The way forward in a two party context

The Sri Lankan polity has been having, or rather enjoying, the two party system of politics for a long time now. This system has been a part and parcel of life in this country, especially since independence where the two political parties, the UNP and the SLFP, had appealed to the people, vying with one another to offer a better deal in living.

The polity too, saw some virtues in both these political camps and thus they were divided among themselves 50 – 50 most of the time between the two camps and thus giving both a fair chance of coming to power at every election held. The people felt ‘important’ under the system, at least once in five years, as they were being pampered and cajoled by one party or the other, alternatively. So they in turn cheered both the parties, with some innocently following the differences in political dictums, some attracted by the benefits of periodic power and some building up unquestionable loyalties stemming in to generations. However, on the whole, the majority of the people were appreciative of the two party system of democracy.

Social disparity

The events after 1977 dented this system to some extent but yet that was only a dent. Despite the 17 year rule of the UNP, the Opposition vote consistently stood hovering around at a healthy 40-45 percent even during the leanest of times. Even though it was a lengthy period to be in continuous power, the commissions and omissions of the party in power always gave hope for the opposition. Despite the facile economic boom there was rampant social disparity, communal disharmony and political dissension that provided enough cause for the Opposition to justify its opposing course of action.

With the fall of the UNP in 1994 the political scenario was again paved with the antics of the two party mentality. This was amply proved by the results of the elections held in 1999 and 2005 where both political camps scored a close 50 percent of the vote with a thin edge to the victor. The country was definitely back in the ‘two party mood’ whatever the seriousness of the issues it faced.

However things have begun to change since the election of 2010. The Opposition vote that registered a near 40 percent at the 2010 Presidential election has been steadily eroding since then and today the Opposition UNP is not in a position to obtain more than 27 percent at an election in any province. And what is more tragic is that this percentage of the principal political rival of the government in power is getting reduced at every successive election.

Single party

Adding to the woes of the Opposition are the crossovers staged by its MPs from time to time signaling the hopelessness in being loyal to a party that is more or less doomed. Thus, this time the inclination towards a single party appears persuasive rather than coercive as never before in the history of two party politics in this country.

This brings the country and the polity to cross roads where party politics and its relation, democracy are concerned. Yet the polity at large seemed to be less mindful of the future of party politics as they seemed to be at present immersed in thoughts of impending good times for the country. So now we come to the point. Should people be concerned about the future of the country or should they be concerned about the future of party politics in this country? Or in other words is the relationship between the two symbiotic or do the people have to choose one at the expense of the other? Is the two party system compatible to a developing country?

English politics

That literary genius, George Bernard Shaw never stinted his words in denouncing the party system of government. However proud the English may be of this institution, Shaw castigated it whenever he got a chance. According to him, “The party system is partisan in the principle in empowering one section of the legislature to govern the country while authorizing another section to prevent the first from doing so”. Shaw saw this weakness in the context of English politics where they have the Mother of all Parliaments and a polity that is high in intellect and sophistication. This, then begs the question that if the party system is not the best for developed countries, would that not be an unaffordable luxury for a developing country like Sri Lanka?

Analyzing further the current Sri Lankan political scenario, how could an Opposition MP continues to oppose the government when the government is doing what is in the best interest of the country and when the government stock with the polity is undoubtedly rising? It is a situation where the more the Opposition criticizes the government the more it becomes unpopular. It is the government that needs an Opposition and not the country and in that context what is the role of an opposing party when the party in power is doing so well for the country?

Does democracy, the government of the people by the people and for the people necessarily have to have two parties opposing each other? Is the two party system more productive than it is counter productive?