්ඩායම ජාත්‍යන්තර කමිටුවේ ක්‍රියා මාර්ගය දිවි දෙවෙනි කොට රකිනු ඇත. එය එම පිලිවෙත මග හැරීමට ගන්නා ඔනෑම ප්‍රයත්නයකට එරෙහිව සටන් වදිනු ඇත. එහෙත් කොලඹ ක්‍රියාකාරී කමිටුව වාම පාර්ශවයට අනන්‍ය කිරීමට සසප තන්ත්‍රය දරන ප්‍රයත්නය අපි ප්‍රතික්ෂේප කරමු. සසප වාම පාර්ශවයට මුවා වීමට අම්බලම් අනවශ්‍ය ය. එය, දශකයකට ආසන්න කාලයක් පක්ෂ අභ්‍යන්තරයේ සිදු කල, ජාත්‍යන්තර කමිටුවේ ඉදිරි දර්ශනයෙන් පන්නරය ලද අරගලය, වඩා තීව්ර ලෙස කම්කරු පන්තිය තුල සිදු කරනු ඇත.   

සසප ආරක්ෂා කිරිමේ අරගලය: අභ්‍යන්තර ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය උදෙසා ට්‍රොට්ස්කිවාදී ව්‍යාපාරයේ ‌ඓතිහාසික ඥානය මත පදනම් වීමට කල කැඳවුම 

සසප ආරක්ෂා කිරිමේ අරගලය: අම්බලන්ගොඩ ශාඛාවේන් අමරතුංග සහෝදරයා විරේක කිරීමට එරෙහිව

ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ සමාජවාදී සමානතා පක්ෂ තන්ත්‍රය තවත් සාමාජිකයන් 7ක් පක්ෂයෙන් නෙරපයි Read More »

Scroll to Top