Some marginal comments:

Voting behaviour at Presidential election

Prof. Sunanda Mahendra

My good hearted companion, the driver of an official vehicle telephoned me in the afternoon of January 27 to say that he was over jubilant as regards the bliss of the Presidential Election. He went on to say that he was engaged in a Kiribath feast in his village, celebrating the victory. His sound reverberated in my ears, as he went on reiterating the excessive ecstasy, which for me was a voice of an honest spell overjoy on the part of a member of his humble down to earth community.

“Sir” he said. “This victory is the result of those blessings on the part of those who love our Motherland, thrice blessed by the Buddha.” This I felt as a common census of opinion held by the mass of voters in the country. I was interested in knowing more about the phenomenon. Then I met a certain adult who said.

“We want to live in peace and we need prosperity. It is only through peace lovers that peace and prosperity could be achieved. It is only a political thinker or longstanding experience who could usher in such peace and prosperity.

“We want to vote for such a peace loving political thinker and not just a stranger who had come from another planet.”

Then I had the chance of meeting many more common folk who engage themselves in the victorious ceremony. The common census of opinion was that they all wanted to lead a happy and peaceful time, devoid of any strings attached to chauvinistic and/or separatist groups. Most of them denounced the ideology of the TNA Pact with UNP and JVP.

It was a pleasant listening session as they said: “We cannot give way to a separate state within our state.” They went on expressing their views in various ways. “The masses of this country, Sri Lanka, felt the real serenity of identity on the denouncement of LTTE terrorism. We cannot allow that terrorism to return in another guise,” said a teacher.

“The steering courage of our President Mahinda Rajapaksa is commendable. He is the real hero of the anti-terrorist struggle of our country. He overthrew the pangs of terrorism,” said a teacher. “We instinctively felt the impending disaster as we were exposed to mass media channels,” said a certain vendor of vegetables.

“The hero Mahinda Rajapaksa, knows the ground reality of the impending disaster. That is one of the reasons why he tried himself so much to clarify the situation to us. We all prayed that he be safe and be selected as our President for a second stage,” the friendly vendor added. The indigenous manner of hospitality shown by the President was regarded by masses as a respectable intimate process with a noble vision.

Sociologically observed, the common masses, like artistes, teachers’ drivers, vendors, and various other types wish to share an intimate hospitality on the part of their beloved leader. But this cultural aspect was frowned by certain speculative so called elite groups, who are by and large uprooted.

In this regard President Rajapaksa was a unique host, who took time off his tight schedule to meet his fellow mates. This admirable hospitality undoubtedly went a long way. Firstly as a memorable moment, secondly as a grateful blessing. All in all, the opinion leaders such as clergy, teachers and artistes stressed the significance of oriental gratitude, which they denoted by the term Kelehiguna Salakima.

Some young voters went to the extent dissenting from the views of their stalwart peer leaders. Such I felt was the result of several splinter groups in JVP politics.

Some of the first time voters told me that though they belong to the JVP clans, they disagree with their leadership.

As such at the university level the young membership held several inter personal communication sessions to ascertain their voting behaviour. The small group discussions, whispers and chitchats went a long way as regards this factor. I had at several instances, the chance of witnessing how these small groups inter-acted. One of the central messages that transpired was the TNA Pact, which the group discussants felt as venomous and pave the way to separatism. Now this factor is observable in the scale of preference given to Fonseka in the North.

As pointed out in a scholarly work written by Professor J. Blondel, titled as ‘Voters, parties and leaders’ (1965, Pelican), the voting behaviour is often sufficiently stable among many sectors of the population to enable us to look for broad associations between the social structure and party allegiance. Everyone knows that there is some connection between the way people vote and the social groups to which people belong. Many even assume a closer connection than the one which exists in fact.

The necessity for a better future (Subha Anagatayak) was stressed quite often. It was more or less a catch phrase among well wishing groups. The term Subha went a long way.

I also had the chance of meeting members of the community who held Bodhi Puja rituals at the nearby temples. All these socio-religious and socio-cultural issues too were added to the voting behaviour. Volumes could be written as regards these matters. But may this suffice for the moment.